Development and validation of a measure of primary care behavioral health integration
Authors
Kessler, Rodger S.Auxier, Andrea
Hitt, Juvena R.
Macchi, C. R.
Mullin, Daniel J.
van Eeghen, Constance
Littenberg, Benjamin
UMass Chan Affiliations
Department of Family Medicine and Community HealthCenter for Integrated Primary Care
Document Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2016-12-01Keywords
integrated caremeasurement
methods
primary care
Behavioral Medicine
Health Psychology
Health Services Administration
Integrative Medicine
Mental and Social Health
Primary Care
Psychiatry and Psychology
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
INTRODUCTION: We developed the Practice Integration Profile (PIP) to measure the degree of behavioral health integration in clinical practices with a focus on primary care (PC). Its 30 items, completed by providers, managers, and staff, provide an overall score and 6 domain scores derived from the Lexicon of Collaborative Care. We describe its history and psychometric properties. METHOD: The PIP was tested in a convenience sample of practices. Linear regression compared scores across integration exemplars, PC with behavioral services, PC without behavioral services, and community mental health centers without PC. An additional sample rated 4 scenarios describing practices with varying degrees of integration. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-nine surveys were returned. Mean domain scores ran from 49 to 65. The mean total score was 55 (median 58; range 0-100) with high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = .95). The lowest total scores were for PC without behavioral health (27), followed by community mental health centers (44), PC with behavioral health (60), and the exemplars (86; p < .001). Eleven respondents rerated their practices 37 to 194 days later. The mean change was + 1.5 (standard deviation = 11.1). Scenario scores were highly correlated with the degree of integration each scenario was designed to represent (Spearman's rho = -0.71; P = 0.0005). DISCUSSION: These data suggest that the PIP is useful, has face, content, and internal validity, and distinguishes among types of practices with known variations in integration. We discuss how the PIP may support practices and policymakers in their integration efforts and researchers assessing the degree to which integration affects patient health outcomes.Source
Fam Syst Health. 2016 Dec;34(4):342-356. doi: 10.1037/fsh0000227. Epub 2016 Oct 13. Link to article on publisher's site
DOI
10.1037/fsh0000227Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/26797PubMed ID
27736110Related Resources
ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1037/fsh0000227