INTRODUCTION
Reproductive mental health needs are prevalent, under-recognized, and under-treated
throughout the United States (US).
1
This especially affects the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) as the population
of US veterans who are women continues to increase. Between 1980 and 2018, the percent
of women veterans more than doubled, from approximately 4 to 9%, and is projected
to increase to 17% by 2040. More than 75% of women veterans are of reproductive age,
less than 45 years old.
2
This has led to a sizeable increase in reproductive mental health (RMH) needs among
women veterans. Among women receiving health care through VHA, the number who gave
birth increased more than 14-fold from the year 2000 to 2015.
3
Based on multisite and national data, it is estimated that among pregnant women receiving
VHA care, 28% have clinically significant depression
4
(more than double the estimated 12% prevalence of perinatal depression in the general
population)
5
and 12% have post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
6
Untreated antenatal depressive and/or PTSD symptoms are associated with increased
risk of obstetric complications and adverse effects on offspring.
7–9
In addition to perinatal mental health concerns, other reproductive-related conditions
require specialized clinical knowledge and interventions. For example, premenstrual
dysphoric disorder requires specific tools and processes for diagnosis, responds to
specific psychotropic agents, and can be treated with unique dosing strategies and
psychotherapy adaptations.
10
Similarly, perimenopausal depression requires unique diagnostic strategies and responds
best to multimodal, targeted interventions.
11
Throughout the US, the need for RMH services exceeds available expertise, in part
due to a dearth of RMH training.
12
The challenge of ensuring access to specialized RMH knowledge is amplified in VHA,
where a small proportion of patients are women and 44% of those women are diagnosed
with a mental health condition (Greenberg 2020).
13
VHA is also among the largest health care systems in the US, serving remote rural
as well as urban populations; an effective system of access to RMH specialty knowledge
needs to reach all veterans while using resources efficiently.
In circumstances of substantial clinical need but limited locally available expertise,
a consultation program can greatly expand access to care. Perinatal mental health
consultation programs have attempted to fill this gap, including three state-based
and one national program
14–17
. These models expanded access but have limited applicability for VHA. All were perinatal
only; none included the full range of RMH concerns. Other limitations included being
geared to limited groups of clinicians (e.g., obstetricians), solely addressing psychopharmacology
questions, or lacking adequate quality control.
Learning from the strengths and limitations of these programs and adapting to the
needs of VHA, we developed a national RMH Consultation Program to ensure access to
RMH expertise across VHA. The VA RMH Consult Program differs from others in several
ways:
It addresses a wide range of women’s RMH concerns including but not limited to perinatal
mental health. This is particularly important for a health care system which serves
mainly men.
Replies are in writing to ensure accuracy and retention and promotes sharing replies
with other health care team members. This confers medicolegal protection by stating
the purpose and limitations of the consultation, and documenting replies.
It is a multidisciplinary team of experts available to all types of clinicians and
not limited to pharmacologic questions.
Multiple team members review each consult reply and come to consensus, offering more
quality control than in services where only one consultant replies.
We conducted an initial evaluation of the VA RMH Consult Program by measuring utilization
patterns and satisfaction ratings for the first 200 consultations. This initial evaluation
focused on the feasibility, effectiveness, and scalability of the program.
SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS
The VHA RMH Consultation Program is virtual, accessed by email. It was piloted at
12 geographically diverse VHA health care systems in 2019 and implemented nationally,
across all VHA health care systems, in 2020.
Program evaluation data are based on the first 200 consultations, received between
5/20/19 and 6/10/21 from 122 unique consultees. Among these, 188 were initial consultations;
12 were follow-up consultations for the same cases. Among the 122 consultees, 93 placed
a single consult, 12 placed 2 consults, 6 placed 3 consults, 4 placed 4 consults,
3 placed 5 consults, 2 placed 6 consults, and 2 placed 7 consults.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This program was developed to fill a need identified by demographic data and through
VHA’s network of Women’s Mental Health Champions (WMHCs). Each VHA medical center
has at least one WMHC, who serves as a local point of contact for advancing WMH services
and communicating WMH needs. A survey of WMHCs revealed that few VHA medical centers
had sufficient resources to address RMH concerns.
The consultation team consists of two psychiatrists, a clinical pharmacy specialist,
and a social worker, all with extensive subject matter expertise, experience, and
training in RMH. The team also includes multidisciplinary trainees; this expands capability
while providing mentoring.
The VA RMH Consultation Program accepts requests about premenstrual, perinatal, and
perimenopausal mental health concerns. It also covers mental health questions related
to contraception, infertility, perinatal loss, breast and gynecologic cancers, and
gynecologic comorbidities.
Clinicians within any discipline, at any VA health care facility, can email consultation
requests to a dedicated address. Queries contain no personal identifying information
about patients. A brief request form, with a sample query, helps consultees provide
relevant information. The team social worker reviews the query and asks for further
information if needed. A team psychiatrist reviews relevant research and drafts a
reply. Replies typically include 3–6 pages of evidence-based explanations for relevant
clinical issues, including but not limited to those explicitly asked. For example,
if the query is about pharmacotherapy, the reply may also include information about
evidence-based nonpharmacologic interventions. The draft ends with a “key points”
summary. This draft is reviewed by other team members, who comment and edit. When
consensus is reached, the reply is emailed to the consultee. The consultee is encouraged
to share the reply with health care team members and to place it in the medical record.
In developing this service, the primary barriers anticipated were making clinicians
aware of its availability, and lack of detection of RMH issues. To address the first
barrier, information about the program was disseminated via the WMHC network. The
program was presented on numerous national calls for relevant VHA communities of practice,
such as psychiatrists, maternity care coordinators, and women’s health primary care
providers. To address the second barrier, VHA developed and delivered a 12-h training
session on RMH, available virtually to all VHA clinicians.
PROGRAM EVALUATION
This initial evaluation focused on the feasibility, effectiveness, and scalability
of the program. Consultees were asked to complete brief feedback forms that were emailed
along with consult replies. Feedback was received from 82 consultees. As feedback
was voluntary, we prioritized not placing additional time burdens on clinicians and
opted not to make second requests of non-responders.
Feasibility
Objective #1: Prompt replies — measured by tracking response times and asking users
whether replies were prompt enough (yes/no). The average response time was 1.7 business
days (range 7; standard deviation 1.3); 100% of respondents said the replies were
prompt enough.
Objective #2: Serving all geographic regions — measured by tracking responses by Veterans
Integrated Service Networks (VISNs). Requests came from all but one of VA’s 18 VISNs.
There was a median of 10 requests per VISN, with a range of 0–30.
Objective #3: Serving multidisciplinary mental health clinicians, with availability
to other types of clinicians — measured by tracking users’ clinical disciplines. Table
1 shows the clinical disciplines of consultees. Most users were mental health providers,
most often psychiatrists. Clinical pharmacists, primary care physicians, and gynecologists
were not the primary intended users but were welcome to use the service; this is reflected
in their smaller presence.
Table 1
Percent of Unique Consultees by Clinical Discipline (N=123)
Clinician discipline
Number and percent
Psychiatrist
69 (56.1%)
Advanced practice nurse
14 (11.4%)
Psychologist
19 (15.4%)
Clinical pharmacist
9 (7.3%)
Social worker
6 (4.9%)
Primary care physician
3 (2.4%)
Certified physician assistant
2 (1.6%)
Gynecologist
1 (0.8%)
Objective #4: Responding to a wide array of RMH concerns — measured by tracking type
of RMH query. Table 2 shows the primary topics for which consultations were requested.
The requests span the full array of topics addressed by this service, with most questions
related to perinatal concerns.
Table 2
Topic Requests for Reproductive Mental Health Consultation (N=200)
Primary reproductive mental health topic
Number and percent
Perinatal (pregnancy and postpartum)
117 (58.5%)
Preconception planning
49 (24.5%)
Perimenopause
13 (6.5%)
Premenstrual mental health symptoms
11 (5.5%)
Breast cancer
2 (1.0%)
Breastfeeding and weaning
2 (1.0%)
Hysterectomy
2 (1.0%)
Post-menopausal vasomotor symptoms
1 (0.5%)
Infertility
1 (0.5%)
Mental health effects of contraceptives
1 (0.5%)
Sexual functioning
1 (0.5%)
Objective #5: Summarizing complex concepts in a way that is easy for busy clinicians
of multiple disciplines to understand — measured by surveying users (yes/no). Among
respondents, 81 (98.8%) said the reply was easy to understand.
Effectiveness
Since cases have a variety of diagnoses and reproductive concerns, no single set of
clinical outcome measures is applicable. Although change in clinical practice is desirable
in some cases, in other cases consultations reinforce clinicians’ treatment plans
when clinicians feel uncertain. For this reason, we focused the program evaluation
on a universally applicable concept: whether clinicians found the consultations useful.
To ascertain whether this was a necessary resource, we asked clinicians to compare
it to other available local and online resources.
Consultees were asked to rate usefulness on a 4-point scale (not useful, a little
useful, moderately useful, and very useful). Among the 82 respondents, 78 (95.1%)
rated replies as very useful; the other 4 (4.9%) rated them as moderately useful.
Consultees were asked to compare usefulness to online and local resources on a 4-point
scale (less helpful, about the same, more helpful, and much more helpful). Regarding
online resources, 75/82 (91.5%) rated the consult replies much more helpful, 6/82
(7.3%) rated them more helpful, and 1/82 (1.2%) rated them about the same. Only 74
respondents replied to the question about local resources; some non-respondents were
unaware of any local resources. Among the 74 respondents, 63 (85.1%) found the national
consults much more helpful; 11 (14.9%) found the national consults more helpful.
Qualitative comments from consultees were overwhelmingly positive. These suggested
additional benefits, such as improved confidence, time saving, ability to teach patients,
and ability to weigh risks and benefits. Examples include:
“The response was prompt, thorough and with the most up to date information and data.
I feel much more confident and reassured in treating my pregnant patient.”
“The suggestions were detailed, specific and action-oriented.”
“I feel like the consults help teach me so I can apply it to future patients.”
“I found the thorough weighing of risks and benefits helpful.”
“It personalized the response to the care of the veteran.”
“Much easier to understand to relay to the veteran.”
“Provides an excellent summary of evidence-based literature allowing provider to focus
on other aspects of the patient’s care.”
Scalability
To maximize scalability, response times were estimated to promote efficient practices.
During the pilot phase, drafting a response took approximately 3–4 h, including review
of relevant literature. Responses are logged by subject, so information remains consistent
in subsequent replies until updates are needed. This reduced estimated time to draft
a response to 0.5–1.5 h. The estimated time for team members to review and edit a
draft is 10–20 min per person.
DISCUSSION AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
As the proportion of veterans who are women grows, meeting the RMH needs of this subpopulation
is especially important, yet challenging.
Implementing the RMH Consultation Program is part of addressing this challenge. While
especially suited to VHA, this model could be adapted for use in other health networks.
Preliminary evaluation data show feasibility and high user satisfaction, with the
caveat that data are from voluntary respondents only. The eventual scope of need is
unknown; preliminary data suggest scalability. The program’s limitations reflect the
anticipated barriers. While nearly all geographic regions have utilized this service,
the wide range of usage suggests underutilization in some areas. More widespread dissemination
of information about this service is a goal for the next phase of development of this
program. The paucity of consult requests about non-perinatal topics highlights a systemic
need to ensure awareness and detection of these conditions. In a pilot study
18
of women receiving mental health evaluations at a VHA Women’s Health Clinic, 43.3%
of participants screened positive for premenstrual emotional problems and 31.2% screened
positive for perimenopausal emotional problems, suggesting that the number of women
veterans who might benefit from consultation about these conditions likely exceeds
current request volume. This can inform future efforts to expand RMH awareness, clinician
training, and patient screening throughout VHA.