The impact of integrating behavioral health services into pediatric subspecialty care: A systematic review

Abstract

Pediatric gastroenterology patients are at risk for co‐occurring behavioral health concerns, such as depression and anxiety, compared with youth without medical conditions. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the scientific literature supporting the hypothesis that integrating behavioral health services into gastroenterology clinics could improve patient psychosocial well‐being. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases and gray literature to identify studies reporting the impact of behavioral health integration on the psychosocial well‐being of pediatric gastroenterology patients. Two independent coders evaluated each study for inclusion and extracted data regarding patient demographics, study design, behavioral health integration approaches, and psychosocial outcomes. Results were synthesized using narrative review procedures. Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Most reported outcomes from research grant‐funded randomized controlled trials or open trials investigating behavioral health interventions based on Cognitive‐Behavioral Therapy, primarily with youth with irritable bowel disease or functional gastrointestinal disorders. Within the highest‐quality, comparable studies, nearly 80% reported at least one statistically significant treatment effect on patient psychosocial well‐being. Many studies used rigorous methods that minimize bias, but did not provide models for sustainable, programmatic behavioral health integration outside the bounds of a research study. The studies included in this review suggest that behavioral integration could have the potential to positively impact gastroenterology patients' psychosocial functioning. However, more research is needed to investigate the appropriate intensity of behavioral health services and evaluate models for integrating behavioral healthcare in pediatric gastroenterology settings beyond the research‐funded clinical trial context.