Literature Collection

OBJECTIVES: Collaborative and integrated (C + I) working between general practice and community pharmacies has the potential to increase accessibility to services, improve service efficiency and quality of care, and reduce health care expenditures. Many existing studies report challenges and complexities inherent in establishing effective C + I ways of working. The aim of our review is to understand how, when and why working arrangements between General Practitioners (GP) and Community Pharmacists (CP) can provide the conditions necessary for effective communication, decision-making, and C + I working. METHODS: We conducted a realist review to explore the key contextual factors and mechanisms through which GP-CP C + I working may be achieved. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, HMIC, Web of Science, IBSS, ASSIA, Sociological Abstracts, Sociology Database and the King's Fund Library Database were searched for articles and grey literature published between January 2000 and April 2022. RESULTS: A total of 136 documents were included in the final synthesis. Our findings highlight the importance of mutually beneficial remuneration models to support effective integration of services; supportive organisational cultures and values; flexible and agile IT systems/technologies; adequate physical infrastructure and space design to support multidisciplinary teamworking; the importance of establishing patient's trust in collaborative processes between GP-CP; and the need to acknowledge, support and utilise effective triadic relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Our research generates new insights regarding how, why and in which contexts C + I working can be achieved between GPs and CPs. The findings of our review can be used to inform future policy, research and clinical practice guidelines for designing and delivering C + I care.

In Veterans Health Administration's (VA) Primary Care-Mental Health Integration (PC-MHI) models, primary care providers, care managers, and mental health clinicians collaboratively provide depression care. Primary care patients, however, still lack timely, sufficient access to psychotherapy treatment. Adapting PC-MHI collaborative care to improve uptake of evidence-based computerized cognitive behavioral therapy (cCBT) may be a potential solution. Understanding primary care-based mental health clinician perspectives is crucial for facilitating adoption of cCBT as part of collaborative depression care. We examined PC-MHI mental health clinicians' perspectives on adapting collaborative care models to support cCBT for VA primary care patients. We conducted 16 semi-structured interviews with PC-MHI nurse care managers, licensed social workers, psychologists, and psychiatrists in one VA health-care system. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded using the constant comparative method, and analyzed for overarching themes. Although cCBT awareness and knowledge were not widespread, participants were highly accepting of enhancing PC-MHI models with cCBT for depression treatment. Participants supported cCBT delivery by a PC-MHI care manager or clinician and saw it as an additional tool to engage patients, particularly younger Veterans, in mental health treatment. They commented that current VA PC-MHI models did not facilitate, and had barriers to, use of online and mobile treatments. If effectively implemented, however, respondents thought it had potential to increase the number of patients they could treat. There is widespread interest in modernizing health systems. VA PC-MHI mental health clinicians appear open to adapting collaborative care to increase uptake of cCBT to improve psychotherapy access.

The collaborative care model (CoCM) is an evidence-based model shown to improve treatment of depression and anxiety in the primary care setting. However, there is limited research on CoCM outcomes in underserved populations and which factors impact outcomes. We performed a retrospective chart review to examine GAD-7 scores for patients (N = 1,034) seen in primary care clinics within an urban, safety-net hospital system. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test and linear mixed models were used. Our population was 81% female and 89% self-identified Black or African American. There were significant reductions on GAD-7 scores from baseline to 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-months follow-up (p < .001). The analysis suggested gender, patient age, clinic setting, and number of visits were significant. The effect sizes for these covariates were 0.94, 3.77, 1.98, and 0.74, respectively. Further research including patients' social determinants of health and comorbidities may help refine CoCM and optimize its effectiveness.