1 / 14

Comments and Reactions: Four Evidence-based MH QI projects

Comments and Reactions: Four Evidence-based MH QI projects. Tim Cuerdon, PhD Director of Measurement and Evaluation Office of Mental Health Services, VHA December 11, 2008. Background / Context. Participated in, and evaluated Quality Improvement projects for about 20 years at:

dagan
Download Presentation

Comments and Reactions: Four Evidence-based MH QI projects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Comments and Reactions:Four Evidence-based MH QI projects Tim Cuerdon, PhD Director of Measurement and Evaluation Office of Mental Health Services, VHA December 11, 2008

  2. Background / Context • Participated in, and evaluated Quality Improvement projects for about 20 years at: • Program Evaluation and Methodology Division (PEMD) – GAO • QIO (nee PRO) program at CMS (nee HCFA) • NIMH • OQP & OMHS - VHA

  3. Results • Fairly typical of most QI efforts • Some, weak, but disappointing amounts of improvement. • Improvements tend to be incremental, not tectonic or quantum • Despite good evidence-based processes and high enthusiasm

  4. What have we learned? • Not much • Shot gun approaches seem to work better than single, rifle shot interventions • Effective, charismatic champions seem to be associated with most successful QI efforts

  5. How did we get here? • “Just do it” mentality • Moral imperative to deliver the right or best care to all patients has caused a sense of urgency • “We’re not doing research here” • We don’t need “analysis paralysis”

  6. What’s Missing? • Theory of the Status Quo – why are things the way they are, when everyone knows there’s a better way? • Identification and appreciation of the forces that cause inertia / resistance to change

  7. Implicit Theories • Every QI project reflects an implicit theory, based on the nature of the interventions used. • But because the theory is left unstated, it usually cannot be directly tested, or compared to a competing theory

  8. Review of today’s four projects • Rosenheck and Sernyak Cost-Effectiveness Study • Typical of many early QI efforts • Lack of knowledge causes today’s pattern of care • Spreading the good news will lead to positive change • Earlier Patient Education literature challenges the utility of information as a change agent

  9. Review of today’s four projects • Owen et al Study • Moves information closer to point of care delivery – reminders / pocket cards. Makes the information more salient • Adds performance monitoring and feedback – suggesting that increased self-monitoring and/or competition might induce change • Team QI vs. Opinion leader – nexus of change “ownership” / motivation

  10. Review of today’s four projects • Young et al Study • Clozapine training • Family referrals • Weight / wellness referrals • Feedback reports • Evaluation of QI components also incorporated in the design • Burnout • Cross-service boundaries identified as barriers

  11. Review of today’s four projects • Resnick Study • Model sites developed • Other sites come to model to learn by observing • Fidelity to model site features emphasized • But not all model sites are exemplery, and some can do, but not teach

  12. Where do we go from here? • Make explicit the cause and effect connection between the intervention and the targeted QI outcome • Use designs that can test out this hypothesized connection • Include a run out, or post-QI phase to detect Hawthorne effects and delayed onsets

  13. Where do we go from here? • Debrief QI participants / collaborators (or “victims”) • Conduct post-hoc examinations of most and least successful sites. • Begin to describe and then test the efficacy of the characteristics that make a successful champion / opinion leader

  14. Invitation • Implementation of the MH Uniform Services Handbook will generate lots of study opportunities • Psychotherapy vs. pharmacotherapy • Delivery of MH services in specialty clinics vs. integrated and primary care clinics • Delivery of MH services in CBOCs • Delivery of MH services via Tele-medicine.

More Related