Literature Collection

Background: Although common and often with long-lasting effects, child mental health problems (MHPs) are still under-recognized and under-treated. A better understanding of the factors associated with the identification of MHPs in primary care may improve the recognition of MHPs. Objectives: To review studies on factors associated with the identification of child MHPs in primary care. Methods: Six leading databases were systematically searched until 1 October 2018. Two independent researchers selected articles and extracted data on study characteristics and factors associated with MHP identification. Inclusion criteria were the investigation of factors associated with MHP identification by primary care professionals (PCPs) in children aged 0-18 years. Results: Of the 6215 articles identified, 26 were included. Prevalence rates of PCP-identified MHPs varied between 7 and 30%. PCPs identified 26-60% of children with an increased risk of MHPs as indicated by MHP assessment tools, but associated factors were investigated in relatively few studies. MHPs were more often identified in children with a family composition other than married parents, with worse mental health symptoms, prior MHPs, among boys in elementary school, when contact with PCPs was related to parental psychosocial concerns or routine health check-ups, when PCPs were recently trained in MHPs or when PCPs felt less burdened treating MHPs. Conclusion: MHP identification varied substantially between studies and PCPs and was related to several child, family and practice factors. Future studies should systematically investigate factors associated with MHP identification by PCPs and specifically in children with an increased risk of MHPs according to mental health assessment tools.

Opioid use during pregnancy is rising, with an estimated 14-22% of women obtaining an opioid prescription during pregnancy. Methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) has been the gold standard for treatment of opioid use disorders during pregnancy; however, its use is limited in clinical practice due to availability, stigma, and reluctance on the part of clinicians. The present study compared against medical advice (AMA) treatment dropout from seven days of residential care between pregnant women diagnosed with opioid dependence who elected either MMT (n = 119) or non-pharmacological treatment (NPT) (n = 91) within the same treatment program in Baltimore, Maryland from 1996 to 1998. Multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to compare the rate of AMA drop out between the two modalities. Patients who elected NPT were 2.77 times as likely to leave residential treatment as patients who elected MMT (adjusted odds ratio [OR = 2.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.23-6.17]. AMA was associated with interviewer-assessed drug severity and patient's rating of the importance of psychiatric treatment. The present findings further support the clinical utility of MMT and suggest that policies that facilitate the implementation of MMT in clinical practice would be beneficial to the engagement and retention of pregnant women with opioid use disorders.

BACKGROUND: Behavioral health integration is uncommon among U.S. physician practices despite recent policy changes that may encourage its adoption. OBJECTIVE: To describe factors influencing physician practices' implementation of behavioral health integration. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews with leaders and clinicians from physician practices that adopted behavioral health integration, supplemented by contextual interviews with experts and vendors in behavioral health integration. SETTING: 30 physician practices, sampled for diversity on specialty, size, affiliation with parent organizations, geographic location, and behavioral health integration model (collaborative or co-located). PARTICIPANTS: 47 physician practice leaders and clinicians, 20 experts, and 5 vendors. MEASUREMENTS: Qualitative analysis (cyclical coding) of interview transcripts. RESULTS: Four overarching factors affecting physician practices' implementation of behavioral health integration were identified. First, practices' motivations for integrating behavioral health care included expanding access to behavioral health services, improving other clinicians' abilities to respond to patients' behavioral health needs, and enhancing practice reputation. Second, practices tailored their implementation of behavioral health integration to local resources, financial incentives, and patient populations. Third, barriers to behavioral health integration included cultural differences and incomplete information flow between behavioral and nonbehavioral health clinicians and billing difficulties. Fourth, practices described the advantages and disadvantages of both fee-for-service and alternative payment models, and few reported positive financial returns. LIMITATION: The practice sample was not nationally representative and excluded practices that did not implement or sustain behavioral health integration, potentially limiting generalizability. CONCLUSION: Practices currently using behavioral health integration face cultural, informational, and financial barriers to implementing and sustaining behavioral health integration. Tailored, context-specific technical support to guide practices' implementation and payment models that improve the business case for practices may enhance the dissemination and long-term sustainability of behavioral health integration. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: American Medical Association and The Commonwealth Fund.