Rodger Kessler

A Proposal to Speed Translation of Healthcare Research Into Practice: Dramatic Change Is Needed

Efficacy trials have generated interventions to improve health behaviors and biomarkers. However, these efforts have had limited impact on practice and policy. It is suggested that key methodologic and contextual issues have contributed to this state of affairs. Current research paradigms generally have not provided the answers needed for more probable and more rapid translation. A major shift is proposed to produce research with more rapid clinical, public health, and policy impact.

What Does It Mean to “Employ” the RE-AIM Model?:

Many grant proposals identify the use of a given evaluation model or framework but offer little about how such models are implemented. The authors discuss what it means to employ a specific model, RE-AIM, and key dimensions from this model for program planning, implementation, evaluation, and reporting. The authors report both conceptual and content specifications for the use of the RE-AIM model and a content review of 42 recent dissemination and implementation grant applications to National Institutes of Health that proposed the use of this model. Outcomes include the extent to which proposals addressed the overall RE-AIM model and specific items within the five dimensions in their methods or evaluation plans. The majority of grants used only some elements of the model (less than 10% contained thorough measures across all RE-AIM dimensions). Few met criteria for “fully developed use” of RE-AIM and the percentage of key issues addressed varied from, on average, 45% to 78% across the RE-AIM dimensions. The results and discussion of key criteria should help investigators in their use of RE-AIM and illuminate the broader issue of comprehensive use of evaluation models.

Competencies for psychology practice in primary care.

This article reports on the outcome of a presidential initiative of 2012 American Psychological Association President Suzanne Bennett Johnson to delineate competencies for primary care (PC) psychology in six broad domains: science, systems, professionalism, relationships, application, and education. Essential knowledge, skills, and attitudes are described for each PC psychology competency. Two behavioral examples are provided to illustrate each competency. Clinical vignettes demonstrate the competencies in action. Delineation of these competencies is intended to inform education, practice, and research in PC psychology and efforts to further develop team-based competencies in PC.

Primary Care Is the De Facto Mental Health System

● Many medical presentations contain significant psychological comorbidity. Strosahl and Robinson point out in Chap. 8 that presentations that are for specific psychological or substance abuse issues are infrequent. More often, psychological issues are found to be part of acute medical issues, such as sleeping problems, headache or gastrointestinal problems, as well as complex chronic medical conditions such as diabetes, cardiac conditions or pain.

Designing a valid randomized pragmatic primary care implementation trial: The my own health report (MOHR) project

BackgroundThere is a pressing need for greater attention to patient-centered health behavior and psychosocial issues in primary care, and for practical tools, study designs and results of clinical and policy relevance. Our goal is to design a scientifically rigorous and valid pragmatic trial to test whether primary care practices can systematically implement the collection of patient-reported information and provide patients needed advice, goal setting, and counseling in response.MethodsThis manuscript reports on the iterative design of the My Own Health Report (MOHR) study, a cluster randomized delayed intervention trial. Nine pairs of diverse primary care practices will be randomized to early or delayed intervention four months later. The intervention consists of fielding the MOHR assessment – addresses 10 domains of health behaviors and psychosocial issues – and subsequent provision of needed counseling and support for patients presenting for wellness or chronic care. As a pragmatic participatory trial, stakeholder groups including practice partners and patients have been engaged throughout the study design to account for local resources and characteristics. Participatory tasks include identifying MOHR assessment content, refining the study design, providing input on outcomes measures, and designing the implementation workflow. Study outcomes include the intervention reach (percent of patients offered and completing the MOHR assessment), effectiveness (patients reporting being asked about topics, setting change goals, and receiving assistance in early versus delayed intervention practices), contextual factors influencing outcomes, and intervention costs.DiscussionThe MOHR study shows how a participatory design can be used to promote the consistent collection and use of patient-reported health behavior and psychosocial assessments in a broad range of primary care settings. While pragmatic in nature, the study design will allow valid comparisons to answer the posed research question, and findings will be broadly generalizable to a range of primary care settings. Per the pragmatic explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS) framework, the study design is substantially more pragmatic than other published trials. The methods and findings should be of interest to researchers, practitioners, and policy makers attempting to make healthcare more patient-centered and relevant.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov: NCT01825746

THE DEVELOPMENT OF JOINT PRINCIPLES: INTEGRATING BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CARE INTO THE PATIENT-CENTERED MEDICAL HOME

The world of primary care was galvanized in 2007 by the publication of the Joint Principles of The Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) that spells out the fundamental features of a primary health care setting in which a team of clinicians offers accessible first-contact primary care.[1][1] This

Joint principles: integrating behavioral health care into the patient-centered medical home.

The Patient-centered Medical Home (PCMH) is an innovative, improved, and evolving approach to providing primary care that has gained broad acceptance in the United States. The Joint Principles of the PCMH, formulated and endorsed in February 2007, are sound and describe the ideal toward which we

Mental Health Care Treatment Initiation When Mental Health Services Are Incorporated Into Primary Care Practice

Purpose: Most primary care patients with mental health issues are identified or treated in primary care rather than the specialty mental health system. Primary care physicians report that their patients do not have access to needed mental health care. When referrals are made to the specialty behavioral or mental health care system, rates of patients who initiate treatment are low. Collaborative care models, with mental health clinicians as part of the primary care medical staff, have been suggested as an alternative. The aim of this study is to examine rates of treatment startup in 2 collaborative care settings: a rural family medicine office and a suburban internal medicine office. In both practices referrals for mental health services are made within the practice. Methods: Referral data were drawn from 2 convenience samples of patients referred by primary care physicians for collaborative mental health treatment at Fletcher Allen Health Care in Vermont. The first sample consisted of 93 consecutively scheduled referrals in a family medicine office (sample A) between January 2006 and December 2007. The second sample consisted of 215 consecutive scheduled referrals at an internal medicine office (sample B) between January 2009 and December 2009. Referral data identified age, sex, and presenting mental health/medical problem. Results: In sample A, 95.5% of those patients scheduling appointments began behavioral health treatment; in sample B this percentage was 82%. In sample B, 69% of all patients initially referred for mental health care both scheduled and initiated treatment. Conclusions: When referred to a mental health clinician who provides on-site access as part of a primary care mental health collaborative care model, a high percentage of patients referred scheduled care. Furthermore, of those who scheduled care, a high percentage of patients attend the scheduled appointment. Findings persist despite differences in practice type, populations, locations, and time frames of data collection. That the findings persist across the different offices suggests that this model of care may contain elements that improve the longstanding problem of poor treatment initiation rates when primary care physicians refer patients for outpatient behavioral health services.

The Problem of Integrating Behavioral Health in the Medical Home and the Questions It Leads to

Psychology and other behavioral health professions have amassed a broad empirical and clinical literature suggesting many medical presentations are best responded to with the addition of evidence based behavioral interventions. Despite this, psychology has not achieved a regular presence as part of medical practice. We suggest specific reasons for the current state of affairs including clinical, operational, societal labels, financial and training dimensions. Medical, psychological, administrative, and financial perspectives are reviewed. If the goals of health care system reform are to be reached then we must identify and challenge the current limitations of health care. This paper will identify the elements that need to be changed in order for psychology to be integrated into medicine rather than excluded from its policy, planning and operations.

The 5 R’s: An Emerging Bold Standard for Conducting Relevant Research in a Changing World

Research often fails to find its way into practice or policy in a timely way, if at all. Given the current pressure and pace of health care change, many authors have recommended different approaches to make health care research more relevant and rapid. An emerging standard for research, the “5 R’s” is a synthesis of recommendations for care delivery research that (1) is relevant to stakeholders; (2) is rapid and recursive in application; (3) redefines rigor; (4) reports on resources required; and (5) is replicable. Relevance flows from substantive ongoing participation by stakeholders. Rapidity and recursiveness occur through accelerated design and peer reviews followed by short learning/implementation cycles through which questions and answers evolve over time. Rigor is the disciplined conduct of shared learning within the specific changing situations in diverse settings. Resource reporting includes costs of interventions. Replicability involves designing for the factors that may affect subsequent implementation of an intervention or program in different contexts. These R’s of the research process are mutually reinforcing and can be supported by training that fosters collaborative and reciprocal relationships among researchers, implementers, and other stakeholders. In sum, a standard is emerging for research that is both rigorous and relevant. Consistent and bold application will increase the value, timeliness, and applicability of the research enterprise.