Behavioral health integration and specialty medical care: Opportunities for applying knowledge from primary care integration.

While education and advocacy regarding behavioral health (BH) integration in primary care have been in full force at the state and national level for many years, specialty care BH integration has not received the same attention in terms of practice transformation, workforce development, and payment reform. Models of BH care have been tested in primary care and can be easily adapted to improve specialty patient care. There are many opportunities for using the knowledge base gained from integrated primary care to help move integration forward in the specialty medical setting. The timing for this is rife, as the benefits of integrated BH for patient health outcomes are well established. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

UPSTREAM! Together evaluation results from community efforts to prevent mental, emotional, and behavioral health problems.

Mental, emotional, and behavioral (MEB) health problems are prevalent globally. Despite effective programs that can prevent MEB problems and promote mental health, there has not been widespread adoption. UPSTREAM! Together was a planning project in three Colorado communities. Communities partnered with academic and policy entities to 1) translate evidence about MEB problem prevention into locally-relevant messages and materials and 2) develop long-term plans for broad implementation of interventions to prevent high-priority MEB problems. Community members recognized the need to talk about MEB problems to prevent them. The UPSTREAM! communities localized messages designed to start conversations and sustain attention on preventing MEB problems. The communities understood that prevention takes sustained community attention and advocacy, knowing that important outcomes may be years away. Long-term implementation plans aimed to strengthen families and enhance social connections among youth. Despite community readiness and capacity to implement evidence-based programs, there were few funding opportunities, delaying program implementation and revealing gaps between funding policies and community readiness. This community-engaged experience suggests an achievable approach, acceptable to communities, and worthy of further development and testing. Policies that cultivate and support local expertise may help to increase wider community adoption of evidence-based programs that promote mental health among youth.

Assessing cross-sector stakeholder readiness to advance and sustain statewide behavioral integration beyond a State Innovation Model (SIM) initiative.

Integrated care is recognized as a promising approach to comprehensive health care and reductions in health care costs. However, the integration of behavioral health and primary care is complex and often difficult to implement. Successful and sustainable integration efforts require coordination and alignment both within health care organizations and across multiple sectors. Furthermore, implementation progress and outcomes are shaped by the readiness of stakeholders to work together toward integrated care. In the context of a Colorado State Innovation Model (SIM) effort, we examined stakeholder readiness to advance and sustain partnerships for behavioral health integration beyond the period of grant funding. Partnership readiness was assessed using the Readiness for Cross-sector Partnerships Questionnaire (RCP) in spring 2019. Participants from 67 organizations represented seven sectors: government, health care, academic, practice transformation, advocacy, payer, and other. RCP analyses indicated a moderate level of readiness among Colorado stakeholders for partnering to continue the work of behavioral health integration initiated by SIM. Stakeholders indicated their highest readiness levels for general capacity and lowest for innovation-specific capacity. Five thematic categories emerged from the open-ended questions pertaining to partnership experiences: (a) collaboration and relationships, (b) capacity and leadership, (c) measurement and outcomes, (d) financing integrated care, and (e) sustainability of the cross-sector partnership. Partnering across sectors to advance integrated behavioral health and create more equitable access to services is inherently complex and nonlinear in nature. The RCP usefully identifies opportunities to strengthen the sustainability of integrated care efforts.

Integrating behavioral health and primary care: a qualitative analysis of financial barriers and solutions.

The objective of this study was to characterize financial barriers and solutions for the integration of behavioral health in primary care at the practice and system levels. Semi-structured interviews were conducted March-August of 2015 with 77 key informants. Initially a broad thematic coding approach was used, and data coded as "financing" was further analyzed in ATLAS.ti using an inductive thematic approach by three coders. Themes identified included the following: fragmentation of payment and inadequate investment limit movement toward integration; the evidence base for integration is not well known and requires appropriately structured further study; fee-for-service limits the movement to integration-an alternative payment system is needed; there are financial considerations beyond specific models of payment, including incentivizing innovation, prevention, and practice transformation support; stakeholders need to be engaged and aligned to support this process. There was consensus that the current fragmented, fee-for-service system with inadequate baseline reimbursement significantly hinders progression toward integrated behavioral health and primary care. Funding is needed both to support integrated care and to facilitate the transition to a new model. Multiple suggestions were offered regarding interim solutions to move toward an integrated model and ultimately global payment. Payment, in terms of both adequate amount and model, is a significant obstacle to integrating behavioral health and primary care. Future policy efforts must focus on ensuring stakeholder collaboration, multi-payer alignment, increasing investment in behavioral health and primary care, and moving away from fee-for-service toward a global and value-based payment model.

Cost savings associated with an alternative payment model for integrating behavioral health in primary care.

Financially supporting and sustaining behavioral health services integrated into primary care settings remains a major barrier to widespread implementation. Sustaining Healthcare Across Integrated Primary Care Efforts (SHAPE) was a demonstration project designed to prospectively examine the cost savings associated with utilizing an alternative payment methodology to support behavioral health services in primary care practices with integrated behavioral health services. Six primary care practices in Colorado participated in this project. Each practice had at least one on-site behavioral health clinician providing integrated behavioral health services. Three practices received non-fee-for-service payments (i.e., SHAPE payment) to support provision of behavioral health services for 18 months. Three practices did not receive the SHAPE payment and served as control practices for comparison purposes. Assignment to condition was nonrandom. Patient claims data were collected for 9 months before the start of the SHAPE demonstration project (pre-period) and for 18 months during the SHAPE project (post-period) to evaluate cost savings. During the 18-month post-period, analysis of the practices' claims data demonstrated that practices receiving the SHAPE payment generated approximately $1.08 million in net cost savings for their public payer population (i.e., Medicare, Medicaid, and Dual Eligible; N = 9,042). The cost savings were primarily achieved through reduction in downstream utilization (e.g., hospitalizations). The SHAPE demonstration project found that non-fee-for-service payments for behavioral health integrated into primary care may be associated with significant cost savings for public payers, which could have implications on future delivery and payment work in public programs (e.g., Medicaid).

Not Near Enough: Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Access to Nearby Behavioral Health Care and Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Racial, ethnic, and geographical health disparities have been widely documented in the United States. However, little attention has been directed towards disparities associated with integrated behavioral health and primary care services. METHODS: Access to behavioral health professionals among primary care physicians was examined using multinomial logistic regression analyses with 2010 National Plan and Provider Enumeration System, American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, and American Community Survey data. RESULTS: Primary care providers practicing in neighborhoods with higher percentages of African Americans and Hispanics were less likely to have geographically proximate behavioral health professionals. Primary care providers in rural areas were less likely to have geographically proximate behavioral health professionals. CONCLUSION: Neighborhood-level factors are associated with access to nearby behavioral health and primary care. Additional behavioral health professionals are needed in racial/ethnic minority neighborhoods and rural areas to provide access to behavioral health services, and to progress toward more integrated primary care.