session # f3 behavioral health homes study: leading the way to … · 2018-04-01 · behavioral...
TRANSCRIPT
Behavioral Health Homes Study: Leading the Way to Optimal Health for Individuals with Serious Mental Illness
Patricia Schake, MSW, LSW, Senior Director Program Innovation, Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Cara Nikolajski, MPH, Senior Program Administrator, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center for High-Value Health Care, Pittsburgh, PA
Suzanne Daub, LCSW, Senior Director of Integrated Care Initiatives, Community Care Behavioral Health Organization, Pittsburgh, PA
Session # F3
CFHA 19th Annual ConferenceOctober 19-21, 2017 • Houston, Texas
Faculty DisclosureThe presenters of this session have NOT had any relevant
financial relationships during the past 12 months.
Conference Resources
Slides and handouts shared in advance by our Conference Presenters are available on the CFHA website at http://www.cfha.net/?page=Resources_2017
Slides and handouts are also available on the mobile app.
Learning Objectives
At the conclusion of this session, the participant will be able to:
Describe and discuss considerations for successfully implementing complex research designs in real world settings
Examine the role of stakeholder partnership in developing and conducting research
Apply lessons learned from the Optimal Health study; intervention model outcomes and research to their work
Bibliography / ReferenceKogan, J; Schuster, J; Nikolajski, C; Schake, P; Morton, S; Kang, C; Reynolds, C. Challenges encountered in the conduct of Optimal Health: A patient-centered comparative effectiveness study of interventions for adults with serious mental illness. Clinical Trials. Sept 28, 2016 epub; Feb 2017, volume 14.
De Hert M, Correll CU, Bobes J, et al. Physical illness in patients with severe mental disorders. I. Prevalence, impact of medications and disparities in health care. World Psychiatry. 2011; 10(1): 52077.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Wellness Campaign. 2012; www.promoteacceptance, samhsa.gov/10by10/sitemap.aspx. July3, 2012
Garces JPD, Lopez GJP, Wang Z, et al. Eliciting Patient Perspective in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research: A Meta Narrative Systematic Review. Washington D.C.: A report prepared for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; 2012
Swarbrick M, Murphy AA, Zechner M, Spagnolo AB, Gill KJ. Wellness coaching: A new role for peers. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal. Spring 2011; 34(4): 328-331.
Learning Assessment
A learning assessment is required for CE credit.
A question and answer period will be conducted
at the end of this presentation.
PCORI Optimal Health
• Community Care Behavioral Health, a large non-profit behavioral health managed care organization in Pennsylvania, leveraged its ongoing collaboration with healthcare, policy, community, and patient stakeholders to design and conduct a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute sponsored study comparing the effectiveness of two behavioral health home interventions aimed at improving healthcare access and outcomes for individuals with SMI, a population that remains largely underserved.
– Brief overview of the execution of all steps of the study including stakeholder involvement in all aspects of research from conception to dissemination study, study design (mixed methods, cluster randomized trial, and unique challenges encountered in real world settings), implementation and outcomes.
– Lessons learned from conducting a large scale study (1,229 Medicaid-enrolled participants with approximately 600 in each intervention arm) to inform the audience of specific skills needed to develop and implement a complex research study in real world settings
– Discussion and questions
© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization 7
Behavioral Health and Wellness
• Adults with SMI are one of the most medically vulnerable populations
– 68% of adults with mental health disorders also have medical conditions
– High rates of undiagnosed, untreated, or poorly treated medical illnesses and difficulty accessing medical care
– High rates of premature death; dying as much as 15 to 25 years
younger than the general population
– Modifiable lifestyle choices and behaviors may contribute
(alcohol & tobacco use, poor nutrition)
© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization 8
Behavioral Health Home (BHHP)
• Community Care’s commitment to overall health & recovery-based programs
• Behavioral & physical health systems have historically failed to systematically address and support prevention and wellness, especially the most vulnerable populations such as adults with SMI
• Belief that BH providers are uniquely positioned to assist adults
with SMI in addressing whole health and wellness
9© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Community Care’s BHHP
10© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
• Services must be:
– Person/family centered
– Adhere to recovery principles
– Promote self-management skills
– Integrate into the individual’s recovery plan
• Individuals do not have to change existing providers or supports, but rather should enhance and build upon the individual’s provider and support network
• Integrating mental health and drug and alcohol care with physical health care creates good health outcomes
Community Care’s BHH Plus
• Successful early collaboration with Community Care & BH providers in North Central region of PA to address wellness through BHH model in 2010 with a focus on:
– Enhancing capacity of behavioral health providers to serve as health homes
– Comprehensive care management
– Care coordination and health promotion
– Linkage of service users to community resources
11© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Study Overview: Optimal Health
12
• A multi-stakeholder collaboration to study the key components of the BHHP model
• Main partners include:– Community Care – UPMC Center for High-Value Health Care– University of Pittsburgh– Stakeholder Advisory Board– BHARP, NC and Chester Counties and
Providers• Principal investigators:
– James Schuster, MD, MBA, Community Care
– Charles (Chip) Reynolds III, MD, University of Pittsburgh
– Tracy Carney, CPRP, CSP, Community Care
• Supported by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI)
© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Study Overview: What is PCORI?
• Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
• Established in 2011 by Congress through the Affordable Care Act to support comparative effectiveness research to provide information about the best available evidence to help patients and their health care providers make more informed decisions about their care
• Focused on studying outcomes that matter to patients in real
world settings; robust stakeholder involvement a hallmark
13© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Broad Stakeholder Involvement
• Strong emphasis on patient and stakeholder involvement in all stages of the study – from proposal development through implementation, and dissemination of results
14© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Monitoring of Progress
Prioritization &
Funding
Formulation of
Research
Questions
Study Design
& ProceduresDissemination ImplementationData Collection
Analysis &
Interpretation
Foundational Execution Translational
Implemented under the guidance and support of a Stakeholder Advisory Board with implementation support from the UPMC Center for High-Value Health Care, BHARP, and Community Care
Broad Stakeholder Involvement
• Stakeholder involvement the key to addressing challenges encountered in implementing comparative effectiveness research in real-world setting
15© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Monitoring of Progress
Prioritization &
Funding
Formulation of
Research
Questions
Study Design
& ProceduresDissemination ImplementationData Collection
Analysis &
Interpretation
Foundational Execution Translational
Stakeholder Advisory Board
• Representatives from our partnering counties, patients, providers, payers, academic and nonprofit community experts, and policy makers
• Convened semi-annually and ad-hoc by the PIs to:
– Monitor study progress
– Assess and advise the research staff on community needs and resources
– Identify opportunities for expanding outreach and dissemination
– Increase the visibility of the project in the community
– Provide feedback from alternative perspectives
Role of the Stakeholder Advisory Board
© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Optimal Health Providers
17© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Pike
WarrenMcKean
Elk
Jefferson
Centre
Mifflin
Chester
Juniata
Huntingdon
Clarion
Provider Offices
Study Overview: Interventions
Comparative effectiveness study of two behavioral health home model approaches to improve the health status of individuals with serious mental illness, increase patient activation in care, and improve engagement with primary/specialty physical health care
18© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Provider-Supported CareWellness nurses focused
on PH & wellness
(5 providers)
Self-Directed CareSelf-management
toolkits & resources
(6 providers)
Enhancing patient & BH
provider capacity to
address PH & wellness
Study Overview: Interventions
• Both approaches:
– Train case managers and peer specialists as wellness coaches/health navigators
– Establish an agency culture of wellness
– Utilize a high-risk disease registry with key indicators of PH
and BH needs
19© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Study Overview: Data Sources
20© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
PCORI
Optimal Health
Participants
HealthChoices Eligibility Data
(Medicaid eligibility)
Self-Report Measures
(Patient activation,** health status,** hope,
quality of life, functional
status, satisfaction with care, social support)
Learning Collaborative
(LC) Data(Implementation
information)
Qualitative Data
(Serv ice user & prov ider interviews)
**Primary outcome
Administrative Data
(Demographic info)
Behavioral Health Claims
(BH diagnosis, utilization)
Physical Health Claims
(Engagement in primary/specialty care**)
Primary Data Sources Secondary Data Sources
Pharmacy Claims
(Medication utilization)
1229 part icipants
Study Overview: Demographics
21© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Characteristic
Provider-
Supported
Self-Directed Total
N % N % N %
Total 713 58.0% 516 42.0% 1,229 100%
Age
(mean/range)43.47 19-72 42.37 18-76 43.01 18-76
Gender
Female
Male
428
285
60.0%
40.0%
341
175
66.1%
33.9%
769
460
62.6%
37.4%
Race
White
Black
Other
622
72
19
87.2%
10.1%
2.7%
487
21
8
94.4%
4.1%
1.6%
1104
93
27
90.2%
7.6%%
2.2%
Ethnicity
Non-Hispanic
Hispanic
710
3
99.6%
0.4%
512
4
99.2%
0.9%
1222
7
99.4%
0.6%
Diagnosis
MDD
Bipolar
Schizoaffective
Schizophrenia
Other
None
227
193
131
86
67
9
31.8%
27.1%
18.4%
12.1%
9.4%
1.3%
234
137
64
40
31
10
45.3%
26.6%
12.4%
7.8%
6.0%
1.9%
461
330
195
126
98
19
37.5%
26.9%
15.9%
10.3%
8.0%
1.5%
Findings Executive Summary
22
• Learning Collaborative/Implementation Findings:– Performance on all process/outcome goals improved over
time
– Provider-supported arm reported higher degree of achievement on all process goals after one year of implementation
• Qualitative Interview Findings:
– Little difference in findings between intervention arms
– Overall positive experiences participating in (service users) or implementing (providers) interventions
• Quantitative Findings:
– Intervention type (Provider-Supported vs. Self-Directed) has a differential impact on some patient-centered outcomes (treatment X time interaction effect)
– Both interventions positively impact several of our outcomes over time (change over time)
• Financial Findings:
– Indicative of long-term cost reductions in Provider-Supported (Wellness Nurse) sites, with some evidence of long-term decreases in Self-Directed (self-management navigator) sites
– Suggestive of increased short-term PH use at both sites, but more ambulatory and lower inpatient
• Lessons Learned:
– Stakeholder involvement in discussion of findings
– Mixed method design
– Additional analysis (financial
impact analysis conducted independent of PCORI sponsored research)
© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
LC to Support Implementation
23© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Structured approach for
change
Adopt best practices in
multiple settings
Uses adult learning
principles & techniques
Time-limited learning process
Shared learning and
collaboration
•Learning Sessions
Training Manuals
•Action Periods
Apply Skills Test Changes •Collaborative
Meetings
Ongoing TA & Support
•Measure Outcomes
Share Progress
Qualitative Interview Data: Svc. Users
24
• Shift in definition of health and wellness, away from vague/impersonal towards more personalized
• Increased awareness of interconnectedness of mental and physical health
• Overall favorable intervention experiences
• No major distinctions between arms –no evident differences in engagement in or satisfaction with interventions
• Most important factor leading to intervention participation was relationship with wellness coach
Code Name Round 3 # of Participants Round 2 # of Participants
Goal Exercise 16 17
Goal Eating
Habits/Nutrition
13 13
Goal Weight Loss 10 9
Goal Relationships 9 10
Goal Tobacco 9 13
Goal Medication 7 4
Goal Mental/Emotional
Health
7 10
Goal Other 7 0
Goal Unsure 7 9
Goal None 6 17
Goal General Activity 4 3
Goal Independence 4 3
Goal Physical/Dental
Health Appointments
3 6
Goal Starting 3 3
Goal Sobriety 2 1
Goal Social Services 2 9
Goal Sleep 1 4
Goal Cleaning 0 3
© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Qualitative Interview Data: Svc. Users
25© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
“We made a goal [for walking] a half mile. I go
and somet imes I go a mile. So we st art from the mile and t hen we go up.
If I didn’t make it and went back, t hen I t old her I’d make it up. So I
go and inst ead of doing t he mile, I do a mile and
a half. That way I keep myself ahead.”
“...Going t o the doct or and asking him about t he
Chant ix...I was afraid t o t ake it because it st raight says on t here, ‘if you have
depression, t alk to your doct or first .’...It didn’t seem t o have any bad effect on
t hat...Overall, it really helped me quit . It took
away t hat urge t o want the cigarette smoke.”
“I am eat ing a lot more fruits and veget ables. Cutting down what I’m eat ing. Trying t o watch my
calories. She [t he case manager] knows t hat I just started watching
my calories and she’ll ask me how t he calorie count ing is
going...she’ll encourage me.”
“I’ve act ually exceeded my
goal...the weight I’m at now, I haven’t been
since I was a young
t eenager...I lost 25 pounds in t he
beginning and I’ve act ually lost more
close t o 45. I feel like I
have more energy.”
Qualitative Interview Data: Providers
• Agency response:
– High degree of agency support for wellness coaching
– Establishment of culture of wellness
– Continued use of model post study implementation period
– Staff turnover problematic for maintaining wellness coaching continuity
– Worry about service user “relapse” when discharged from CMHC
• Provider response:
– Providers simplified/casualized wellness coaching to increase service user engagement
– Nurses often mentioned as most beneficial component of the model
– Providers often established their own wellness goal(s)
26© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Qualitative Interview Data: Providers
• Service user response (provider perception):
– Robustly positive impact on service user’s health/wellness
– Some service users resistant to wellness coaching due to mental illness severity or age (e.g., being set in their ways)
– Structural barriers (e.g., lack of access to health care,
community resources, transportation) limits success
• Physician response:
– Several providers indicated difficulties engaging with primary care providers (especially at interview time point three)
27© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Qualitative Interview Data: Providers
28© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
“We really need t o find a way t o keep t his program going for t hem because we
finally got t hem doctors. We can’t just say, ‘Oh, we’re sorry’ now. It ’s done so much for t hem...We know how important this is
for t he consumers...A gent leman in his late 50s, he has some int ellectual disabilities, and he was very anxious about get t ing t est ing for us. We wanted his t o get an
echo and a st ress t est...labs, x-rays...he is
now going t o get these t ests...and on t op of all t hat, he has lost about 36 pounds.”
“We had bet ter coordination of care and her hospit al visits decreased. Before I met her, she said she was
going [t o the hospital] once or t wice a mont h; now she might go once
every t hree months when her bronchit is flares up a little bit , but
she’s able t o come home t he next day or t he day after t hat so it’s not as
t raumatic...She sees t he wellness
nurse and she get s all of t he information she needs regarding
each specialist . And there was a t ime when she was here and monitored by t he wellness nurse, and t he nurse
said, ‘You need t o go t o t he ER because you’re not well, you’re
coughing, and your blood pressure is sky high.’ If she wouldn’t have come
in and had t hose t hings done...A
regular visit from back in t he day, she would have come in and she would say, ‘I’m fine,’ and I don’t know t hat
she would have made it .”
“He went from three packs a week t o one
pack a mont h, and he did t hat within six
mont hs...His goal within
t he next six months is t o quit smoking all
t ogether & not use t he e-cigarette.”
Quantitative: Patient Activation
• What is patient activation?
– Measures an individual’s level of engagement in their own health care; measured via the Patient Activation Measure (PAM)
– Past research suggests even a small increase in patient activation is associated with reductions in health care utilization and improved medication adherence
• Our findings:
– Provider-supported led to more immediate and stable improvement in patient activation
– Female gender is associated with quicker improvement in patient activation in the Provider-Supported arm
29© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Quantitative: Health Status
• What is health status?– Health status measured with the SF-12, which measures both
perceived physical and mental health – The national mean score for SF-12 is 50; our participants scored
much lower than the national average– Research shows that even a small score change can impact mortality
rates and other health-related factors
• Our findings: – Mental health status score increased, particularly at month 6
(significant change over time) – Physical health status score decreased over time, particularly after
month 12 (significant change over time)
30© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Quantitative: Health Care Utilization
31
Engagement in Primary/Specialty
Care
• Our finding: while the two
interventions did not differ significantly in their impact on this outcome, both showed improvement over time (significant change over time)
Emergent Care Use
• Our finding: two interventions were significantly different with regard to
their impact on ED use; Self-Directed started off with higher
utilization and decreased more drastically, Provider-Supported remained fairly stable over time
(significant treatment X time interaction effect)
© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Engagement - Primary/Specialty Care
32© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Emergent Care Use
33© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Quantitative: Quality of Life
• What is quality of life?
– Measured using the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire – Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) which assesses physical health, mood, relationships, and well-being, among other variables
• Our finding: Provider-Supported started off with a higher score
and the score peaked at 6 months. Quality of life score for Self-Directed peaked at 12 months
34© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Findings Recap
35© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Discussion
36
• Lessons learned
• Applicability to your work
• Key takeaways
• Describe and discuss considerations for successfully implementing complex research designs in real world settings
• Examine the role of stakeholder partnership in developing and conducting research
• Apply lessons learned from the Optimal Health study; intervention model outcomes and research
© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Next Steps
37
• Complete interpretation of study findings and develop final research report
• Dissemination – PCORI– Clinical trials– Manuscripts– Conference presentations– Stakeholder forums and results
materials – Optimal Health dissemination website– PCORI dissemination funding
opportunity
• Behavioral health home expansion
© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Behavioral Health Home Expansion
• Additional populations served: adolescents, opioid treatment programs
• Population Health LC ocused on hypertension & smoking cessation
38© 2017 Community Care Behavioral Health Organization
Erie
Allegheny
Clarion
Forest
Warren McKean Potter
CameronElk
Jefferson
Clearfield
Blair
Centre
Clinton
Adams
Snyder
Union
Lycoming
Tioga Bradford
Columbia
Montour
York
Chester
Berks
Schuylkill
Luzerne
Wyoming
Susquehanna
Lackawanna
Wayne
Pike
Monroe
Carbon
Juniata
Sullivan
Mifflin
Huntingdon
Northumberland
Session Evaluation
Use the CFHA mobile app to complete the
evaluation for this session.
Thank you!