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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2019 Jul;57(7):503-511.
doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001138.

Change in Patient Outcomes After Augmenting a Low-level Implementation Strategy in Community Practices That Are Slow to Adopt a Collaborative Chronic Care Model: A Cluster Randomized Implementation Trial

Shawna N Smith  1   2 , Daniel Almirall  2   3 , Katherine Prenovost  1 , Celeste Liebrecht  1   4 , Julia Kyle  1 , Daniel Eisenberg  5 , Mark S Bauer  6 , Amy M Kilbourne  1   4
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Change in Patient Outcomes After Augmenting a Low-level Implementation Strategy in Community Practices That Are Slow to Adopt a Collaborative Chronic Care Model: A Cluster Randomized Implementation Trial

Shawna N Smith et al. Med Care. 2019 Jul.

Abstract

Background: Implementation strategies are essential for promoting the uptake of evidence-based practices and for patients to receive optimal care. Yet strategies differ substantially in their intensity and feasibility. Lower-intensity strategies (eg, training and technical support) are commonly used but may be insufficient for all clinics. Limited research has examined the comparative effectiveness of augmentations to low-level implementation strategies for nonresponding clinics.

Objectives: To compare 2 augmentation strategies for improving uptake of an evidence-based collaborative chronic care model (CCM) on 18-month outcomes for patients with depression at community-based clinics nonresponsive to lower-level implementation support.

Research design: Providers initially received support using a low-level implementation strategy, Replicating Effective Programs (REP). After 6 months, nonresponsive clinics were randomized to add either external facilitation (REP+EF) or external and internal facilitation (REP+EF/IF).

Measures: The primary outcome was patient 12-item short form survey (SF-12) mental health score at month 18. Secondary outcomes were patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9) depression score at month 18 and receipt of the CCM during months 6 through 18.

Results: Twenty-seven clinics were nonresponsive after 6 months of REP. Thirteen clinics (N=77 patients) were randomized to REP+EF and 14 (N=92) to REP+EF/IF. At 18 months, patients in the REP+EF/IF arm had worse SF-12 [diff, 8.38; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.59-13.18] and PHQ-9 scores (diff, 1.82; 95% CI, -0.14 to 3.79), and lower odds of CCM receipt (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.30-1.49) than REP+EF patients.

Conclusions: Patients at sites receiving the more intensive REP+EF/IF saw less improvement in mood symptoms at 18 months than those receiving REP+EF and were no more likely to receive the CCM. For community-based clinics, EF augmentation may be more feasible than EF/IF for implementing CCMs.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02151331.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Consort Diagram: Patient outcomes for ADEPT sites
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
Predicted and raw means for Mental Health Quality of Life over study period, by first randomization Note: EF=External Facilitation; IF=Internal Facilitation. Raw means show values for non-imputed data with no adjustment. Error bars show 95% confidence interval for model predictions.
Figure 3:
Figure 3:
Predicted and raw means for PHQ-9 over study period, by first randomization Note: EF=External Facilitation; IF=Internal Facilitation. Raw means show values for non-imputed data with no adjustment. Error bars show 95% confidence interval for model predictions.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Proctor EK, Landsverk J, Aarons G, Chambers D, Glisson C, Mittman B. Implementation research in mental health services: an emerging science with conceptual, methodological, and training challenges. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2009;36(1):24–34. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2011;38(2):65–76. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Woltmann E, Grogan-Kaylor A, Perron B, Georges H, Kilbourne AM, Bauer MS. Comparative effectiveness of collaborative chronic care models for mental health conditions across primary, specialty, and behavioral health care settings: systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Psychiatry. 2012;169(8):790–804. - PubMed
    1. Kilbourne AM, Li D, Lai Z, Waxmonsky J, Ketter T. Pilot randomized trial of a cross‐diagnosis collaborative care program for patients with mood disorders. Depression and anxiety. 2013;30(2):116–122. - PubMed
    1. Roy-Byrne PP, Sherbourne CD, Craske MG, et al. Moving treatment research from clinical trials to the real world. Psychiatric Services. 2003;54(3):327–332. - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data