The need, benefit, and desirability of behavioral health integration in primary care is generally accepted and has acquired widespread positive regard. However, in many health care settings the economics, business aspects, and financial sustainability of practice in integrated care settings remains an unsolved puzzle. Organizational administrators may be reluctant to expand behavioral health services without evidence that such programs offer clear financial benefits and financial sustainability. The tendency among mental health professionals is to consider positive clinical outcomes (e.g., reduced depression) as being globally valued indicators of program success. Although such outcomes may be highly valued by primary care providers and patients, administrative decision makers may require demonstration of more tangible financial outcomes. These differing views require program developers and evaluators to consider multiple outcome domains including clinical/psychological symptom reduction, potential cost benefit, and cost offset. The authors describe a process by which a pilot demonstration project is being implemented to demonstrate programmatic outcomes with a focus on the following: 1) clinician efficiency, 2) improved health outcomes, and 3) direct revenue generation associated with the inclusion of integrated primary care in a public health care system. The authors subsequently offer specific future directions and commentary regarding financial evaluation in each of these domains.

An estimated 49.7 million people in the United States live with one or more disabilities, representing nearly 20% of the 257.2 million individuals ages 5 and older in the civilian population (U.S. Census Bureau, 2003). Most psychologists are likely to have the opportunity to work with clients who have disabilities (R. and need the competencies to provide ethical services to this growing proportion of the population. What constitutes ethical practice with people with disabilities? First, the ethical issues involved in providing services for people with disabilities are outlined, and 2 vignettes and a number of questions for practitioners and educators are presented. Then, 3 invited experts provide commentaries that address these issues, raise additional questions, and provide important resources.

Background Team-based models of care are efficacious in improving outcomes for patients with mental and physical illnesses. However, primary care clinics have been slow to adopt these models. We used iterative stakeholder engagement to develop an intervention to improve the implementation of team-based care for this complex population. Methods We developed the initial framework for Relational Team Development (RELATED) from a qualitative study of Primary Care Providers’ (PCPs’) experiences treating mental illness and a literature review of practice facilitation and psychology clinical supervision. Subsequently, we surveyed 900 Colorado PCPs to identify factors associated with PCP self-efficacy in management of mental illness and team-based care. We then conducted two focus groups for feedback on RELATED. Lastly, we convened an expert panel to refine the intervention. Results We developed RELATED, a two-part intervention delivered by a practice facilitator with a background in clinical psychology. The facilitator observes PCPs during patient visits and provides individualized coaching. Next, the facilitator guides the primary care team through a practice change activity with a focus on relational team dynamics. Conclusion The iterative development of RELATED using stakeholder engagement offers a model for the development of interventions tailored to the needs of these stakeholders. Trial registration Not applicable. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-019-1010-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Patients with mental illness are frequently treated in primary care, where Primary Care Providers (PCPs) report feeling ill-equipped to manage their care. Team-based models of care improve outcomes for patients with mental illness, but multiple barriers limit adoption. Barriers include practical issues and psychosocial factors associated with the reorganization of care. Practice facilitation can improve implementation, but does not directly address the psychosocial factors or gaps in PCP skills in managing mental illness. To address these gaps, we developed Relational Team Development (RELATED). Methods RELATED is an implementation strategy combining practice facilitation and psychology clinical supervision methodologies to improve implementation of team-based care. It includes PCP-level clinical coaching and a team-level practice change activity. We performed a preliminary assessment of RELATED with a convergent parallel mixed method study in 2 primary care clinics in an urban Federally Qualified Health Center in Southwest, USA, 2017-2018. Study participants included PCPs, clinic staff, and patient representatives. Clinic staff and patients were recruited for the practice change activity only. Primary outcomes were feasibility and acceptability. Feasibility was assessed as ease of recruitment and implementation. Acceptability was measured in surveys of PCPs and staff and focus groups. We conducted semi-structured focus groups with 3 participant groups in each clinic: PCPs; staff and patients; and leadership. Secondary outcomes were change in pre- post- intervention PCP self-efficacy in mental illness management and team-based care. We conducted qualitative observations to better understand clinic climate. Results We recruited 18 PCPs, 17 staff members, and 3 patient representatives. We ended recruitment early due to over recruitment. Both clinics developed and implemented practice change activities. The mean acceptability score was 3.7 (SD=0.3) on a 4-point Likert scale. PCPs had a statistically significant increase in their mental illness management self-efficacy [change = 0.9, p-value= <.01]. Focus group comments were largely positive, with PCPs requesting additional coaching. Conclusions RELATED was feasible and highly acceptable. It led to positive changes in PCP self-efficacy in Mental Illness Management. If confirmed as an effective implementation strategy, RELATED has the potential to significantly impact implementation of evidence-based interventions for patients with mental illness in primary care.