整合身心保健:成功的推动者和障碍。

Medicine access @ point of care Pub Date : 2021-10-11 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23992026211050615
Karen Monaghan, Travis Cos
{"title":"整合身心保健:成功的推动者和障碍。","authors":"Karen Monaghan,&nbsp;Travis Cos","doi":"10.1177/23992026211050615","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Effective and appropriate provision of mental healthcare has long been a struggle globally, resulting in significant disparity between prevalence of mental illness and access to care. One attempt to address such disparity was the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), 2010, mandate in the United States to integrate physical and mental healthcare in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). The notion of integration is attractive, as it has demonstrated the potential to improve both access to mental healthcare and healthcare outcomes. However, while the PPACA mandate set this requirement for FQHCs, no clear process as to how these centers should achieve successful integration was identified.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This research employed case study methods to examine the implementation of this policy in two FQHCs in New England. Data were obtained from in-depth interviews with leadership, management, and frontline staff at two case study sites.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Study findings include multiple definitions of and approaches for integrating physical and mental healthcare, mental healthcare being subsumed into, rather than integrated with, the medical model and multiple facilitators of and barriers to integration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study asked questions about what integration means, how it occurs, and what factors facilitate or pose barriers to integration. Integration is facilitated by co-location of providers within the same department, a warm hand-off, collaborative collegial relationships, strong leadership support, and a shared electronic health record. However, interdisciplinary conflict, power differentials, job insecurity, communication challenges, and the subsumption of mental health into the medical model pose barriers to successful integration.</p>","PeriodicalId":74158,"journal":{"name":"Medicine access @ point of care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/db/07/10.1177_23992026211050615.PMC9413608.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Integrating physical and mental healthcare: Facilitators and barriers to success.\",\"authors\":\"Karen Monaghan,&nbsp;Travis Cos\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23992026211050615\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Effective and appropriate provision of mental healthcare has long been a struggle globally, resulting in significant disparity between prevalence of mental illness and access to care. One attempt to address such disparity was the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), 2010, mandate in the United States to integrate physical and mental healthcare in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). The notion of integration is attractive, as it has demonstrated the potential to improve both access to mental healthcare and healthcare outcomes. However, while the PPACA mandate set this requirement for FQHCs, no clear process as to how these centers should achieve successful integration was identified.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This research employed case study methods to examine the implementation of this policy in two FQHCs in New England. Data were obtained from in-depth interviews with leadership, management, and frontline staff at two case study sites.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Study findings include multiple definitions of and approaches for integrating physical and mental healthcare, mental healthcare being subsumed into, rather than integrated with, the medical model and multiple facilitators of and barriers to integration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study asked questions about what integration means, how it occurs, and what factors facilitate or pose barriers to integration. Integration is facilitated by co-location of providers within the same department, a warm hand-off, collaborative collegial relationships, strong leadership support, and a shared electronic health record. However, interdisciplinary conflict, power differentials, job insecurity, communication challenges, and the subsumption of mental health into the medical model pose barriers to successful integration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74158,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicine access @ point of care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/db/07/10.1177_23992026211050615.PMC9413608.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicine access @ point of care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23992026211050615\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine access @ point of care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23992026211050615","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

导言:长期以来,有效和适当地提供精神保健一直是全球范围内的一项斗争,导致精神疾病的流行和获得护理之间的显着差距。解决这种差异的一个尝试是2010年的《患者保护和平价医疗法案》(PPACA),该法案要求美国在联邦合格医疗中心(fqhc)整合身心保健。整合的概念很有吸引力,因为它已证明有可能改善获得精神保健的机会和保健结果。然而,尽管PPACA授权为fqhc设定了这一要求,但没有明确的流程来确定这些中心应该如何实现成功的整合。方法:本研究采用个案研究方法,对新英格兰地区两家fqhc实施该政策的情况进行调查。数据来自对两个案例研究地点的领导、管理和一线员工的深入访谈。结果:研究发现包括对身心健康整合的多种定义和方法,心理健康被纳入医学模式而不是与之整合,以及整合的多种促进因素和障碍。结论:本研究提出了以下问题:融合意味着什么,它是如何发生的,以及促进或构成融合障碍的因素是什么。通过在同一部门内的服务提供商的共同位置、热情的交接、协作的学院关系、强有力的领导支持和共享的电子健康记录,可以促进集成。然而,跨学科冲突、权力差异、工作不安全感、沟通挑战以及将心理健康纳入医学模式对成功整合构成了障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Integrating physical and mental healthcare: Facilitators and barriers to success.

Introduction: Effective and appropriate provision of mental healthcare has long been a struggle globally, resulting in significant disparity between prevalence of mental illness and access to care. One attempt to address such disparity was the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), 2010, mandate in the United States to integrate physical and mental healthcare in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). The notion of integration is attractive, as it has demonstrated the potential to improve both access to mental healthcare and healthcare outcomes. However, while the PPACA mandate set this requirement for FQHCs, no clear process as to how these centers should achieve successful integration was identified.

Methods: This research employed case study methods to examine the implementation of this policy in two FQHCs in New England. Data were obtained from in-depth interviews with leadership, management, and frontline staff at two case study sites.

Results: Study findings include multiple definitions of and approaches for integrating physical and mental healthcare, mental healthcare being subsumed into, rather than integrated with, the medical model and multiple facilitators of and barriers to integration.

Conclusion: This study asked questions about what integration means, how it occurs, and what factors facilitate or pose barriers to integration. Integration is facilitated by co-location of providers within the same department, a warm hand-off, collaborative collegial relationships, strong leadership support, and a shared electronic health record. However, interdisciplinary conflict, power differentials, job insecurity, communication challenges, and the subsumption of mental health into the medical model pose barriers to successful integration.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
A structural equation modeling of supply chain strategies for artemisinin-based combination therapies in Uganda. Antibiotic consumption at community pharmacies: A multicenter repeated prevalence surveillance using WHO methodology. Assessment of proton-pump inhibitor use at a tertiary teaching hospital in Nigeria. Point-of-care high-sensitivity assay on PATHFAST as the backup in the emergency room. Medicine quality in high-income countries: The obstacles to comparative prevalence studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1