Literature Collection

This study examined a program focused on integrating mental health in a family medicine practice in an economically challenged urban setting. The program included using a behavioral health technology platform, a behavioral health collaborative composed of community mental health agencies, and a community health worker (CHW). Of the 202 patients screened, 196 were used for analysis; 56% were positive for anxiety, 38% had scores consistent with moderate to severe depression, and 34% were positive for post-traumatic stress disorder. There was a statistically significant difference in the diagnosis of depression when comparing the screened group to a control group. Only 27% of patients followed through with behavioral health referrals despite navigational assistance provided by a CHW and assured access to care through a community agency engaged with the Behavioral Health Alliance. Further qualitative analysis revealed that there were complex patient factors that affected patient decision making regarding follow-up with behavioral health care.

OBJECTIVE: To explore primary care patients' and practitioners' views and experiences of remote consulting for common mental disorders (CMDs), to optimise their management in primary care. DESIGN: Qualitative study using in-depth interviews and thematic analysis. A topic guide was used to ensure consistency across interviews. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. There was patient and public input throughout. SETTING: Participants were recruited from general practices. Interviews were held by telephone or videocall between March 2023 and October 2023. PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed 20 practitioners and 21 patients. RESULTS: Interviewees suggested benefits included convenience, increased anonymity and were easier for those feeling very low or anxious. Challenges included practitioners finding it hard to assess risk, which lengthened consultation duration or led to further contact, increasing practice workload and patients feeling anxious waiting for the practitioner to call. In-person appointments were viewed as important for initial consultations and providing a safe space. Continuity of care and practitioner training were identified as facilitators for telephone consultations, and both patients and practitioners identified training needs around how to deliver mental healthcare remotely. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners should aim to offer continuity of care and in-person appointments when patients initially seek help. Remote consultations may not be more time or cost-efficient for individuals with CMDs as risk is harder to assess. There is a need to evaluate existing training on delivering remote consultations to identify whether remote mental healthcare is included or should be incorporated in the future.

PURPOSE: Buprenorphine is a highly effective medication for opioid use disorder (OUD) that remains substantially underutilized by primary care professionals (PCPs). This is particularly true in rural communities, which have fewer prescribers and significant access disparities. The Drug Enforcement Administration removed the X-waiver requirement in December 2022, yet many rural clinicians still report barriers to prescribing buprenorphine. In this study, we examined rural PCPs' experiences with buprenorphine to identify tailored training strategies for rural practice. METHODS: Physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician associates practicing in rural Ohio counties were recruited through contacts at statewide health associations and health professions training programs. Twenty-three PCPs were interviewed about their perspectives on prescribing buprenorphine, including their training history. FINDINGS: PCPs self-reported being motivated to respond to OUD. However, they also reported that current training efforts failed to equip them with the knowledge and resources needed to prescribe effectively, and that urban-focused training often alienated rural clinicians. Participants suggested tailoring training content to rural settings, using rural trainers, and bolstering confidence in navigating rural-specific barriers, such as resource deficits and acute opioid fatigue. CONCLUSION: Our study found that current training on buprenorphine prescribing is inadequate for meeting the needs of rural PCPs. Tailored buprenorphine training is needed to improve accessibility and acceptability, and to better support the clinical workforce in communities disproportionately impacted by the opioid epidemic.

In response to rising numbers of opioid overdose deaths, primary care providers have been called on to play a greater role in delivering buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder. However, policy makers and providers have raised concerns that expanding treatment access may reduce treatment quality and that primary care providers are not well equipped to deliver buprenorphine treatment. We investigated two research questions in response to these concerns: How did buprenorphine treatment use and quality change in North Carolina Medicaid from 2014 to 2017, and how did buprenorphine treatment quality differ between primary care providers and specialists in North Carolina Medicaid during this period? We measured buprenorphine treatment quality as patients' retention in treatment and providers' adherence to treatment guidelines. We found that the number of enrollees receiving medication treatment for opioid use disorder increased substantially, but the percentage of enrollees with the disorder receiving treatment remained low. The quality of buprenorphine treatment increased during the study period, and primary care providers provided care of comparable or higher quality compared with that of other providers. Treatment quality for buprenorphine treatment is improving, but there remains room for improvement in both use and quality. Our results support the role of primary care providers in expanding treatment for opioid use disorder.