Ta strona została przetłumaczona automatycznie i dokładność tłumaczenia nie jest gwarantowana. Proszę odnieść się do angielska wersja za tekst źródłowy.

Hybrid Collaborative Care Randomized Program Evaluation (BHIP-CCM)

22 czerwca 2020 zaktualizowane przez: 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.

Przegląd badań

Szczegółowy opis

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.

Typ studiów

Interwencyjne

Zapisy (Rzeczywisty)

1112

Faza

  • Nie dotyczy

Kontakty i lokalizacje

Ta sekcja zawiera dane kontaktowe osób prowadzących badanie oraz informacje o tym, gdzie badanie jest przeprowadzane.

Lokalizacje studiów

    • Massachusetts
      • Boston, Massachusetts, Stany Zjednoczone, 02131
        • VA Boston Healthcare System

Kryteria uczestnictwa

Badacze szukają osób, które pasują do określonego opisu, zwanego kryteriami kwalifikacyjnymi. Niektóre przykłady tych kryteriów to ogólny stan zdrowia danej osoby lub wcześniejsze leczenie.

Kryteria kwalifikacji

Wiek uprawniający do nauki

18 lat i starsze (Dorosły, Starszy dorosły)

Akceptuje zdrowych ochotników

Nie

Płeć kwalifikująca się do nauki

Wszystko

Opis

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 studiów

Ta sekcja zawiera szczegółowe informacje na temat planu badania, w tym sposób zaprojektowania badania i jego pomiary.

Jak projektuje się badanie?

Szczegóły projektu

  • Główny cel: Leczenie
  • Przydział: Randomizowane
  • Model interwencyjny: Zadanie sekwencyjne
  • Maskowanie: Brak (otwarta etykieta)

Broń i interwencje

Grupa uczestników / Arm
Interwencja / Leczenie
Eksperymentalny: 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
Inne nazwy:
  • REP-F
Komparator 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

Co mierzy badanie?

Podstawowe miary wyniku

Miara wyniku
Opis środka
Ramy czasowe
Veterans RAND-12 Mental Component Score (VR-12 MCS)
Ramy czasowe: 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

Miary wyników drugorzędnych

Miara wyniku
Opis środka
Ramy czasowe
Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Scores (VR-12 PCS)
Ramy czasowe: 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
Ramy czasowe: 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)
Ramy czasowe: 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)
Ramy czasowe: 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
Ramy czasowe: 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
Ramy czasowe: 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
Ramy czasowe: 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
Ramy czasowe: 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
Ramy czasowe: Two years
Quarterly indicator (0 not hospitalized or 1 hospitalized) for mental health hospitalization in the prior three months.
Two years

Współpracownicy i badacze

Tutaj znajdziesz osoby i organizacje zaangażowane w to badanie.

Śledczy

  • Główny śledczy: Mark S Bauer, MD, VA Boston Healthcare System

Publikacje i pomocne linki

Osoba odpowiedzialna za wprowadzenie informacji o badaniu dobrowolnie udostępnia te publikacje. Mogą one dotyczyć wszystkiego, co jest związane z badaniem.

Publikacje ogólne

Daty zapisu na studia

Daty te śledzą postęp w przesyłaniu rekordów badań i podsumowań wyników do ClinicalTrials.gov. Zapisy badań i zgłoszone wyniki są przeglądane przez National Library of Medicine (NLM), aby upewnić się, że spełniają określone standardy kontroli jakości, zanim zostaną opublikowane na publicznej stronie internetowej.

Główne daty studiów

Rozpoczęcie studiów (Rzeczywisty)

7 marca 2016

Zakończenie podstawowe (Rzeczywisty)

26 kwietnia 2018

Ukończenie studiów (Rzeczywisty)

26 kwietnia 2018

Daty rejestracji na studia

Pierwszy przesłany

4 września 2015

Pierwszy przesłany, który spełnia kryteria kontroli jakości

4 września 2015

Pierwszy wysłany (Oszacować)

7 września 2015

Aktualizacje rekordów badań

Ostatnia wysłana aktualizacja (Rzeczywisty)

23 czerwca 2020

Ostatnia przesłana aktualizacja, która spełniała kryteria kontroli jakości

22 czerwca 2020

Ostatnia weryfikacja

1 czerwca 2020

Więcej informacji

Terminy związane z tym badaniem

Dodatkowe istotne warunki MeSH

Inne numery identyfikacyjne badania

  • 15-289
  • QUE-15-289 (Inny identyfikator: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs)

Plan dla danych uczestnika indywidualnego (IPD)

Planujesz udostępniać dane poszczególnych uczestników (IPD)?

NIE

Te informacje zostały pobrane bezpośrednio ze strony internetowej clinicaltrials.gov bez żadnych zmian. Jeśli chcesz zmienić, usunąć lub zaktualizować dane swojego badania, skontaktuj się z register@clinicaltrials.gov. Gdy tylko zmiana zostanie wprowadzona na stronie clinicaltrials.gov, zostanie ona automatycznie zaktualizowana również na naszej stronie internetowej .

Subskrybuj