Explore the vast range of titles available.

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND Depression contributes to disability and there are ethnic/racial disparities in access and outcomes of care. Quality improvement (QI) programs for depression in primary care improve outcomes relative to usual care, but health, social and other community-based service sectors also support clients in under-resourced communities. Little is known about effects on client outcomes of strategies to implement depression QI across diverse sectors. OBJECTIVE To compare the effectiveness of Community Engagement and Planning (CEP) and Resources for Services (RS) to implement depression QI on clients’ mental health-related quality of life (HRQL) and services use. DESIGN Matched programs from health, social and other service sectors were randomized to community engagement and planning (promoting inter-agency collaboration) or resources for services (individual program technical assistance plus outreach) to implement depression QI toolkits in Hollywood-Metro and South Los Angeles. PARTICIPANTS From 93 randomized programs, 4,440 clients were screened and of 1,322 depressed by the 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) and providing contact information, 1,246 enrolled and 1,018 in 90 programs completed baseline or 6-month follow-up. MEASURES Self-reported mental HRQL and probable depression (primary), physical activity, employment, homelessness risk factors (secondary) and services use. RESULTS CEP was more effective than RS at improving mental HRQL, increasing physical activity and reducing homelessness risk factors, rate of behavioral health hospitalization and medication visits among specialty care users (i.e. psychiatrists, mental health providers) while increasing depression visits among users of primary care/public health for depression and users of faith-based and park programs (each p  < 0.05). Employment, use of antidepressants, and total contacts were not significantly affected (each p  > 0.05). CONCLUSION Community engagement to build a collaborative approach to implementing depression QI across diverse programs was more effective than resources for services for individual programs in improving mental HRQL, physical activity and homelessness risk factors, and shifted utilization away from hospitalizations and specialty medication visits toward primary care and other sectors, offering an expanded health-home model to address multiple disparities for depressed safety-net clients.

Background Grounded in the Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework (i-PARIHS) and the Replicating Effective Programs framework (REP), the goal is to determine if the use of theory, data and end-user perspectives to guide an adaptation of the Transdiagnostic Intervention for Sleep and Circadian Dysfunction (TSC) yields better outcomes and improves the “fit” of TSC to community mental health centers (CMHCs), relative to the standard version. Methods Ten counties in California were cluster-randomized by county to Adapted or Standard TSC. Within each county, adults who exhibited sleep and circadian dysfunction and serious mental illness (SMI) were randomized to immediate TSC or Usual Care followed by Delayed Treatment with TSC (UC-DT). Facilitation was the implementation strategy. The participants were 93 CMHC providers who delivered TSC (Standard = 30; Adapted = 63) and 396 CMHC patients (Standard = 74; Adapted = 124; UC-DT = 198). Patient assessments were completed at pre-treatment, post-treatment, and six months after treatment (6FU). Provider assessments were completed at post-training, mid-treatment, and post-treatment. Results TSC (combining Adapted and Standard), relative to UC-DT before delayed treatment with TSC, was associated with improvement from pre- to post-treatment in sleep disturbance ( b  = -10.91, p  < 0.001, d  = -1.52), sleep-related impairment ( b  = -9.52, p  < 0.001, d  = -1.06), sleep health composite ( b  = 1.63, p  < 0.001, d  = 0.95), psychiatric symptoms ( b  = -6.72, p  < 0.001, d  = -0.52), and overall functional impairment ( b  = -5.12, p  < 0.001, d  = -0.71). TSC’s benefits for functional impairment and psychiatric symptoms were mediated by improvements in sleep and circadian problems. Adapted versus Standard TSC did not differ on provider ratings of fit and better fit did not mediate the relation between TSC condition and patient outcome. Conclusions TSC can be delivered by CMHC providers. Adapted and Standard TSC both fit the CMHC context. These findings are interpreted through the lens of the four core constructs of the i-PARIHS framework. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04154631. Registered on November 6, 2019. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04154631

Compulsory supervision outside hospital has been developed internationally for the treatment of mentally ill people following widespread deinstitutionalisation but its efficacy has not yet been proven. Community treatment orders (CTOs) for psychiatric patients became available in England and Wales in 2008. We tested whether CTOs reduce admissions compared with use of Section 17 leave when patients in both groups receive equivalent levels of clinical contact but different lengths of compulsory supervision. OCTET is a non-blinded, parallel-arm randomised controlled trial. We postulated that patients with a diagnosis of psychosis discharged from hospital on CTOs would have a lower rate of readmission over 12 months than those discharged on the pre-existing Section 17 leave of absence. Eligible patients were those involuntarily admitted to hospital with a diagnosis of psychosis, aged 18–65 years, who were deemed suitable for supervised outpatient care by their clinicians. Consenting patients were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to be discharged from hospital either on CTO or Section 17 leave. Randomisation used random permuted blocks with lengths of two, four, and six, and stratified for sex, schizophrenic diagnosis, and duration of illness. Research assistants, treating clinicians, and patients were aware of assignment to randomisation group. The primary outcome measure was whether or not the patient was admitted to hospital during the 12-month follow-up period, analysed with a log-binomial regression model adjusted for stratification factors. We did all analyses by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN73110773. Of 442 patients assessed, 336 patients were randomly assigned to be discharged from hospital either on CTO (167 patients) or Section 17 leave (169 patients). One patient withdrew directly after randomisation and two were ineligible, giving a total sample of 333 patients (166 in the CTO group and 167 in the Section 17 group). At 12 months, despite the fact that the length of initial compulsory outpatient treatment differed significantly between the two groups (median 183 days CTO group vs 8 days Section 17 group, p<0·001) the number of patients readmitted did not differ between groups (59 [36%] of 166 patients in the CTO group vs 60 [36%] of 167 patients in the Section 17 group; adjusted relative risk 1·0 [95% CI 0·75–1·33]). In well coordinated mental health services the imposition of compulsory supervision does not reduce the rate of readmission of psychotic patients. We found no support in terms of any reduction in overall hospital admission to justify the significant curtailment of patients' personal liberty. National Institute of Health Research.

Background Despite the availability of psychosocial evidence-based practices (EBPs), treatment and outcomes for persons with mental disorders remain suboptimal. Replicating Effective Programs (REP), an effective implementation strategy, still resulted in less than half of sites using an EBP. The primary aim of this cluster randomized trial is to determine, among sites not initially responding to REP, the effect of adaptive implementation strategies that begin with an External Facilitator (EF) or with an External Facilitator plus an Internal Facilitator (IF) on improved EBP use and patient outcomes in 12 months. Methods/Design This study employs a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design to build an adaptive implementation strategy. The EBP to be implemented is life goals (LG) for patients with mood disorders across 80 community-based outpatient clinics ( N N = 1,600 patients) from different U.S. regions. Sites not initially responding to REP (defined as <50% patients receiving ≥3 EBP sessions) will be randomized to receive additional support from an EF or both EF/IF. Additionally, sites randomized to EF and still not responsive will be randomized to continue with EF alone or to receive EF/IF. The EF provides technical expertise in adapting LG in routine practice, whereas the on-site IF has direct reporting relationships to site leadership to support LG use in routine practice. The primary outcome is mental health-related quality of life; secondary outcomes include receipt of LG sessions, mood symptoms, implementation costs, and organizational change. Discussion This study design will determine whether an off-site EF alone versus the addition of an on-site IF improves EBP uptake and patient outcomes among sites that do not respond initially to REP. It will also examine the value of delaying the provision of EF/IF for sites that continue to not respond despite EF. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02151331

Provider shortages and lack of culturally responsive care limit mental health services in reaching multicultural populations worldwide. We examined the effectiveness of a psychoeducational intervention aimed at building community capacity to address depression and anxiety among racial, ethnic, and linguistic minoritised adults. Strong Minds–Strong Communities (SM–SC) was a 6-month, multicentre, longitudinal, randomised trial done in 37 community-based organisations and clinics in two US sites (Massachusetts and North Carolina). Adults aged 18 years and older speaking English, Spanish, Mandarin, or Cantonese, with moderate to severe depression or anxiety symptoms assessed using the Computerized Adaptive Test for Mental Health (CAT-MH), were eligible for inclusion. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to a psychoeducational intervention provided by community health workers or a usual care condition, which constituted receiving a US National Institutes of Health booklet about anxiety and depression. Both conditions included referrals for social determinants of health needs. Randomisation was stratified by site using computer-generated blocks of size 2. Investigators and participants were not masked to treatment allocation, but outcome assessors were. Primary outcomes were changes from baseline at months 6 and 12 in self-reported depression and anxiety symptoms using the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25), level of functioning using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2·0), and perceived quality of care using the Global Evaluation of Care domain of the Perceptions of Care Outpatient Survey (PoC-OP) in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04092777, and has been completed. From Sept 4, 2019, to March 3, 2023, 5265 potential participants were approached for study inclusion. 2681 were excluded and 2584 were assessed for eligibility. A further 1417 were excluded, and 1167 were deemed eligible for study inclusion. 1044 participants were randomly assigned, 524 to the SM–SC intervention and 520 to the usual care group. The mean age of participants was 42·6 years (SD 13·3) and 875 (83·8%) were female, 165 (15·8%) were male, and four (0·4%) were other. Between baseline and 6 months, intervention participants reported greater improvements in depression and anxiety symptoms (standardised effect size, 0·39 [95% CI 0·27–0·52]), functioning (standardised effect size, 0·28 [0·16–0·39]), and perceived quality of care (standardised effect size, 0·47 [0·31–0·62]). These greater improvements in depression and anxiety symptoms, functioning, and perceived quality of care attenuated but remained significant 6 months post-intervention (standardised effect sizes of 0·28 [95% CI 0·16–0·40] for depression and anxiety, 0·21 [0·08–0·33]) for functioning, and 0·33 [0·16 –0·50] for perceived quality of care). The intervention shows that a culturally adapted intervention can improve depression and anxiety symptoms in Black, Latino, and Asian populations and provides an alternative to mental health care shortages by building community capacity. National Institute of Mental Health. For the Spanish and Mandarin translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

BACKGROUNDThe effectiveness of collaborative care of mental health problems is clear for depression and growing but mixed for anxiety disorders, including posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). We know little about whether collaborative care can be effective in settings that serve low-income patients such as Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs).OBJECTIVEWe compared the effectiveness of minimally enhanced usual care (MEU) versus collaborative care for PTSD with a care manager (PCM).DESIGNThis was a multi-site patient randomized controlled trial of PTSD care improvement over 1 year.PARTICIPANTSWe recruited and enrolled 404 patients in six FQHCs from June 2010 to October 2012. Patients were eligible if they had a primary care appointment, no obvious physical or cognitive obstacles to participation, were age 18–65 years, planned to continue care at the study location for 1 year, and met criteria for a past month diagnosis of PTSD.MAIN MEASURESThe main outcomes were PTSD diagnosis and symptom severity (range, 0–136) based on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS). Secondary outcomes were medication and counseling for mental health problems, and health-related quality of life assessed at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months.KEY RESULTSPatients in both conditions improved similarly over the 1-year evaluation period. At 12 months, PTSD diagnoses had an absolute decrease of 56.7 % for PCM patients and 60.6 % for MEU patients. PTSD symptoms decreased by 26.8 and 24.2 points, respectively. MEU and PCM patients also did not differ in process of care outcomes or health-related quality of life. Patients who actually engaged in care management had mental health care visits that were 14 % higher (p < 0.01) and mental health medication prescription rates that were 15.2 % higher (p < 0.01) than patients with no engagement.CONCLUSIONSA minimally enhanced usual care intervention was similarly effective as collaborative care for patients in FQHCs.

Background Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific su

Information about the cost-effectiveness of early intervention programmes for first-episode psychosis is limited. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an intensive early-intervention programme (called OPUS) (trial registration NCT00157313) consisting of enriched assertive community treatment, psychoeducational family treatment and social skills training for individuals with first-episode psychosis compared with standard treatment. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomised controlled trial, adopting a public sector perspective was undertaken. The mean total costs of OPUS over 5 years (€123,683, s.e. = 8970) were not significantly different from that of standard treatment (€148,751, s.e. = 13073). At 2-year follow-up the mean Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) score in the OPUS group (55.16, s.d. = 15.15) was significantly higher than in standard treatment group (51.13, s.d. = 15.92). However, the mean GAF did not differ significantly between the groups at 5-year follow-up (55.35 (s.d. = 18.28) and 54.16 (s.d. = 18.41), respectively). Cost-effectiveness planes based on non-parametric bootstrapping showed that OPUS was less costly and more effective in 70% of the replications. For a willingness-to-pay up to €50,000 the probability that OPUS was cost-effective was more than 80%. The incremental cost-effectiveness analysis showed that there was a high probability of OPUS being cost-effective compared with standard treatment.

BACKGROUND:Implementation strategies are essential for promoting the uptake of evidence-based practices and for patients to receive optimal care. Yet strategies differ substantially in their intensity and feasibility. Lower-intensity strategies (eg, training and technical support) are commonly used but may be insufficient for all clinics. Limited research has examined the comparative effectiveness of augmentations to low-level implementation strategies for nonresponding clinics. OBJECTIVES:To compare 2 augmentation strategies for improving uptake of an evidence-based collaborative chronic care model (CCM) on 18-month outcomes for patients with depression at community-based clinics nonresponsive to lower-level implementation support. RESEARCH DESIGN:Providers initially received support using a low-level implementation strategy, Replicating Effective Programs (REP). After 6 months, nonresponsive clinics were randomized to add either external facilitation (REP+EF) or external and internal facilitation (REP+EF/IF). MEASURES:The primary outcome was patient 12-item short form survey (SF-12) mental health score at month 18. Secondary outcomes were patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9) depression score at month 18 and receipt of the CCM during months 6 through 18. RESULTS:Twenty-seven clinics were nonresponsive after 6 months of REP. Thirteen clinics (N=77 patients) were randomized to REP+EF and 14 (N=92) to REP+EF/IF. At 18 months, patients in the REP+EF/IF arm had worse SF-12 [diff, 8.38; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.59–13.18] and PHQ-9 scores (diff, 1.82; 95% CI, –0.14 to 3.79), and lower odds of CCM receipt (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.30–1.49) than REP+EF patients. CONCLUSIONS:Patients at sites receiving the more intensive REP+EF/IF saw less improvement in mood symptoms at 18 months than those receiving REP+EF and were no more likely to receive the CCM. For community-based clinics, EF augmentation may be more feasible than EF/IF for implementing CCMs.

Background Informed by our prior work indicating that therapists do not feel recognized or rewarded for implementation of evidence-based practices, we tested the feasibility and acceptability of two incentive-based implementation strategies that seek to improve therapist adherence to cognitive-behavioral therapy for youth, an evidence-based practice. Methods This study was conducted over 6 weeks in two community mental health agencies with therapists ( n  = 11) and leaders ( n  = 4). Therapists were randomized to receive either a financial or social incentive if they achieved a predetermined criterion on adherence to cognitive-behavioral therapy. In the first intervention period (block 1; 2 weeks), therapists received the reward they were initially randomized to if they achieved criterion. In the second intervention period (block 2; 2 weeks), therapists received both rewards if they achieved criterion. Therapists recorded 41 sessions across 15 unique clients over the project period. Primary outcomes included feasibility and acceptability. Feasibility was assessed quantitatively. Fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with therapists and leaders to assess acceptability. Difference in therapist adherence by condition was examined as an exploratory outcome. Adherence ratings were ascertained using an established and validated observational coding system of cognitive-behavioral therapy. Results Both implementation strategies were feasible and acceptable—however, modifications to study design for the larger trial will be necessary based on participant feedback. With respect to our exploratory analysis, we found a trend suggesting the financial reward may have had a more robust effect on therapist adherence than the social reward. Conclusions Incentive-based implementation strategies can be feasibly administered in community mental health agencies with good acceptability, although iterative pilot work is essential. Larger, fully powered trials are needed to compare the effectiveness of implementation strategies to incentivize and enhance therapists’ adherence to evidence-based practices such as cognitive-behavioral therapy.