Adults with serious mental illness and substance use disorders have elevated risk of mortality and higher healthcare costs compared to the general population. As these disparities have been linked to poor management of co-occurring chronic conditions in primary care, the behavioral health setting may be a preferred setting for routine medical screening and treatment. This qualitative study describes early stages of integrating care teams in emerging medical homes based in mental health and addiction treatment settings. Clinicians and staff from ten agencies engaged in the Behavioral Health Home Learning Collaborative participated in qualitative interviews exploring local definitions of "behavioral health home" and initial barriers and facilitators to integration. Facilitators included clear staff roles, flexible scheduling, and interdisciplinary huddles and staff trainings. Challenges included workforce, limited use of electronic health records, and differing professional cultures. Participants advocated for new workflows and payment structures to accommodate scheduling demands and holistic case management.

We conducted a randomized controlled trial of an individually-tailored, virtual perspective-taking intervention to reduce race and socioeconomic (SES) disparities in providers' pain treatment decisions. Physician residents and fellows (n=436) were recruited from across the United States for this two-part online study. Providers first completed a bias assessment task in which they made treatment decisions for virtual patients with chronic pain who varied by race (Black/White) and SES (low/high). Providers who demonstrated a treatment bias were randomized to the intervention or control group. The intervention consisted of personalized feedback about their bias, real-time dynamic interactions with virtual patients, and videos depicting how pain impacts the patients' lives. Treatment bias was re-assessed one week later. Compared to the control group, providers who received the tailored intervention had 85% lower odds of demonstrating a treatment bias against Black patients and 76% lower odds of demonstrating a treatment bias against low SES patients at follow-up. Providers who received the intervention for racial bias also showed increased compassion for patients compared to providers in the control condition. Group differences did not emerge for provider comfort in treating patients. Results suggest an online intervention that is tailored to providers according to their individual treatment biases, delivers feedback about these

Background Compared to White and high socioeconomic status (SES) patients, Black and low SES patients receive less adequate pain care. Providers may contribute to these disparities by making biased decisions that are driven, in part, by their attitudes about race and SES. Purpose We examined the effects of patient race and SES on providers’ chronic pain decisions and the extent to which providers’ implicit and explicit attitudes about race and SES were related to these decisions. Methods Physician residents/fellows (n = 436) made pain care decisions for 12 computer-simulated patients with chronic back pain that varied by race (Black/White) and SES (low/high). Physicians also completed measures assessing implicit and explicit attitudes about race and SES. Results There were three significant race-by-SES interactions: (a) For high SES patients, Black (vs. White) patients were rated as having more pain interference; the opposite race difference emerged for low SES patients. (b) For high SES patients, Black (vs. White) patients were rated as being in greater distress; no race difference emerged for low SES patients. (c) For low SES patients, White (vs. Black) patients were more likely to be recommended workplace accommodations; no race difference emerged for high SES patients. Additionally, providers were more likely to recommend opioids to Black (vs. White) and low (vs. high) SES patients, and were more likely to use opioid contracts with low (vs. high) SES patients. Providers’ implicit and explicit attitudes predicted some, but not all, of their pain-related ratings. Conclusion These results highlight the need to further examine the effects of patient race and SES simultaneously in the context of pain care.