Key Points Question Collaborative chronic care models for mental health conditions are supported by extensive randomized clinical trial data, but what is the evidence that these models can be implemented and can have beneficial effects in general clinical settings? Findings In this randomized clinical implementation trial of 5596 veterans, a collaborative chronic care model was shown to be effectively implemented with practical, scalable facilitation support for clinicians. Effects on self-reported health outcomes were limited, but mental health hospitalization rate improved. Meaning These findings suggest that collaborative chronic care models can be exported to general clinical practice settings using implementation facilitation and, at least for individuals with complex mental health conditions, can improve health outcomes.
Background The task complexity involved in connecting to telehealth video visits may disproportionately impact health care access in populations already experiencing inequities. Human intermediaries can be a strategy for addressing health care access disparities by acting as technology helpers to reduce the cognitive load demands required to learn and use patient-facing telehealth technologies. Objective We conducted a cognitive load theory–informed pilot intervention involving warm accompaniment telehealth helping sessions with patients at a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC). We demonstrate how to design and report recruitment methods, reach, delivery process, and the preliminary impact of a novel equity-focused intervention. Methods Early into the COVID-19 pandemic a telehealth helping session was offered to patients at FQHC via phone. Graduate students led the sessions on conducting a telehealth video test run or helping with patient portal log-in. They systematically recorded their recruitment efforts, intervention observations, and daily reflection notes. Following the intervention, we asked the intervention participants to participate in an interview and all patients who had telehealth visits during and 4 weeks before and after the intervention period to complete a survey. Electronic health records were reviewed to assess telehealth visit format changes. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses of the recruitment records, electronic health record data, and surveys were performed. Through integrative analysis, we developed process-related themes and recommendations for future equity-focused telehealth interventions. Results Of the 239 eligible patients, 34 (14.2%) completed the intervention and 3 (1.2%) completed subsequent interviews. The intervention participants who completed the survey (n=15) had lower education and less technological experience than the nonintervention survey participants (n=113). We identified 3 helping strategies for cognitive load reduction: providing step-by-step guidance for configuring and learning, building rapport to create confidence while problem-solving, and being on the same page to counter informational distractions. Intervention participants reported increased understanding but found that learning the video visit software was more difficult than nonintervention participants. A comparison of visit experiences did not find differences in difficulty (cognitive load measure) using telehealth-related technologies, changes to visit modality, or reported technical problems during the visit. However, the intervention participants were significantly less satisfied with the video visits. Conclusions Although a limited number of people participated in the intervention, it may have reached individuals more likely to need technology assistance. We postulate that significant differences between intervention and nonintervention participants were rooted in baseline differences between the groups’ education level, technology experience, and technology use frequency; however, small sample sizes limit conclusions. The barriers encountered during the intervention suggest that patients at FQHC may require both improved access to web-based technologies and human intermediary support to make telehealth video visits feasible. Future large, randomized, equity-focused studies should investigate blended strategies to facilitate video visit access.
Background: Many previous studies of health care teamwork have taken place in clinical teams with high staffing ratios (i.e., high ratios of staff to patients). Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify clinicians' viewpoints of foundational resources necessary to support good team functioning in the context of low staffing ratios. Methodology: We used administrative data, validated with local mental health chiefs, to identify mental health teams that had achieved high team functioning despite low staffing ratios in U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers. Guided by a recently developed model of team effectiveness, the Team Effectiveness Pyramid, we conducted qualitative interviews with 21 team members across three teams within two medical centers. Interview questions focused on the resources needed to support good team functioning despite low staffing ratios. We used directed content analysis to analyze results. Results: We found there were several domains of relevant resources: material, staffing, temporal, organizational, and psychological. These represent an expansion of the domains originally included in the Team Effectiveness Pyramid. Conclusions: Within the five domains, we identified key tensions to be addressed when forming teams, including the balances between providing care for new versus established patients, emphasizing shared caseloads within the team versus matching patients to clinicians based on individual expertise, and establishing reporting structures by clinical discipline versus team membership. Practice Implications: Establishing high-functioning health care teams in the context of low staffing ratios requires attention to key resource domains and fundamental trade-offs in how teams are structured.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.