...
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Integrated Care >Finding 'Win' Factors for People with Serious Mental Illness in New York: a qualitative analysis of primary care provision in behavioral health settings
【24h】

Finding 'Win' Factors for People with Serious Mental Illness in New York: a qualitative analysis of primary care provision in behavioral health settings

机译:在纽约患有严重精神疾病的人的“获胜”因素:行为健康环境中初级保健规格的定性分析

获取原文

摘要

Introduction : People with serious mental illness (SMI) like schizophrenia tend to be high-need high-cost patients. They use health care services disproportionately, often due to physical health conditions, but receive lower quality of care. A leading proposal to challenge this disparity is to integrate primary care services into specialist behavioral health systems. Yet the implementation of integration initiatives is not always realized, and after implementation, the benefits are not always sustained. Theory : Focusing on integration of primary care services into behavioral health settings, this project analyzes the structural, process, cultural and external factors that help or hinder programs providing comprehensive care to people with SMI and how these factors interact. Methods : This is a qualitative research study. Focusing on New York State we identified 11 sites of innovative mental health-primary care integration practice through federal registries. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 52 individuals (senior clinicians, administrators and frontline staff) at these sites on organizational, structural, integration and implementation factors. Qualitative thematic analysis identified common facilitators and barriers to integration. A causal loop diagram is being developed to explore interactions between themes. Results and Discussions : Factors that helped integration divided into structural, process and cultural facilitators. A key structural facilitator was co-location of care; however, this did not always stimulate or motivate integration. Process factors such as multi-disciplinary practices, prescribed case conferences and informal huddles had to be in place to ensure effective cross-disciplinary communication. An integrated health record was a key facilitator to care but used in different ways from simply a communication tool to a sophisticated outcomes monitoring database. Cultural factors such as having a vision for integration, disseminating this vision throughout the organization and making time and resources available were fundamental to successful implementation. Barriers to integration broadly divided into clinical, organizational and external factors. Clinical barriers included difficulties in engaging patients and in recruiting clinicians. Organizational barriers included high administrative burden taking clinicians away from the frontline. External barriers such as fragmentation amongst regulatory authorities and short-term funding arrangements were most commonly reported and most difficult to resolve. Conclusions : (1) In New York no integration sites are situated in rural areas and most were concentrated in New York City. Of these, most were located in socially deprived neighborhoods with high ethnic minority populations. (2) Primary care organizations had access to a range of different mechanisms and incentives to integrate care, but behavioral health organizations were limited to short-term grants. These were mainly used to increase capacity or buy time whilst providers developed more sustainable integration efforts. Lessons Learned : Delineating the key components of mental health integration could help align funding and service delivery to overcome some of the sustainability and regulatory barriers to integration. Limitations : All the sites identified were situated in New York City limiting the generalizability of our findings outside large urban centres. Suggestions for Future Research : Should we expect all practices to integrate mental health and physical care to the same degree, or should we focus/initiate integration strategies in well-resourced, well-networked centres?.
机译:介绍:具有精神病症等严重精神疾病(SMI)的人往往是高需求的高成本患者。他们使用医疗服务不成比例地使用,往往是由于身体健康状况,而是获得较低的护理质量。挑战这种差异的领先建议是将初级保健服务整合到专家行为卫生系统中。然而,整合举措的实施并不总是意识到,实施后,福利并不总是持久。理论:专注于将初级保健服务集成到行为健康环境中,分析了帮助或阻碍为具有SMI的人提供全面照料的结构,过程,文化和外部因素以及这些因素如何互动。方法:这是一个定性研究研究。专注于纽约国家通过联邦注册管理机构确定了11个创新心理健康初级保健融合实践的网站。我们在这些网站上进行了半结构化访谈,在这些网站上进行了组织,结构,集成和实施因素。定性专题分析确定了融合的普通促进者和障碍。正在开发一个因果环图来探索主题之间的相互作用。结果与讨论:帮助整合分为结构,过程和文化促进者的因素。关键结构促进者是CARE的共同位置;但是,这并不总是刺激或激励整合。必须在进行多学科实践,规定的案例会议和非正式雇员等过程因素,以确保有效的跨学科沟通。一体化的健康记录是一个关键的促进者,但以不同的方式使用的方式从简单的通信工具到复杂的结果监测数据库。在整个整合的愿景,在整个组织中传播这一愿景等文化因素,以获得时间和资源可用的是成功实施的根本性。整合的障碍大概分为临床,组织和外部因素。临床障碍包括参与患者和招募临床医生的困难。组织障碍包括高行政负担,以临床医生远离前线。诸如监管机构和短期资助安排中的外部障碍是最常见的,最难以解决。结论:(1)在纽约没有集成场地,位于农村地区,大部分都集中在纽约市。其中,大多数人都位于具有高族裔少数民族人口的社会被剥夺的社区。 (2)初级保健组织可以获得一系列不同的机制和激励措施,以整合护理,但行为卫生组织仅限于短期补助金。这些主要用于增加能力或购买时间,而提供者开发了更可持续的整合努力。经验教训:描绘心理健康整合的关键组成部分可以帮助兑现资金和服务交付,以克服整合的一些可持续性和监管障碍。限制:所确定的所有网站位于纽约市,限制了大城市中心外的调查结果的普遍性。未来研究的建议:我们是否应该预期所有做法都将心理健康和身体护理整合到同样的程度,或者我们应该专注/启动资源良好的网络中心的整合策略吗?

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号