Objective To perform a factor analysis of the Practice Integration Profile (PIP), a 30‐item practice‐level measure of primary care and behavioral health integration derived from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Lexicon for Behavioral Health and Primary Care Integration. Data Sources The PIP was completed by 735 individuals, representing 357 practices across the United States. Study Design The study design was a cross‐sectional survey. An exploratory factor analysis and assessment of internal consistency reliability via Cronbach's alpha were performed. Data Collection Methods Participant responses were collected using REDCap, a secure, web‐based data capture tool. Principal Findings Five of the PIP's six domains had factor loadings for most items related to each factor representing the PIP of 0.50 or greater. However, one factor had items from two PIP domains that had loadings >0.50. A five‐factor model with redistributed items resulted in improved factor loadings for all domains along with greater internal consistency reliability (>0.80). Conclusions Five of the PIP's six domains demonstrated excellent internal consistency for measures of health care resources. Although minor improvements to strengthen the PIP are possible, it is a valid and reliable measure of the integration of primary care and behavioral health.

No abstract

Background: The literature supports occupational therapy (OT) on primary care (PC) interprofessional teams; however, due to uncertainty regarding the role of, and reimbursement for, OT in PC, few occupational therapists practice in PC. This study addressed the first barrier by identifying the 15 most common diagnoses in a specific PC practice and determining how many of them have evidence-based OT interventions appropriate for their treatments. Method: A retrospective analysis of the ICD-10 codes used by one physician during a 12-month period was completed. These codes were reviewed and categorized using a functional classification system to determine the 15 most frequently occurring diagnostic categories. These diagnostic categories were compared to evidence-based industry standard OT interventions. Results: We reviewed 1,769 distinct ICD-10 codes and condensed them into 58 thematically grouped diagnostic categories. The 15 most frequent categories comprised 64% of the codes used. Evidencebased OT interventions to treat conditions directly, or address related underlying issues and common comorbidities, were identified for 100% of these categories. Discussion: Evidence-based OT interventions exist to treat aspects of 100% of the 15 most common conditions seen in PC. The findings support the growing body of literature that demonstrate the use of occupational therapists as interprofessional PC team members. Comments The authors report that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

The challenges facing surveillance for dog bite injuries include the lack of a standardized reporting form, consistent information being collected, and utilization of the information that is collected. Potential solutions include a standardized reporting form, greater emphasis on reporting, and a repository for information. These solutions can be accomplished in part by including dog bite injuries in current or developing disease surveillance systems.

Purpose: Habits, roles, and routines are important behaviors that affect lifestyle and can lead to the development of chronic disease such as diabetes mellitus. Primary care physicians (PCPs) have limited time, suggesting an interprofessional team approach would be beneficial in helping patients modify behaviors for the prevention and treatment of chronic disease. Occupational therapists (OTs) specialize in addressing health behaviors, and literature supports including OTs on the primary care team to improve the self-management techniques of patients with chronic disease. This study was guided by Lifestyle Redesign®, an evidence-based program that addresses the health behaviors of patients with diabetes in primary care. We aimed to improve health outcomes by combining an OT-led lifestyle modification program with patient-centered treatment recommendations from an external interprofessional team. We hypothesized that the health outcomes of patients with diabetes in primary care would improve after participating in an OT-led interprofessional lifestyle modification program, and that reimbursement for services would be obtainable. Method: Two PCPs in community practice initially agreed to involve an OT on their primary care team. Due to reimbursement concerns, the PCPs later preferred to refer patients to receive the OT-led intervention at an offsite clinic, rather than onsite at the primary care practice. Health outcomes were measured pre- and post-intervention using industry standard assessments and biometrics. Descriptive and non-parametric statistics were used to evaluate change. Results: Thirty-one patients with diabetes were referred, and three (9.7%) participated in the offsite lifestyle modification program. While statistical significance was not achieved (p≥0.10), trends toward individual improvement were noted for occupational performance and satisfaction and empowerment, and reimbursement was received from the third-party payers. Conclusions: Patient participation in this study was consistent with participation rates for offsite behavioral health referrals. An offsite OT-led interprofessional lifestyle modification program demonstrated potential for meaningful change and services were reimbursed. These findings support practice redesign efforts to include OTs as part of an integrated primary care model. Offering onsite services will increase patient accessibility to care and improve referral completion rates, thus providing OTs the opportunity to further demonstrate the efficacy of delivering chronic disease management in primary care.