Tag Archives: AHRQ

Challenges to Integrating Behavioral Health and Primary Care Services Revisited

One year ago a poll was published in the LinkedIn group, Behavioral Health Integration:

What is the greatest challenge for integrating behavioral health and primary care services?

The poll generated a tremendous amount of interest, both in voting on the poll and in comments. Much has happened in the healthcare industry in the past twelve months, changes that have an impact on the way behavioral health and primary care will be delivered in the future.

The greatest impact has come from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) that was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 28, 2012. Though passed in 2010, the flurry of activity toward implementing began after the Supreme Court ruling. As states prepare for the 2014 implementation of the new health laws, more and more are agreeing to participation in the Medicaid Health Home plan.

Poll Results

As we near the end of the first quarter 2013, time is running out quickly for implementation. With integrated care playing a crucial role in health reform, the challenges for integrating healthcare services are more and more apparent. Revisiting the below results of the poll conducted one year ago, one has to wonder whether the perceived challenges remain the same among healthcare providers.

Poll results from LinkedIn group, Behavioral Health Integration 3/5/2012 - 3/5/2013

Poll results from LinkedIn group, Behavioral Health Integration
3/5/2012 – 3/5/2013

Finance and Billing

Poll responses indicated that sustainability issues related to finance and billing were the greatest challenge for integration efforts. While many providers have successfully overcome this barrier, it is no easy feat to develop a financially sustainable integrated services delivery system. Fortunately, the ACA created an optional Medicaid State Plan benefit for states to establish Health Homes to coordinate care for people with chronic conditions who receive Medicaid benefits. While only a handful signed on initially, there are currently 24 states and the District of Columbia who have elected to participate in the Medicaid Expansion. Fourteen states have elected not to participate; and 12 states remain undecided. (Click here for more information on where each state stands on ACA’s Medicaid expansion.)

States that are moving forward with Medicaid Health Homes are in the process of making adjustments to policies, billing, and service delivery to enable service providers to integrate behavioral health and primary care services, a requirement of Health Homes:

“Health Homes providers will integrate and coordinate all primary, acute, behavioral health, and long-term services and supports to treat the whole person.” – Medicaid.gov

Partnership Issues

Regular visitors to this blog know that much has been published here about the partnership between behavioral health and primary care providers. This was ranked as second most challenging in the poll.

Why do so many people find partnership issues as challenging? It’s counterintuitive. Most providers approach the integration of behavioral health and primary care with a blind eye to the process of partnership development. It is assumed that the interpersonal aspects will fall into place. Unfortunately, it is far more likely that an integration effort will fail due to partnership issues than financial ones. They are not unlike other partnerships, requiring attention to building a strong foundation from the onset.

Here are additional resources:

Operations/Workflow Issues

All healthcare administrators acknowledge the importance of operations for successful service delivery. That’s why 15% of respondents to the poll indicated that this area is the greatest challenge. Once a smooth-running clinic takes on an entirely new service-line, a degree of disruption is inevitable. The workflow will likely be drastically different than the service providers and support staff have grown accustomed to. Of course, taking on a new service also means addressing the organization’s policies, regulatory requirements, physical space requirements, etc.

With a little careful planning and a LOT of patience, your new integrated clinic will be operating smoothly in no time. Click here for a useful integration planning checklist.

Workforce Issues

Seven percent of the respondents indicated that workforce is the greatest challenge. With the current shortage of primary care providers, nurses, and psychiatrists, it’s no wonder that this is of concern. Fortunately, programs for training about integrated care delivery are available, such as the University of Massachusetts Medical School’s Center for Integrated Primary Care, which offers three programs aimed at training healthcare providers for providing integrated services:

Health Information Technology Issues

Despite concerns over the dilemma of sharing health records for integrating behavioral health and primary care, health information technology garnered 5% of the responses. Fortunately vendors of electronic health records are working earnestly to develop products that allow for the seamless sharing of behavioral health and primary care records. (Click here for more information on the role of HIT in integrated healthcare.)

One Year Later

What are the greatest challenges to integrating behavioral health and primary care in 2013? What will be the challenges next year? Dare we suggest that in the near future there will no longer be challenges?

Additional Resources:

Reducing Health Disparities Among People with Serious Mental Illness

“Psychiatrists need to pay attention to weight, lipid levels, blood pressure, and exercise in our patients with serious mental illness,” declares psychiatrist Dale Svendsen, M.D., medical director at the Ohio Department of Mental Health and co-author of the NASMHPD report. “The psychiatrist of the future is going to have to be more of a general physician than in the past, and our training programs are going to need to adapt.” In Those With Serious Mental Illness Suffer From Lack of Integrated Care, in Psychiatric News January 5, 2007, Vou. 42, No. 1, Pg. 5 Mark Moran summarizes the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors (NASMHPD) report “Morbidity and Mortality in People With Serious Mental Illness.” Emphasizing the recommendation that people with serious mental illness “be designated as a distinct health-disparities population under the federal government’s initiative to reduce disparities in health outcomes.”  Perhaps psychiatrists need to pick the stethoscope back up again…. and actually  touch their patients.

Moran goes on to look at compelling data: In a study of people (25 to 44 years old) with serious mental illness in Massachusetts over a six year period, the cardiovascular rate was nearly seven times that of the general population. In another study in Ohio, state psychiatric hospital discharges were tracked over a six year period. People who had been hospitalized there died at three times the expected rate, primarily due to cardiovascular disease. The average loss of life was a startling 32 years. The NASMHPD report drew clear connections between antipsychotic medications in the development of metabolic syndrome in people with serious mental illness, particularly when multiple medications are prescribed. Their recommendations include integration of behavioral health and physical health, promotion of  the recovery model, supporting wellness, and the implementation of care-coordination models.

In the nearly four years since this was published, there has been a marked increased in focus on the serious health disparities of this vulnerable population. The question remains whether there has been an improvement in overall health among this group. While ongoing studies must be conducted to adequately address this question, I am encouraged by the concentration on the issue. The National Council for Community Behavioral Healthcare, the Mental Health Corporation of America, Association of Healthcare Research and Quality, the Carter Center, the Collaborative Family Healthcare Association, National Institute of Mental Health, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Admistration, National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors, Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement, Collaborative Care Research Network, Health Resources and Services Administration, and a variety of other national and state associations have initiatives directed toward integration efforts. These efforts include new programs, partnerships, grants, learning collaboratives, and research. APS Healthcare of Georgia’s Disease Management division is working on an initiative with various community behavioral health organizations to create a ‘Virtual’ Medical Home. This novel approach is led by Dr. Bob Climko, Senior Medical Director. Health indicators in people with serious mental illness are monitored through telephonic health coaching and Medicaid claims data made available to providers.

It is hopeful that this increased focus will result in a significant increase in longevity for people with serious mental illness. In the words of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, “Let us recognize that there can be no health without mental health.” It would appear that the reverse is true as well: There can be no mental health without health.