Alliances to Disseminate Addiction Prevention and Treatment (ADAPT): Assessing the Exchange of Ideas in Alliances Between Juvenile Justice and Community Mental Health Centers

Background/Hypothesis: In the US, over half of youth involved in the juvenile justice system meet criteria for substance use disorder (SUD). Further, SUD is a consistent predictor of recidivism. Thus, significant improvements are needed to assure that justice-involved youth who meet criteria for SUD are screened and referred to care, especially in rural settings. ADAPT, an ongoing, statewide project, employs a learning health system (LHS) model to implement evidence-based practices (EBPs) to develop and improve alliances between juvenile justice (JJ) and community mental health centers (CMHCs). We assessed collaboration, “alliance,” between these systems. Methods: The LHS alliance was assessed with self-report surveys distributed to personnel at 8 county sites. These included the cultural exchange inventory (CEI) measure to assess the process of exchanges in knowledge (beliefs about the process of implementing EBPs), and outcomes of those exchanges (beliefs about the outcome of interagency collaboration), to assess the alliance between JJ and CMHCs. Results: Pre-implementation surveys indicated a significant difference between CMHC respondents (CEI Output M=3.55, SD=1.53) compared to JJ respondents (M=2.89, SD=1.57) about the outcomes of the exchange of ideas [t(190)=2.13, p=0.03]. Both CMHC (CEI Process M=3.93, SD=1.45) and JJ participants (CEI Process M=3.84, SD=1.96) reported similar beliefs about the process of idea exchange t(119)=0.27, p=0.78). Further, participants from low rurality counties (i.e., more urban) reported less favorably to beliefs about the outcomes of collaboration (CEI Output M=3.16, SD=1.62) compared to medium rurality county participants [M=3.76, SD=1.39; t(120)=2.03, p=0.04]. Thus, we find a difference in perception of collaboration both between systems and between counties of varying rurality. Conclusion/Potential Impact: These findings help capture the current barriers to collaboration that exist between JJ and CMHCs before implementation of the LHS framework. Understanding these barriers between systems is essential to better cultivate interagency alliances to improve care for justice-involved youth with SUDs.

Proportion of U.S. Clinics Offering LGBT-Tailored Mental Health Services Decreased Over Time: A Panel Study of the National Mental Health Services Survey

Our objective was to characterize the proportion of U.S. mental health clinics that offered LGBT-tailored mental health services between 2014 and 2018. We used data from the National Mental Health Services Survey (NMHSS) to construct a mixed logistic model of availability of LGBT-tailored mental health services over time, by region (Northeast, South, Midwest and West), and by facility type (Veterans Administration, inpatient/residential, outpatient, community mental health centers and mixed). Our results show that the overall proportion of mental health clinics that offered LGBT-tailored services decreased from 2014 to 2018. Our results also indicate that Veteran Affairs clinics and facilities in the West and Northeast were most likely to offer LGBT-tailored mental health services. Given the temporal, regional, and facility gaps in LGBT-tailored mental health services availability, more effort should be dedicated to addressing this disparity.

Specialized Outpatient: Community Mental Health Centers (CMHCs)

Objective: The Iranian Mental Health Survey (IranMHS) in 2011 has demonstrated that almost 1 out of 4 adult individuals suffer from psychiatric disorders; however, more than two-thirds are left unrecognized and untreated and many of the services have poor quality of care. In this paper we present our experience in developing and employing community-based mental health services through community mental health centers (CMHCs), which has been incorporated in Iran's comprehensive mental and social health services (the Seraj program). Method: The service model of the CMHCs was developed though an evidence-based service planning approach and was then incorporated as the specialized outpatient services model into the Seraj program in 2015. Results: The CMHCs in the Seraj program provide mental health care to patients with common mental and severe mental disorders in a defined catchment area. The services include the collaborative care, the aftercare, and day rehabilitation. The collaborative care model works with primary care providers in the health centers to provide detection and treatment of common mental illnesses. In the aftercare, services are offered to patients with severe mental disorders following discharge from the hospital and include telephone follow-ups and home visits. Day rehabilitation is mostly focused on providing psychoeducation and skill trainings. During the first 4 years of implementation in 2 pilot areas, more than 6200 patients (10% having severe mental disorders) received care at CMHCs. Conclusion: The main challenge of the implementation of the CMHC component in the Seraj program is to secure funds and employ skilled personnel. We need to incorporate Seraj in the existing national health system, and if successful, it can fill the treatment gap that has been so huge in the country.

Organizational structure, climate, and collaboration between juvenile justice and community mental health centers: implications for evidence-based practice implementation for adolescent substance use disorder treatment

Background Substance use disorders are prevalent among youth involved with the criminal justice system, however, evidence-based substance use disorder treatment is often unavailable to this population. The goal of this study was to identify barriers to effective implementation of evidence-based practices among juvenile justice and community mental health organizations through the lens of an adopter-based innovation model. Methods In this mixed-methods study, qualitative interviews were conducted with n = 15 juvenile justice staff and n = 14 community mental health staff from two counties implementing substance use services for justice involved youth. In addition, n = 28 juvenile justice staff and n = 85 community mental health center staff also completed quantitative measures of organizational effectiveness including the implementation leadership scale (ILS), organizational readiness for change (ORIC), and the implementation climate scale (ICS). Results Organizationally, staff from community mental health centers reported more “red tape” and formalized procedures around daily processes, while many juvenile justice staff reported a high degree of autonomy. Community mental health respondents also reported broad concern about their capacity for providing new interventions. Staff across the two different organizations expressed support for evidence-based practices, agreed with the importance of treating substance use disorders in this population, and were enthusiastic about implementing the interventions. Conclusions While both community mental health and juvenile justice staff express commitment to implementing evidence-based practices, systems-level changes are needed to increase capacity for providing evidence-based services.

Experiences, opinions and current policies on users’ choice and change of the allocated primary mental health professional: a survey among directors of community mental health centers in the Emilia-Romagna region, Italy

Background The subject of how the initial allocation of the primary mental health professional (PMHP) in community mental health services is made and the frequency and management of users’ requests to choose and/or change their allocated PMHPs has been scarcely investigated. The present paper is aimed at exploring the experiences and opinions of directors of community mental health centers (CMHC) on this topic. Methods A cross-sectional survey was conducted. Electronic ad hoc questionnaires with both multiple choice and open-ended questions were e-mailed to the institutional addresses of CMHC directors in the Emilia-Romagna Region (Northern Italy) with the consent of their heads of department and the Ethical Committee. Quantitative data were analysed by means of Microsoft Excel software and STATA 14.2 (College Station, TX), while the qualitative analysis was performed using the Nvivo12 software. Results Twenty-eight questionnaires were collected (response rate: 71.8%) that were equally distributed between males and females. For the initial PMHP allocation, casual allocation by “fixed-rota” was commonly performed (39.3%). Moreover, hope for a change of prescription by a different psychiatrist was the most frequent reason for users’ requests to change their PMHP. In two mental health departments only (Parma and Bologna), written guidelines to manage users’ requests of change of PMHP were available. In this context, most participants classified the explored topics as relevant and believed that written policies, especially if shared with users, could be useful. Conclusions In Emilia-Romagna CMHCs, neither users nor professionals were generally involved in the initial choice of the PMHP. Further national-level studies should be conducted in order to confirm this finding. Additionally, written and shared guidelines for managing users’ request to choose/change their PHMP may be useful.