An urban behavioral health research center in the northeast supports the New York State Office of Mental Health (OMH)’s mission to promote the widespread availability of evidence-based practices to improve mental health services, ensure accountability, and promote recovery-oriented outcomes for recipients and families. To support behavioral health providers who are integrating physical health care, Spring 2019 the center released resources to educate these providers on commonly seen physical health conditions in the behavioral health population and resources to help educate the people they serve (Office of Mental Health, n.d.).
Among individuals with serious mental illness (SMI), nearly half have at least one chronic illness severe enough to limit daily function. Premature death in this population is often due to preventable, but untreated chronic illnesses like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and obesity, and these conditions are further impacted by poor health habits, less adherence to medical care, and co-occurring substance use (Vaez, Diegel-Vacek, Ryan, & Martyn-Nemeth, 2017). Barriers in navigating complex healthcare systems are a significant obstacle to care, particularly for people with SMI who may experience some cognitive challenges. Combining mental health services and expertise with primary care can increase the quality of care and increase an individual's lifespan (Schmidt, 2016). Integrated physical health care in behavioral health settings, offers greater access to services and earlier identification and intervention of physical health concerns (Bridges et al., 2015).
Methods:
Through our ongoing research, we will identify a select number of users to collect quantitative survey data and perform qualitative interviews to explore the impact of these health resources. SPSS will be used to analyze the quantitative data and an appropriate software will be used for the qualitative data. The focus of the survey will be to assess whether practitioners found the integrating health curricula acceptable and accessible, feasible to use in their practice, effective in their clinical practice (e.g., plain language, filled a knowledge gap), as well as to assess self-reported provider practice change (e.g., change in treatment plans or goals, connection to primary care). We will also examine whether the program setting (type of program, types of clients seen, numbers of clients, availability of a nurse, etc.) or practitioner characteristics (Rutherford, 2017) impacts the findings.
Results:
Ongoing research
Conclusion:
Ongoing research