Cette page a été traduite automatiquement et l'exactitude de la traduction n'est pas garantie. Veuillez vous référer au version anglaise pour un texte source.

Hybrid Collaborative Care Randomized Program Evaluation (BHIP-CCM)

22 juin 2020 mis à jour par: 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.

Aperçu de l'étude

Description détaillée

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.

Type d'étude

Interventionnel

Inscription (Réel)

1112

Phase

  • N'est pas applicable

Contacts et emplacements

Cette section fournit les coordonnées de ceux qui mènent l'étude et des informations sur le lieu où cette étude est menée.

Lieux d'étude

    • Massachusetts
      • Boston, Massachusetts, États-Unis, 02131
        • VA Boston Healthcare System

Critères de participation

Les chercheurs recherchent des personnes qui correspondent à une certaine description, appelée critères d'éligibilité. Certains exemples de ces critères sont l'état de santé général d'une personne ou des traitements antérieurs.

Critère d'éligibilité

Âges éligibles pour étudier

18 ans et plus (Adulte, Adulte plus âgé)

Accepte les volontaires sains

Non

Sexes éligibles pour l'étude

Tout

La 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

Plan d'étude

Cette section fournit des détails sur le plan d'étude, y compris la façon dont l'étude est conçue et ce que l'étude mesure.

Comment l'étude est-elle conçue ?

Détails de conception

  • Objectif principal: Traitement
  • Répartition: Randomisé
  • Modèle interventionnel: Affectation séquentielle
  • Masquage: Aucun (étiquette ouverte)

Armes et Interventions

Groupe de participants / Bras
Intervention / Traitement
Expérimental: 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
Autres noms:
  • REP-F
Comparateur placebo: 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

Que mesure l'étude ?

Principaux critères de jugement

Mesure des résultats
Description de la mesure
Délai
Veterans RAND-12 Mental Component Score (VR-12 MCS)
Délai: 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

Mesures de résultats secondaires

Mesure des résultats
Description de la mesure
Délai
Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Scores (VR-12 PCS)
Délai: 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
Délai: 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)
Délai: 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)
Délai: 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
Délai: 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
Délai: 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
Délai: 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
Délai: 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
Délai: Two years
Quarterly indicator (0 not hospitalized or 1 hospitalized) for mental health hospitalization in the prior three months.
Two years

Collaborateurs et enquêteurs

C'est ici que vous trouverez les personnes et les organisations impliquées dans cette étude.

Les enquêteurs

  • Chercheur principal: Mark S Bauer, MD, VA Boston Healthcare System

Publications et liens utiles

La personne responsable de la saisie des informations sur l'étude fournit volontairement ces publications. Il peut s'agir de tout ce qui concerne l'étude.

Publications générales

Dates d'enregistrement des études

Ces dates suivent la progression des dossiers d'étude et des soumissions de résultats sommaires à ClinicalTrials.gov. Les dossiers d'étude et les résultats rapportés sont examinés par la Bibliothèque nationale de médecine (NLM) pour s'assurer qu'ils répondent à des normes de contrôle de qualité spécifiques avant d'être publiés sur le site Web public.

Dates principales de l'étude

Début de l'étude (Réel)

7 mars 2016

Achèvement primaire (Réel)

26 avril 2018

Achèvement de l'étude (Réel)

26 avril 2018

Dates d'inscription aux études

Première soumission

4 septembre 2015

Première soumission répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité

4 septembre 2015

Première publication (Estimation)

7 septembre 2015

Mises à jour des dossiers d'étude

Dernière mise à jour publiée (Réel)

23 juin 2020

Dernière mise à jour soumise répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité

22 juin 2020

Dernière vérification

1 juin 2020

Plus d'information

Termes liés à cette étude

Termes MeSH pertinents supplémentaires

Autres numéros d'identification d'étude

  • 15-289
  • QUE-15-289 (Autre identifiant: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs)

Plan pour les données individuelles des participants (IPD)

Prévoyez-vous de partager les données individuelles des participants (DPI) ?

NON

Ces informations ont été extraites directement du site Web clinicaltrials.gov sans aucune modification. Si vous avez des demandes de modification, de suppression ou de mise à jour des détails de votre étude, veuillez contacter register@clinicaltrials.gov. Dès qu'un changement est mis en œuvre sur clinicaltrials.gov, il sera également mis à jour automatiquement sur notre site Web .

Essais cliniques sur Troubles de santé mentale

3
S'abonner