Implementation of Behavioral Health Integration in Small Primary Care Settings: Lessons Learned and Future Directions.

Primary care practices are in great need of practical guidance on the steps they can take to build behavioral health integration (BHI) capacities, particularly for smaller practice settings with fewer resources. 11 small primary care sites (≤ 5 providers) throughout New York State utilized a continuum framework of core components of BHI in combination with technical assistance. Surveys were collected at baseline, 6-months, and 12-months. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted during site visits, and a stakeholder roundtable was facilitated to address broader themes. Data were analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis. Practices reported successful engagement with the framework and actively participated in planning and advancing BHI operations. Greater success was observed in practices with existing on-site BHI services, identified champions for BHI, early and sustained training and involvement of providers and administrators, use of collaborative agreements with external behavioral health providers, and capacity to successfully receive reimbursements for BHI services. Advancing health information technologies was a challenge across sites. Financing and policy factors were viewed as critically important to advance integration efforts. The pilot of a continuum framework offers lessons for primary care practices and policymakers to advance integrated BH care.

A novel continuum-based framework for translating behavioral health integration to primary care settings.

Although evidence-based behavioral health integration models have been demonstrated to work well when implemented properly, primary care practices need practical guidance on the steps they can take to build behavioral health integration capacities. This is especially true for practice settings with fewer resources. This study is a pilot field test of a framework continuum composed of core components of behavioral health integration that can be used to translate the implementation of behavioral health into diverse clinical settings guided by a practice's priorities and available resources. This framework, in combination with technical assistance by the study team, was piloted in 11 small primary care sites (defined as ≤5 primary care providers) throughout New York State. Surveys were collected at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Informal check-in calls and site visits using qualitative semistructured individual and group interviews were conducted with 10 of the 11 sites. A mixed-methods approach was used to incorporate the survey data and qualitative thematic analysis. All practices advanced at least one level of behavioral health integration along various components of the framework. These advances included implementing depression screening, standardizing workflows for positive screens, integrating patient tracking tools for follow-up behavioral health visits, incorporating warm hand-offs to on-site or off-site behavioral health providers, and formalized external referrals using collaborative agreements. Practices reported they had overall positive experiences using the framework and offered feedback for how to improve future iterations. The framework continuum, in combination with technical assistance, was shown to be useful for primary care practices to advance integrated behavioral health care based on their priorities and resource availability. The results combined with feedback from the practices have yielded a revised "Framework 2.0" that includes a new organization as well as the addition of a "Sustainability" domain.

Persistent cannabis use among young adults with early psychosis receiving coordinated specialty care in the United States.

Persistent cannabis use among young adults with first episode psychosis (FEP), even those receiving early intervention services, has been associated with poor outcomes. In the United States (US), Coordinated Specialty Care (CSC) has been shown to be more effective at reducing symptoms, improving quality of life and increasing involvement in work or school, compared to typical care for FEP. However, little is known about the prevalence, course and outcomes for cannabis use in this real-world, clinical setting. This study examined the prevalence, course and outcomes of cannabis use categorized into three groups: no use, reduced use, and persistent use, among a sample of 938 CSC participants enrolled for at least 1 year. Prevalence of cannabis use was 38.8% at admission and 32.8% of the sample had persistent cannabis use at 1 year. At baseline, persistent cannabis users were more likely to be male (p < .001), white, non-Hispanic and black non-Hispanic (p = .001), have worse symptoms as measured by the GAF (p < .001), increased suicidality (p = .024), violent ideation (p = .008), and legal trouble (p = .006) compared with non-users. At 1 year, persistent users maintained worse symptoms compared with non-users (p = .021) while those who reduced use had significant improvement in symptoms compared with persistent users (p = .008). This study suggests that cannabis use is common among young adults enrolled in a CSC program in the US and that persistent cannabis users may have worse outcomes while reducing cannabis use may improve outcomes. These findings highlight the potential impact of secondary prevention in this population through reduction in cannabis use.