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
Review
. 2019 Mar 1;76(3):324-335.
doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.3329.

Implementing Measurement-Based Care in Behavioral Health: A Review

Affiliations
Review

Implementing Measurement-Based Care in Behavioral Health: A Review

Cara C Lewis et al. JAMA Psychiatry. .

Abstract

Importance: Measurement-based care (MBC) is the systematic evaluation of patient symptoms before or during an encounter to inform behavioral health treatment. Despite MBC's demonstrated ability to enhance usual care by expediting improvements and rapidly detecting patients whose health would otherwise deteriorate, it is underused, with typically less than 20% of behavioral health practitioners integrating it into their practice. This narrative review addresses definitional issues, offers a concrete and evaluable operationalization of MBC fidelity, and summarizes the evidence base and utility of MBC. It also synthesizes the extant literature's characterization of barriers to and strategies for supporting MBC implementation, sustainment, and scale-up.

Observations: Barriers to implementing MBC occur at multiple levels: patient (eg, concerns about confidentiality breach), practitioner (eg, beliefs that measures are no better than clinical judgment), organization (eg, no resources for training), and system (eg, competing requirements). Implementation science-the study of methods to integrate evidence-based practices such as MBC into routine care-offers strategies to address barriers. These strategies include using measurement feedback systems, leveraging local champions, forming learning collaboratives, training leadership, improving expert consultation with clinical staff, and generating incentives.

Conclusions and relevance: This narrative review, informed by implementation science, offers a 10-point research agenda to improve the integration of MBC into clinical practice: (1) harmonize terminology and specify MBC's core components; (2) develop criterion standard methods for monitoring fidelity and reporting quality of implementation; (3) develop algorithms for MBC to guide psychotherapy; (4) test putative mechanisms of change, particularly for psychotherapy; (5) develop brief and psychometrically strong measures for use in combination; (6) assess the critical timing of administration needed to optimize patient outcomes; (7) streamline measurement feedback systems to include only key ingredients and enhance electronic health record interoperability; (8) identify discrete strategies to support implementation; (9) make evidence-based policy decisions; and (10) align reimbursement structures.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Douglas reported receipt of compensation related to the Peabody Treatment Progress Battery and a financial relationship with Mirah; there is a management plan to ensure that this conflict does not jeopardize the objectivity of her research. No other disclosures were reported.

References

    1. Shimokawa K, Lambert MJ, Smart DW. Enhancing treatment outcome of patients at risk of treatment failure: meta-analytic and mega-analytic review of a psychotherapy quality assurance system. J Consult Clin Psychol 2010;78(3):298–311. 10.1037/a0019247 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gondek D, Edbrooke-Childs J, Fink E, Deighton J, Wolpert M. Feedback from outcome measures and treatment effectiveness, treatment efficiency, and collaborative practice: a systematic review. Adm Policy Ment Health 2016;43(3):325–343. 10.1007/s10488-015-0710-5 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Krägeloh CU, Czuba KJ, Billington DR, Kersten P, Siegert RJ. Using feedback from patient-reported outcome measures in mental health services: a scoping study and typology. Psychiatr Serv 2015; 66(3):224–241. 10.1176/appi.ps.201400141 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Williams K, Sansoni J, Morris D, Grootemaat P, Thompson C. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Literature Review Sydney: Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care; 2016.
    1. Tam HE, Ronan K. The application of a feedback-informed approach in psychological service with youth: systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev 2017;55:41–55. 10.1016/j.cpr.2017.04.005 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types