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.
調査の概要
状態
条件
詳細な説明
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.
研究の種類
入学 (実際)
段階
- 適用できない
連絡先と場所
研究場所
-
-
Massachusetts
-
Boston、Massachusetts、アメリカ、02131
- VA Boston Healthcare System
-
-
参加基準
適格基準
就学可能な年齢
健康ボランティアの受け入れ
受講資格のある性別
説明
Inclusion Criteria:
At least three visits to the General Mental Health Clinic's BHIP team in prior year
Exclusion Criteria:
Chart evidence of dementia
研究計画
研究はどのように設計されていますか？
デザインの詳細
- 主な目的：処理
- 割り当て：ランダム化
- 介入モデル：順次割り当て
- マスキング：なし（オープンラベル）
武器と介入
参加者グループ / アーム |
介入・治療 |
|---|---|
|
実験的：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
他の名前：
|
|
プラセボコンパレーター：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
|
この研究は何を測定していますか？
主要な結果の測定
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
|---|---|---|
|
Veterans RAND-12 Mental Component Score (VR-12 MCS)
時間枠：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
|
二次結果の測定
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
|---|---|---|
|
Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Scores (VR-12 PCS)
時間枠：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
時間枠：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)
時間枠：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)
時間枠：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
時間枠：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
時間枠：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
時間枠：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
時間枠：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
時間枠：Two years
|
Quarterly indicator (0 not hospitalized or 1 hospitalized) for mental health hospitalization in the prior three months.
|
Two years
|
協力者と研究者
捜査官
- 主任研究者：Mark S Bauer, MD、VA Boston Healthcare System
出版物と役立つリンク
一般刊行物
- 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.
研究記録日
主要日程の研究
研究開始 (実際)
一次修了 (実際)
研究の完了 (実際)
試験登録日
最初に提出
QC基準を満たした最初の提出物
最初の投稿 (見積もり)
学習記録の更新
投稿された最後の更新 (実際)
QC基準を満たした最後の更新が送信されました
最終確認日
詳しくは
本研究に関する用語
キーワード
追加の関連 MeSH 用語
その他の研究ID番号
- 15-289
- QUE-15-289 (その他の識別子：U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs)
個々の参加者データ (IPD) の計画
個々の参加者データ (IPD) を共有する予定はありますか?
この情報は、Web サイト clinicaltrials.gov から変更なしで直接取得したものです。研究の詳細を変更、削除、または更新するリクエストがある場合は、register@clinicaltrials.gov。 までご連絡ください。 clinicaltrials.gov に変更が加えられるとすぐに、ウェブサイトでも自動的に更新されます。