Hybrid Collaborative Care Randomized Program Evaluation (BHIP-CCM)

Hybrid Controlled Trial to Implement Collaborative Care in General Mental Health

This randomized program evaluation is undertaken in conjunction with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Mental Health Operations (OMHO) and the Quality Enhancement Research Initiative. It is designed to answer two related questions: (1) Can an evidence-based implementation strategy using the Center for Disease Control (CDC)'s Replicating Effective Programs plus External Facilitation (REP-F) enhance the adoption of team-based care in VA General Mental Health (GMH) Clinics, and (2) Does the establishment of such teams via implementation enhance Veterans' health status, satisfaction, and perceptions of care? The model for team-based care is the evidence-based Collaborative Chronic Care Model (CCM).

In conjunction with a nation-wide roll-out of the VA's Behavioral Health Interdisciplinary Program team (BHIP) initiative, the investigators have structured a randomized, controlled program evaluation to answer these questions. Specifically, using a stepped wedge design the investigators will randomize 9 VAMCs that have requested support in establishing a BHIP to 1 of 3 waves of REP-F support: immediate implementation support vs. 4-month vs. 8-month wait with dissemination of CCM materials (3 sites per wave). Fidelity and health outcome measures will be collected in a repeated measures design at 6-month intervals, and analyzed with general linear modeling.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Mental Health Disorders
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Replicating Effective Programs plus External Facilitation; Other: Educational Materials

Detailed Description

Based on an internal system-wide review of mental health services and the Mental Health Action Plan submitted to Congress in November, 2011, the Office of Mental Health Operations (OMHO) has undertaken an effort to establish behavioral health interdisciplinary plans (BHIPs), which are intended to provide General Mental Health (GMH) care throughout the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The BHIP goal is to build effective interdisciplinary teams, which will provide the majority of care for Veterans in GMH. It is now expected that every Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) establish at least one BHIP in the current initial phase (begun in late fiscal year 2013), and that the effort scale-up subsequently. Not surprisingly, progress has been uneven.

In 2015 OMHO incorporated the Collaborative Chronic Care Model (CCM) as an evidence-based model by which to structure BHIPs. Consistent with BHIP goals, CCMs were developed to provide anticipatory, continuous, collaborative, evidence-based care. CCMs consist of 6 elements: delivery system redesign, use of clinical information systems, provider decision support, patient self-management support, linkage to community resources, and healthcare organization support. Replicating Effective Programs with External Facilitation (REP-F) has been shown to be effective in implementing complex care models, including CCMs for mental health, both within and beyond VA.

Thus in conjunction with OMHO, the investigators propose this project with the Specific Aim of evaluating the impact of REP-F in implementing CCM-based BHIPs and their effect on Veteran health status. The investigators propose a Hybrid Type III implementation-effectiveness stepped wedge controlled trial, specifically hypothesizing that:

H1: REP-F-based implementation to establish CCM-based BHIPs, compared to existing centralized technical assistance will result in: (H1a) increased Veteran perceptions of CCM-based care, (H1b) higher rates of achieving national BHIP clinical fidelity measures (implementation outcomes), and (H1c) higher provider ratings of the presence of CCM elements.

H2: CCM-based BHIPs, supported by REP-F implementation, will result in improved Veteran health outcomes compared to BHIPs supported by dissemination material alone (intervention outcomes).

The investigators will utilize the national BHIP rollout as a vehicle for this project. Using a stepped wedge design the investigators will randomize 9 VAMCs that have requested support in establishing a BHIP to 1 of 3 waves of REP-F support: immediate implementation support vs. 4-month vs. 8-month wait with dissemination of CCM materials (3 sites per wave). Fidelity and health outcome measures will be collected in a repeated measures design at 6-month intervals, and analyzed with general linear modeling.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 1112
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• United States
  • Massachusetts
    • Boston, Massachusetts, United States, 02131
      • VA Boston Healthcare System

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No
• Genders Eligible for Study: All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

At least three visits to the General Mental Health Clinic's BHIP team in prior year

Exclusion Criteria:

Chart evidence of dementia

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Treatment
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Sequential Assignment
• Masking: None (Open Label)

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Implementation Facilitation; Implementation Facilitation consists of the Center for Disease Control's Replicating Effective Programs, plus External Facilitation. The intervention lasts 6 months followed by a 6-month step-down period.	Other: Replicating Effective Programs plus External Facilitation; Packaging, training and technical assistance according to the Replicating Effective Programs model plus External Facilitation; Other Names: REP-F
Placebo Comparator: Educational Materials; Dissemination of available materials explaining the Collaborative Chronic Care Model and implementation tools. Sites randomized to delay initiation of facilitation will have these materials plus technical assistance for 4 or 8 months prior to full implementation facilitation.	Other: Educational Materials; Dissemination of educational materials on the collaborative chronic care model for 4 or 8 months prior to cross-over to REP-F

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Veterans RAND-12 Mental Component Score (VR-12 MCS)	Veterans RAND-Mental Component Score: Overall self-rated mental health status over past two weeks among Veteran participants. Possible scores of minimum 0 and maximum 50. Higher is better. Administered with items for Veterans RAND-Physical Component Score.	one year

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Scores (VR-12 PCS)	Veterans RAND-Physical Component Score: Overall self-rated physical health status over past two weeks among Veteran participants. Possible scores of minimum 0 and maximum 50. Higher is better. Administered with items for Veterans RAND-Mental Component Score.	One year
Satisfaction Index	Satisfaction Index: Overall patient satisfaction with mental health services. Higher is better. Minimum score is 12, maximum score is 72.	One year
Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF)	Recovery-oriented quality of life score. Higher is better. Minimum score 0, maximum score 100.	One year
Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC)	Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC): Veteran perception of coordination of and engagement with services. Higher is better. Minimum score is 1, maximum score is 33.	One year
Team Development Measure (TDM)- Cohesion	Mean percentage of participant provider team members who strongly agreed or agreed with the cohesion domain within the Team Development Measure. Measure Description: Team Development Measure (TDM) is a survey assessing team function at baseline and during the second six months of implementation using the four subscales with items rated from strongly agree to strongly disagree: Communication, Cohesion, Role Clarity, and Team Primacy (prioritizing team over individual goals). The percentage of team members agreeing or strongly agreeing with each statement was calculated, then averaged across all statements for a mean percentage for each subscale. Range of percentage was 0-100.	baseline and during stepdown (6-12 months)
Team Development Measure (TDM)- Communication	Mean percentage of participant team members who strongly agreed or agreed with the communication domain within the Team Development Measure. Measure Description: Measure Description: Team Development Measure (TDM) is a survey assessing team function at baseline and during the second six months of implementation using the four subscales with items rated from strongly agree to strongly disagree: Communication, Cohesion, Role Clarity, and Team Primacy (prioritizing team over individual goals). The percentage of team members agreeing or strongly agreeing with each statement was calculated, then averaged across all statements for a mean percentage for each subscale. Range of percentage was 0-100.	baseline and during stepdown (6-12 months)
Team Development Measure (TDM)- Role Clarity	Mean percentage of participant team members who strongly agreed or agreed with the role clarity domain within the Team Development Measure. Measure Description: Team Development Measure (TDM) is a survey assessing team function at baseline and during the second six months of implementation using the four subscales with items rated from strongly agree to strongly disagree: Communication, Cohesion, Role Clarity, and Team Primacy (prioritizing team over individual goals). The percentage of team members agreeing or strongly agreeing with each statement was calculated, then averaged across all statements for a mean percentage for each subscale. Range of percentage was 0-100. Missing: cohesion (3); communication (2); role clarity (1); team primacy (0).	baseline and during stepdown (6-12 months)
Team Development Measure (TDM)- Team Primacy	Mean percentage of participant team members who strongly agreed or agreed with the team primacy domain within the Team Development Measure. Measure Description: Team Development Measure (TDM) is a survey assessing team function at baseline and during the second six months of implementation using the four subscales with items rated from strongly agree to strongly disagree: Communication, Cohesion, Role Clarity, and Team Primacy (prioritizing team over individual goals). The percentage of team members agreeing or strongly agreeing with each statement was calculated, then averaged across all statements for a mean percentage for each subscale. Range of percentage was 0-100. Missing: cohesion (3); communication (2); role clarity (1); team primacy (0).	baseline and during stepdown (6-12 months)
Mental Health Hospitalization Rates	Quarterly indicator (0 not hospitalized or 1 hospitalized) for mental health hospitalization in the prior three months.	Two years

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: VA Boston Healthcare System
• Collaborators: US Department of Veterans Affairs
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Mark S Bauer, MD, VA Boston Healthcare System

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• Woltmann E, Grogan-Kaylor A, Perron B, Georges H, Kilbourne AM, Bauer MS. Comparative effectiveness of collaborative chronic care models for mental health conditions across primary, specialty, and behavioral health care settings: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Psychiatry. 2012 Aug;169(8):790-804. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2012.11111616.
• Miller CJ, Grogan-Kaylor A, Perron BE, Kilbourne AM, Woltmann E, Bauer MS. Collaborative chronic care models for mental health conditions: cumulative meta-analysis and metaregression to guide future research and implementation. Med Care. 2013 Oct;51(10):922-30. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182a3e4c4.
• Waxmonsky J, Kilbourne AM, Goodrich DE, Nord KM, Lai Z, Laird C, Clogston J, Kim HM, Miller C, Bauer MS. Enhanced fidelity to treatment for bipolar disorder: results from a randomized controlled implementation trial. Psychiatr Serv. 2014 Jan 1;65(1):81-90. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201300039.
• Sullivan JL, Kim B, Miller CJ, Elwy AR, Drummond KL, Connolly SL, Riendeau RP, Bauer MS. Collaborative chronic care model implementation within outpatient behavioral health care teams: qualitative results from a multisite trial using implementation facilitation. Implement Sci Commun. 2021 Mar 24;2(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s43058-021-00133-w.
• Connolly SL, Sullivan JL, Ritchie MJ, Kim B, Miller CJ, Bauer MS. External facilitators' perceptions of internal facilitation skills during implementation of collaborative care for mental health teams: a qualitative analysis informed by the i-PARIHS framework. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Mar 4;20(1):165. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-5011-3.
• Lew RA, Miller CJ, Kim B, Wu H, Stolzmann K, Bauer MS. A method to reduce imbalance for site-level randomized stepped wedge implementation trial designs. Implement Sci. 2019 May 3;14(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s13012-019-0893-3.
• Bauer MS, Miller CJ, Kim B, Lew R, Stolzmann K, Sullivan J, Riendeau R, Pitcock J, Williamson A, Connolly S, Elwy AR, Weaver K. Effectiveness of Implementing a Collaborative Chronic Care Model for Clinician Teams on Patient Outcomes and Health Status in Mental Health: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Mar 1;2(3):e190230. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.0230.
• Bauer MS, Miller C, Kim B, Lew R, Weaver K, Coldwell C, Henderson K, Holmes S, Seibert MN, Stolzmann K, Elwy AR, Kirchner J. Partnering with health system operations leadership to develop a controlled implementation trial. Implement Sci. 2016 Feb 24;11:22. doi: 10.1186/s13012-016-0385-7.

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): March 7, 2016
• Primary Completion (Actual): April 26, 2018
• Study Completion (Actual): April 26, 2018

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: September 4, 2015
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: September 4, 2015
• First Posted (Estimate): September 7, 2015

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): June 23, 2020
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: June 22, 2020
• Last Verified: June 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: Implementation; Quality Improvement; Organization of Services
• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Mental Disorders
• Other Study ID Numbers: 15-289; QUE-15-289 (Other Identifier: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: NO