Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Nov 14:2014:934-43.
eCollection 2014.

Computerization of Mental Health Integration complexity scores at Intermountain Healthcare

Thomas A Oniki  1 , Drayton Rodrigues  1 , Noman Rahman  1 , Saritha Patur  1 , Pascal Briot  1 , David P Taylor  1 , Adam B Wilcox  1 , Brenda Reiss-Brennan  1 , Wayne H Cannon  1
Affiliations

Computerization of Mental Health Integration complexity scores at Intermountain Healthcare

Thomas A Oniki et al. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. .

Abstract

Intermountain Healthcare's Mental Health Integration (MHI) Care Process Model (CPM) contains formal scoring criteria for assessing a patient's mental health complexity as "mild," "medium," or "high" based on patient data. The complexity score attempts to assist Primary Care Physicians in assessing the mental health needs of their patients and what resources will need to be brought to bear. We describe an effort to computerize the scoring. Informatics and MHI personnel collaboratively and iteratively refined the criteria to make them adequately explicit and reflective of MHI objectives. When tested on retrospective data of 540 patients, the clinician agreed with the computer's conclusion in 52.8% of the cases (285/540). We considered the analysis sufficiently successful to begin piloting the computerized score in prospective clinical care. So far in the pilot, clinicians have agreed with the computer in 70.6% of the cases (24/34).

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Logic for aggregating sub-scores into overall complexity.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Clinician agreement with computer classification.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Gatchel RJ, Oordt MS. Clinical health psychology and primary care: Practical advice and clinical guidance for successful collaboration. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2003.
    1. Kessler RC, Demler O, Frank RG, et al. Prevalence and treatment of mental disorders, 1990 to 2003. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(24):2515–2523. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Collins C, Hewson D, Munger R, Wade T. Evolving models of behavioral health integration in primary care. New York: Millbank Memorial Fund; 2010. PDF available at: http://www.milbank.org/reports/10430EvolvingCare/EvolvingCare.pdf.
    1. Vermani M, Marcus M, Katzman M. Rates of detection of mood and anxiety disorders in primary care: a descriptive, cross-sectional study. Prim Care Companion CNS Disord. 2011;13(2):PCC.10m01013. doi: 10.4088/PCC.10m01013. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. James BC, Lazar JS. Health system use of clinical programs to build quality infrastructure. In: Nelson EC, Batalden PB, Lazar JS, editors. Practice-based learning and improvement: a clinical improvement action guide. Oakbrook Terrace (IL): Joint Commission Resources; 2007. pp. 95–108.

LinkOut - more resources