Literature Collection

Utilization of telehealth modalities to provide cognitive and behavioral therapies is rapidly increasing. Limitations to access to care can prohibit individuals from getting the care they need, especially evidence-based treatments. In the U.S., Veterans are a population in great need of accessible and high-quality evidence-based psychotherapy for insomnia, as it often co-occurs with other common syndromes such as depression and PTSD. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) offers effective treatment for insomnia and can be delivered via telehealth and in a group format to greatly increase availability and accessibility. To date, however, few programs exist offering telehealth-to-home CBT-I, fewer still are offered in a primary care setting, and none to our knowledge are offered in group format. We examine the feasibility and efficacy of a fully telehealth-to-home (TTH) group CBT-I pilot program in primary care and compare primary outcomes to those seen in a face-to-face (F2F) format as well as meta-analytic studies of group CBT-I. Primary endpoints, as typically defined such as sleep efficiency (SE) and scores on the insomnia severity index (ISI) appear comparable to those seen in F2F groups in our clinic, and to outcomes seen in the literature. We discuss challenges and strategies for successful implementation of such a program in integrated primary care to increase access and availability of this evidence-based treatment.

OBJECTIVES: This quality improvement project sought to develop guidance for Home-Based Primary Care (HPBC) Mental Health (MH) clinicians on integrating Measurement-Based Care (MBC) into their practice and gain participating psychologists' feedback on their experience using MBC for treating mental health concerns with HBPC Veterans. METHODS: Based on feedback from the HBPC MH community and in consultation with national leadership, a workgroup of HBPC psychologists developed a guide tailoring MBC to HBPC Veterans. Eight HBPC psychologists piloted the adapted MBC approach with 53 Veterans. Participating psychologists provided feedback on measure administration, Veterans' responses to MBC, and perceived benefits and challenges. RESULTS: Pilot participants' feedback suggested that MBC can be a highly useful tool for delivering mental health services in HBPC, although feedback varied about specific MBC measures. Qualitative feedback was primarily positive, but participants noted challenges based on the nature of the presenting problem and Veteran-specific characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that MBC can be utilized with appropriate HBPC Veterans and has the potential to benefit care. Further research is needed to clarify factors that enhance or reduce MBC's utility within HBPC. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: HBPC MH providers identified MBC as a useful tool particularly when adapted to meet the needs of HBPC Veterans.