Diese Seite wurde automatisch übersetzt und die Genauigkeit der Übersetzung wird nicht garantiert. Bitte wende dich an die englische Version für einen Quelltext.

Hybrid Collaborative Care Randomized Program Evaluation (BHIP-CCM)

22. Juni 2020 aktualisiert von: Mark Bauer, VA Boston Healthcare System

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.

Studienübersicht

Detaillierte Beschreibung

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.

Studientyp

Interventionell

Einschreibung (Tatsächlich)

1112

Phase

  • Unzutreffend

Kontakte und Standorte

Dieser Abschnitt enthält die Kontaktdaten derjenigen, die die Studie durchführen, und Informationen darüber, wo diese Studie durchgeführt wird.

Studienorte

    • Massachusetts
      • Boston, Massachusetts, Vereinigte Staaten, 02131
        • VA Boston Healthcare System

Teilnahmekriterien

Forscher suchen nach Personen, die einer bestimmten Beschreibung entsprechen, die als Auswahlkriterien bezeichnet werden. Einige Beispiele für diese Kriterien sind der allgemeine Gesundheitszustand einer Person oder frühere Behandlungen.

Zulassungskriterien

Studienberechtigtes Alter

18 Jahre und älter (Erwachsene, Älterer Erwachsener)

Akzeptiert gesunde Freiwillige

Nein

Studienberechtigte Geschlechter

Alle

Beschreibung

Inclusion Criteria:

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

Exclusion Criteria:

Chart evidence of dementia

Studienplan

Dieser Abschnitt enthält Einzelheiten zum Studienplan, einschließlich des Studiendesigns und der Messung der Studieninhalte.

Wie ist die Studie aufgebaut?

Designdetails

  • Hauptzweck: Behandlung
  • Zuteilung: Zufällig
  • Interventionsmodell: Sequenzielle Zuweisung
  • Maskierung: Keine (Offenes Etikett)

Waffen und Interventionen

Teilnehmergruppe / Arm
Intervention / Behandlung
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.
Packaging, training and technical assistance according to the Replicating Effective Programs model plus External Facilitation
Andere Namen:
  • REP-F
Placebo-Komparator: 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.
Dissemination of educational materials on the collaborative chronic care model for 4 or 8 months prior to cross-over to REP-F

Was misst die Studie?

Primäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
Veterans RAND-12 Mental Component Score (VR-12 MCS)
Zeitfenster: one year
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

Sekundäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Scores (VR-12 PCS)
Zeitfenster: One year
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
Zeitfenster: One year
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)
Zeitfenster: One year
Recovery-oriented quality of life score. Higher is better. Minimum score 0, maximum score 100.
One year
Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC)
Zeitfenster: One year
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
Zeitfenster: baseline and during stepdown (6-12 months)

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
Zeitfenster: baseline and during stepdown (6-12 months)

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
Zeitfenster: baseline and during stepdown (6-12 months)

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
Zeitfenster: baseline and during stepdown (6-12 months)

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
Zeitfenster: Two years
Quarterly indicator (0 not hospitalized or 1 hospitalized) for mental health hospitalization in the prior three months.
Two years

Mitarbeiter und Ermittler

Hier finden Sie Personen und Organisationen, die an dieser Studie beteiligt sind.

Ermittler

  • Hauptermittler: Mark S Bauer, MD, VA Boston Healthcare System

Publikationen und hilfreiche Links

Die Bereitstellung dieser Publikationen erfolgt freiwillig durch die für die Eingabe von Informationen über die Studie verantwortliche Person. Diese können sich auf alles beziehen, was mit dem Studium zu tun hat.

Allgemeine Veröffentlichungen

Studienaufzeichnungsdaten

Diese Daten verfolgen den Fortschritt der Übermittlung von Studienaufzeichnungen und zusammenfassenden Ergebnissen an ClinicalTrials.gov. Studienaufzeichnungen und gemeldete Ergebnisse werden von der National Library of Medicine (NLM) überprüft, um sicherzustellen, dass sie bestimmten Qualitätskontrollstandards entsprechen, bevor sie auf der öffentlichen Website veröffentlicht werden.

Haupttermine studieren

Studienbeginn (Tatsächlich)

7. März 2016

Primärer Abschluss (Tatsächlich)

26. April 2018

Studienabschluss (Tatsächlich)

26. April 2018

Studienanmeldedaten

Zuerst eingereicht

4. September 2015

Zuerst eingereicht, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt hat

4. September 2015

Zuerst gepostet (Schätzen)

7. September 2015

Studienaufzeichnungsaktualisierungen

Letztes Update gepostet (Tatsächlich)

23. Juni 2020

Letztes eingereichtes Update, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt

22. Juni 2020

Zuletzt verifiziert

1. Juni 2020

Mehr Informationen

Begriffe im Zusammenhang mit dieser Studie

Zusätzliche relevante MeSH-Bedingungen

Andere Studien-ID-Nummern

  • 15-289
  • QUE-15-289 (Andere Kennung: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs)

Plan für individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD)

Planen Sie, individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD) zu teilen?

NEIN

Diese Informationen wurden ohne Änderungen direkt von der Website clinicaltrials.gov abgerufen. Wenn Sie Ihre Studiendaten ändern, entfernen oder aktualisieren möchten, wenden Sie sich bitte an register@clinicaltrials.gov. Sobald eine Änderung auf clinicaltrials.gov implementiert wird, wird diese automatisch auch auf unserer Website aktualisiert .

Klinische Studien zur Psychische Gesundheitsstörungen

Abonnieren