26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Coordinating across correctional, community, and VA systems: applying the Collaborative Chronic Care Model to post-incarceration healthcare and reentry support for veterans with mental health and substance use disorders

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Between 12,000 and 16,000 veterans leave incarceration annually. As is known to be the case for justice-involved populations in general, mental health disorders (MHDs) and substance use disorders (SUDs) are highly prevalent among incarcerated veterans, and individuals with MHDs and SUDs reentering the community are at increased risk of deteriorating health and recidivism. We sought to identify opportunities to better coordinate care/services across correctional, community, and VA systems for reentry veterans with MHDs and SUDs.

          Methods

          We interviewed 16 veterans post-incarceration and 22 stakeholders from reentry-involved federal/state/community organizations. We performed a grounded thematic analysis, and recognizing consistencies between the emergent themes and the evidence-based Collaborative Chronic Care Model (CCM), we mapped findings to the CCM’s elements – work role redesign (WRR), patient self-management support (PSS), provider decision support (PDS), clinical information systems (CIS), linkages to community resources (LCR), and organizational/leadership support (OLS).

          Results

          Emergent themes included (i) WRR – coordination challenges among organizations involved in veterans’ reentry; (ii) PSS – veterans’ fear of reentering society; (iii) PDS – uneven knowledge by reentry support providers regarding available services when deciding which services to connect a reentry veteran to and whether he/she is ready and/or willing to receive services; (iv) CIS – lapses in MHD/SUD medications between release and a first scheduled health care appointment, as well as challenges in transfer of medical records; (v) LCR – inconsistent awareness of existing services and resources available across a disparate reentry system; and (vi) OLS – reentry plans designed to address only immediate transitional needs upon release, which do not always prioritize MHD/SUD needs.

          Conclusions

          Applying the CCM to coordinating cross-system health care and reentry support may contribute to reductions in mental health crises and overdoses in the precarious first weeks of the reentry period.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Evidence on the Chronic Care Model in the new millennium.

          Developed more than a decade ago, the Chronic Care Model (CCM) is a widely adopted approach to improving ambulatory care that has guided clinical quality initiatives in the United States and around the world. We examine the evidence of the CCM's effectiveness by reviewing articles published since 2000 that used one of five key CCM papers as a reference. Accumulated evidence appears to support the CCM as an integrated framework to guide practice redesign. Although work remains to be done in areas such as cost-effectiveness, these studies suggest that redesigning care using the CCM leads to improved patient care and better health outcomes.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Collaborative care for depression: a cumulative meta-analysis and review of longer-term outcomes.

            Depression is common in primary care but is suboptimally managed. Collaborative care, that is, structured care involving a greater role of nonmedical specialists to augment primary care, has emerged as a potentially effective candidate intervention to improve quality of primary care and patient outcomes. To quantify the short-term and longer-term effectiveness of collaborative care compared with standard care and to understand mechanisms of action by exploring between-study heterogeneity, we conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials that compared collaborative care with usual primary care in patients with depression. We searched MEDLINE (from the beginning of 1966), EMBASE (from the beginning of 1980), CINAHL (from the beginning of 1980), PsycINFO (from the beginning of 1980), the Cochrane Library (from the beginning of 1966), and DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness) (from the beginning of 1985) databases from study inception to February 6, 2006. We found 37 randomized studies including 12 355 patients with depression receiving primary care. Random effects meta-analysis showed that depression outcomes were improved at 6 months (standardized mean difference, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.32), and evidence of longer-term benefit was found for up to 5 years (standardized mean difference, 0.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.001-0.31). When exploring determinants of effectiveness, effect size was directly related to medication compliance and to the professional background and method of supervision of case managers. The addition of brief psychotherapy did not substantially improve outcome, nor did increased numbers of sessions. Cumulative meta-analysis showed that sufficient evidence had emerged by 2000 to demonstrate the statistically significant benefit of collaborative care. Collaborative care is more effective than standard care in improving depression outcomes in the short and longer terms. Future research needs to address the implementation of collaborative care, particularly in settings other than the United States.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Implementing evidence-based interventions in health care: application of the replicating effective programs framework

              Background We describe the use of a conceptual framework and implementation protocol to prepare effective health services interventions for implementation in community-based (i.e., non-academic-affiliated) settings. Methods The framework is based on the experiences of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Replicating Effective Programs (REP) project, which has been at the forefront of developing systematic and effective strategies to prepare HIV interventions for dissemination. This article describes the REP framework, and how it can be applied to implement clinical and health services interventions in community-based organizations. Results REP consists of four phases: pre-conditions (e.g., identifying need, target population, and suitable intervention), pre-implementation (e.g., intervention packaging and community input), implementation (e.g., package dissemination, training, technical assistance, and evaluation), and maintenance and evolution (e.g., preparing the intervention for sustainability). Key components of REP, including intervention packaging, training, technical assistance, and fidelity assessment are crucial to the implementation of effective interventions in health care. Conclusion REP is a well-suited framework for implementing health care interventions, as it specifies steps needed to maximize fidelity while allowing opportunities for flexibility (i.e., local customizing) to maximize transferability. Strategies that foster the sustainability of REP as a tool to implement effective health care interventions need to be developed and tested.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                bo.kim@va.gov
                rendelle.bolton@va.gov
                justeen.hyde@va.gov
                gfincke@bu.edu
                drainoni@bu.edu
                bethann.petrakis@va.gov
                msimmons@post.harvard.edu
                keith.mcinnes@va.gov
                Journal
                Health Justice
                Health Justice
                Health & Justice
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                2194-7899
                12 December 2019
                12 December 2019
                December 2019
                : 7
                : 18
                Affiliations
                [1 ]VA Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, Bedford/Boston, MA USA
                [2 ]ISNI 000000041936754X, GRID grid.38142.3c, Harvard Medical School, ; Boston, MA USA
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9473, GRID grid.253264.4, Brandeis University The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, ; Waltham, MA USA
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0367 5222, GRID grid.475010.7, Boston University School of Medicine, ; Boston, MA USA
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7558, GRID grid.189504.1, Boston University School of Public Health, ; Boston, MA USA
                [6 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0370 7685, GRID grid.34474.30, RAND Corporation, ; Boston, MA USA
                Article
                99
                10.1186/s40352-019-0099-4
                6909453
                31832790
                d5f62d2d-2613-4127-a5bd-a6e885b748d6
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                : 1 May 2019
                : 20 November 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: VA Health Services Research & Development Quality Enhancement Research Initiative
                Award ID: QUE 15-284
                Categories
                Short Report
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                continuity of care,mental health,qualitative research,substance abuse,veterans

                Comments

                Comment on this article