A pilot and feasibility randomised controlled study of Prolonged Exposure Treatment and supportive counselling for post-traumatic stress disorder in adolescents: a third world, task-shifting, community-based sample.

BACKGROUND: There is a dearth of empirical evidence on the effectiveness of pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments for adolescents with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in developing country settings. The primary aim of this study was to demonstrate that Prolonged Exposure Treatment for Adolescents (PE-A) and supportive counselling (SC) are implementable by nurses in a South African context. A secondary aim was to perform a preliminary analysis of the effectiveness of registered nurses delivering either PE-A or SC treatment to adolescents with PTSD. It is hypothesised that PE-A will be superior to SC in terms of improvements in PTSD symptoms and depression. METHOD: A pilot, single-blind, randomised clinical trial of 11 adolescents with PTSD. Nurses previously naïve to Prolonged Exposure (PE) Treatment and SC provided these treatments at the adolescents' high schools. Data collection lasted from March 2013 to October 2014. Participants received twelve 60-90-min sessions of PE (n = 6) or SC (n = 5). All outcomes were assessed before treatment, at mid-treatment, immediately after treatment completion and at 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome, PTSD symptom severity, was assessed with the Child PTSD Symptom Scale-Interview (CPSS-I) (range, 0-51; higher scores indicate greater severity). The secondary outcome, depression severity, was assessed with the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) (range, 0-41; higher scores indicate greater severity). RESULTS: Data were analysed as intention to treat. During treatment, participants in both the PE-A and SC treatment arms experienced significant improvement on the CPSS-I as well as on the BDI. There was a significant difference between the PE-A and SC groups in maintaining PTSD and depression at the 12-month post-treatment assessment, with the participants in the PE-A group maintaining their gains both on PTSD and depression measures. CONCLUSION: The treatment was adequately implemented by the nurses and well-tolerated by the participants. Preliminary results suggest that the delivery of either intervention led to a significant improvement in PTSD and depression symptoms immediately post treatment. The important difference was that improvement gains in PTSD and depression in the PE-A group were maintained at 12-month follow-up. The results of this pilot and feasibility study are discussed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry: PACTR201511001345372 , registered on 11 November 2015.

Transforming care teams to provide the best possible patient-centered, collaborative care.

Patient experience of care is now a crucial parameter in assessing the quality of healthcare delivered in the United States. Continuity, patient-driven access to care, and being "known" by a provider or practice, particularly for patients with chronic diseases, have been shown to enhance patient satisfaction with care and health outcomes. Healthcare systems are challenged to effectively meet the wants and needs of patients by tailoring interventions based on each person's unique set factors-his or her strengths, preferences, and personal and social context. Creating care teams, a coordinated multidisciplinary group of healthcare professionals, enables a practice to take advantage of the skill sets represented and redesign care delivery with the patient and community as the focal point. This article describes the attributes of highly functioning care teams, how to measure them, and guidance on creating them. A case example illustrates how these ideas work in practice.

Implementing colorectal cancer screening in community health centers: addressing cancer health disparities through a regional cancer collaborative.

BACKGROUND: The population served by Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) has lower levels of cancer screening compared with the general population and suffers a disproportionate cancer burden. To address these disparities, 3 federal agencies and a primary care association established and tested the feasibility of a Regional Cancer Collaborative (RCC) in 2005. METHODS: RCC faculty implemented a learning model to improve cancer screening across 4 FQHCs that met explicit organizational readiness criteria. Regional faculty trained "care process leaders," who worked with primary care teams to plan and implement practice changes. FQHCs monitored progress across the following measures of screening implementation: self-management goal-setting; number and percent screened for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer; percent timely results notification; and percent abnormal screens evaluated within 90 days. Progress and plans were reviewed in regular teleconferences. FQHCs were encouraged to create local communities of practice (LCOP) involving community resources to support cancer screening and to participate in a monthly teleconference that linked the LCOPs into a regional community of practice. Summary reports and administrative data facilitated a process evaluation of the RCC. chi test and test of trends compared baseline and follow-up screening rates. RESULTS: The RCC taught the collaborative process using process leader training, teleconferences, 2 regional meetings, and local process improvement efforts. All organizations created clinical tracking capabilities and 3 of the 4 established LCOPs, which met monthly in an regional community of practice. Screening documentation increased for all 3 cancers from 2005 to 2007. Colorectal cancer screening increased from 8.6% to 21.2%. CONCLUSIONS: A regional plan to enable collaborative learning for cancer screening implementation is feasible, and improvements in screening rates can occur among carefully selected organizations.