Literature Collection
11K+
References
9K+
Articles
1400+
Grey Literature
4600+
Opioids & SU
The Literature Collection contains over 11,000 references for published and grey literature on the integration of behavioral health and primary care. Learn More
Use the Search feature below to find references for your terms across the entire Literature Collection, or limit your searches by Authors, Keywords, or Titles and by Year, Type, or Topic. View your search results as displayed, or use the options to: Show more references per page; Sort references by Title or Date; and Refine your search criteria. Expand an individual reference to View Details. Full-text access to the literature may be available through a link to PubMed, a DOI, or a URL. References may also be exported for use in bibliographic software (e.g., EndNote, RefWorks, Zotero).
Integration of behavioral health care into primary care can improve health and economic outcomes. This study adapted the Behavioral Health Integration in Medical Care (BHIMC) index to the Colombian context and assessed the baseline level of behavioral health integration in a sample of primary care organizations. The BHIMC was able to detect the capacity to provide integrated behavioral care in Colombian settings. Results indicate a minimal to partial integration level across all sites, and that it is possible to measure the degree of integrated care capacity and identify improvement areas for better behavioral health care provision.
Integration of behavioral health care into primary care can improve health and economic outcomes. This study adapted the Behavioral Health Integration in Medical Care (BHIMC) index to the Colombian context and assessed the baseline level of behavioral health integration in a sample of primary care organizations. The BHIMC was able to detect the capacity to provide integrated behavioral care in Colombian settings. Results indicate a minimal to partial integration level across all sites, and that it is possible to measure the degree of integrated care capacity and identify improvement areas for better behavioral health care provision.
INTRODUCTION: Opioid and other substance use disorders (OUD/SUDs) have been and continue to be significant public health issues. The standard of care for OUD is the use of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in conjunction with counseling or behavioral therapies, yet research has indicated that barriers exist for patients accessing MOUD as well as for physicians prescribing MOUD due to requirements associated with the DATA 2000 waiver. METHODS: A pilot cross-sectional survey was conducted among Kentucky physicians in order to reassess common barriers as well as to explore barriers that non-waivered providers face to becoming waivered. Barriers were compared by waiver status (waiver vs. non-waivered) as well as geographic location (rural vs. non-rural). RESULTS: Compared to waivered physicians, non-waivered physicians were significantly less likely to report positive personal beliefs related to the use of MOUD for OUD and reported significantly more barriers to treating OUD patients in the areas of physicians' practice and culture, auditing, and institutional support and resources (p < .05). The majority (69%) of all physicians indicated they would benefit from a tool kit with evidence-based clinical guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The barriers and beliefs identified in this pilot study indicate the need for policy action at the federal level to reduce barriers and incentivize more physicians to obtain waivers to treat OUD. Further, the development of brief educational resources tailored to physicians to treat OUD patients including pregnant patients with OUD is recommended.
This grey literature reference is included in the Academy's Literature Collection in keeping with our mission to gather all sources of information on integration. Grey literature is comprised of materials that are not made available through traditional publishing avenues. Often, the information from unpublished resources can be limited and the risk of bias cannot be determined.
This grey literature reference is included in the Academy's Literature Collection in keeping with our mission to gather all sources of information on integration. Grey literature is comprised of materials that are not made available through traditional publishing avenues. Often, the information from unpublished resources can be limited and the risk of bias cannot be determined.
IMPORTANCE: Given that COVID-19 and recent natural disasters exacerbated the shortage of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) services and were associated with increased opioid overdose mortality, it is important to examine how a community's ability to respond to natural disasters and infectious disease outbreaks is associated with MOUD access. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of community vulnerability to disasters and pandemics with geographic access to each of the 3 MOUDs and whether this association differs by urban, suburban, or rural classification. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study of zip code tabulation areas (ZCTAs) in the continental United States excluding Washington, DC, conducted a geospatial analysis of 2020 treatment location data. EXPOSURES: Social vulnerability index (US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention measure of vulnerability to disasters or pandemics). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Drive time in minutes from the population-weighted center of the ZCTA to the ZCTA of the nearest treatment location for each treatment type (buprenorphine, methadone, and extended-release naltrexone). RESULTS: Among 32 604 ZCTAs within the continental US, 170 within Washington, DC, and 20 without an urban-rural classification were excluded, resulting in a final sample of 32 434 ZCTAs. Greater social vulnerability was correlated with longer drive times for methadone (correlation, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.11), but it was not correlated with access to other MOUDs. Among rural ZCTAs, increasing social vulnerability was correlated with shorter drive times to buprenorphine (correlation, -0.10; 95% CI, -0.12 to -0.08) but vulnerability was not correlated with other measures of access. Among suburban ZCTAs, greater vulnerability was correlated with both longer drive times to methadone (correlation, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.24) and extended-release naltrexone (correlation, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.17). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study, communities with greater vulnerability did not have greater geographic access to MOUD, and the mismatch between vulnerability and medication access was greatest in suburban communities. Rural communities had poor geographic access regardless of vulnerability status. Future disaster preparedness planning should match the location of services to communities with greater vulnerability to prevent inequities in overdose deaths.
BACKGROUND: Irritability, a common behavioral problem for school-aged children, is often first assessed by primary care providers, who manage about a third of mental health conditions in children. Until recent changes in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), irritability was often associated with mood disorders, which may have led to increases in bipolar disorder diagnosis and prescription of mood stabilizing medication. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to explore differences between the approaches psychiatric and primary care providers use to assess irritability. METHODS: A single trained interviewer conducted detailed interviews and collected demographic data from a homogeneous group of physicians that saturated with a sample size of 17 pediatric, family medicine, and psychiatric providers who evaluate and treat school-aged children. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: In general, primary care providers chose to refer children with irritability to mental health specialists when medication management became complex, while the psychiatric providers chose behavior modification and parent education strategies rather than medications. The psychiatric group had a significantly higher caseload mix, prior experience with irritability, and more confidence in their assessment capabilities. There was lack of continuing medical education about irritability in all groups. CONCLUSION: This preliminary study highlights the importance of collaboration between primary care and subspecialties to promote accurate assessment and subsequent treatment of school-aged children with irritability, who can represent a safety concern for self and others. More research is needed to establish an efficient method of assessing and managing irritability in primary care and better utilization of specialists.