US Air Force Behavioral Health Optimization Program: team members’ satisfaction and barriers to care

BACKGROUND Granular information sharing studies rarely use actual patient electronic health record (EHR) information. In a previous study, behavioral health patients categorized their own EHR data into sensitive categories (e.g. mental health) and chose which care team members (e.g. pharmacists) should have access to those records. In this study, behavioral health professionals are provided access to the outcomes of a previous patient study to better understand the perspectives of health professionals on patient-controlled granular information sharing. OBJECTIVE Assess behavioral health professionals’: (1) perspectives on understanding and opinions about granular information sharing; (2) accuracy in assessing redacted medical information; (3) reactions to patient rationale for health data categorization, assignment of sensitivity, and sharing choices; and (4) recommendations on how to improve the process of granular health information sharing. METHODS Four two-hour focus groups and a pre- and post-survey were conducted at two integrated health facilities. During the focus groups, outcomes from a previous study on patients’ medical record sharing choices were shared. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistical analyses were conducted. RESULTS Twenty-eight professionals were initially unaware of or provided incorrect definitions of granular information sharing (56.0%). After having access to outcomes from a previous patient study, professionals increased their mixed perspectives (21.4% to 37.1%) on granular information sharing. A majority (81.3%) identified that key medical data had been redacted from the study case. Many (66.1%) stated they did not understand patient rationale for categorization or medical sharing preferences. Finally, participants recommended that a variety of educational approaches be incorporated to inform patients about granular information and health record sharing processes. CONCLUSIONS This study provides detailed insights from behavioral health professionals on patient-controlled granular information sharing. Health professionals accurately identified information gaps resulting from patient-directed data redaction, improved in their overall concept comprehension, underscored the fine line between patient safety and patient rights, and expressed a commitment to help patients appreciate the risks and benefits associated with granular information sharing. Outcomes will inform the development, deployment and evaluation of an electronic consent tool for granular health data sharing.

Download Full-text

Improving Access to Integrated Behavioral Health in a Nurse-Led Federally Qualified Health Center

Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association ◽

10.1177/1078390321994165 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 107839032199416

Author(s):

Sarah Stalder ◽

Aimee Techau ◽

Jenny Hamilton ◽

Carlo Caballero ◽

Mary Weber ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Quality Improvement ◽

Behavioral Health ◽

Behavioral Health Care ◽

Primary Care Providers ◽

Care Team ◽

Psychiatric Nurse ◽

Care Providers ◽

Team Members ◽

Task Forces

BACKGROUND: The specific aims of this project were to create a fully integrated, nurse-led model of a psychiatric nurse practitioner and behavioral health care team within primary care to facilitate (1) patients receiving an appropriate level of care and (2) care team members performing at the top of their scope of practice. METHOD: The guiding model for process implementation was Rapid Cycle Quality Improvement. Three task forces were established to develop interventions in the areas of Roles and Responsibilities, Training and Implementation, and the electronic health record. INTERVENTION: The four interventions that emerged from these task forces were (1) the establishment of patient tiers based on diagnosis, medications, and risk assessment; (2) the creation of process maps to engage care team members; (3) just-in-time education regarding psychiatric medication management for primary care providers; and (4) use of a registry to track patients. RESULTS: The process measures of referrals to the psychiatric care team and psychiatric assessment intakes performed as expected. Both measures were higher at the onset of the project and lower 1 year later. The outcome indicator, number of case reviews, increased dramatically over time. CONCLUSIONS: For psychiatric nurse practitioners, this quality improvement effort provides evidence that a consultative role can be effective in supporting primary care providers. Through providing education, establishing patient tiers, and establishing an effective workflow, more patients may have access to psychiatric services.

Download Full-text