Skip to main content
Full access
Research & Services Partnerships
Published Online: 15 July 2015

Consumer-Involved Participatory Research to Address General Medical Health and Wellness in a Community Mental Health Setting

Abstract

Barriers to sustainably implementing general medical interventions in community mental health (CMH) settings include role uncertainty, consumer engagement, workforce limitations, and sustainable reimbursement. To address these barriers, this project used a community-partnered participatory research framework to create a stakeholder-based general medical and wellness intervention in a large CMH organization, with consumers involved in all decision-making processes. Consumers faced practical barriers to participating in organizational decision making, but their narratives were critical in establishing priorities and ensuring sustainability. Addressing baseline knowledge and readiness of stakeholders and functional challenges to consumer involvement can aid stakeholder-based approaches to implementing general medical interventions in CMH settings.
The age-adjusted risk of mortality for people with serious mental illness is 2 to 2.5 times greater than for the general population, primarily due to chronic general medical conditions (13). Because people with serious mental illness are most likely to access health care in community mental health (CMH) settings, CMH settings are an ideal venue to target general medical interventions to address this excess mortality. However, surveys of CMH providers and organizations have demonstrated multiple barriers to implementing general medical interventions, including insufficient training, workforce and reimbursement limitations, uncertainty about roles, and patient factors (47). The evaluation of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s Primary Behavioral Health Care Initiative to implement general medical services in CMH settings demonstrated that among the most concerning barriers to implementation were consumer engagement and financial sustainability (8). Stakeholder involvement, especially consumer involvement, may be a means to address these barriers to successfully implement sustainable general medical interventions in CMH settings.

Community-Partnered Participatory Research and Engagement of a CMH Organization

Community-partnered participatory research (CPPR) can address identified barriers to successful CMH general medical interventions, such as consumer engagement, sustainability, and role definition, and can provide a mechanism to establish an evidence base around successful and sustainable general medical interventions. In the CPPR framework, community partners and researchers collaborate as equals to develop a common “vision” or framework for partnership, to traverse the “valley” of designing and implementing the research plan, and to celebrate “victory” of the evaluation and achievement of shared goals (9). CPPR differs from traditional community-based participatory research in its manualized emphasis on equal partnership between researchers and the community. This partnership includes coleadership, equal coordination in framing and conducting research, shared responsibility for resources, and equal respect for the knowledge and experience of both the research and community partners. This framework has been successfully used to improve depression screening and services in underresourced communities (10).
The project described here was a partnership between the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars program at the University of California, Los Angeles, and Pacific Clinics, a large CMH organization in the greater Los Angeles area spanning five counties with more than 1,200 employees. The formation of the partnership began with the researcher (SPI) identifying a key representative within Pacific Clinics (LSP) familiar with public-academic partnerships. They collaboratively identified a core need in Pacific Clinics for standardized and sustainable general medical screening across the organization. The partnership then expanded by branching outward within the organization to identify representatives from other critical stakeholder groups, including nursing, medical staff, quality assurance, and consumers. Consumer representatives were specifically sought out. Members of the created stakeholder committee, which was cochaired by a consumer, had intentional overrepresentation of consumers.
From January 2013 to June 2014, 19 stakeholder committee meetings were held every three to four weeks, though this committee has continued to meet regularly after the end of the formal CPPR process. Initial engagement began with community-building narratives about general medical health and wellness, including personal experiences and experiences working with consumers at Pacific Clinics, particularly an active consumer in the organization who died due to an undetected general medical condition. These narratives and an informal survey of providers and managers across the organization led to the collaborative development of a three-step framework for addressing the general medical health and wellness of both consumers and staff. The first step in this process is engagement of both staff and consumers together in programs such as whole health and wellness activities (for example, nutrition and shopping classes) or motivational interviewing training for both providers and consumers. Successful engagement subsequently leads to an interdisciplinary general medical health and wellness assessment of consumers, including factors beyond biological measurements, such as lifestyle, habits, diet, and access to medical services. The third step is to provide targeted interventions to consumers with identified needs, including evidence-based tools, group-based interventions, brief counseling, and/or facilitated referral to external services. [The full three-step framework is provided in a table in an online supplement to this column.] This framework was then used to design a sustainable intervention aimed at both consumers and staff general medical health and wellness, with pilot testing at two sites in the organization.

Benefits and Challenges of CPPR in a Large CMH Organization

To evaluate the use of a CPPR framework, reflection sheets were collected from committee representatives at each meeting. Audio recordings and process notes from each meeting were generated, and independent semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with each committee member. These data were analyzed using a content analysis framework, with identified key themes and inferences verified by the committee as part of its working meetings. Committee members felt enhanced in their understanding of general medical issues faced by consumers and even their own health and wellness. All committee members reported both in real time and in retrospect that their representative group’s voice was heard and incorporated in decision making and that the committee was effective in accomplishing its goals. Although several expressed concern about insufficient representation of line staff, committee members felt the intervention ensured clarity of staff members’ roles in addressing general medical health and wellness while ensuring productivity and reimbursement. However, many committee members expressed frustration with the pace of work under the CPPR framework, especially compared with standard decision making in the organization and the challenge of balancing individual representatives’ concerns in finding common ground. On subsequent reflection, the researchers and community partners felt that part of this frustration may stem from CPPR principles not being oriented to the environment of a CMH organization primarily incentivized by reimbursable services and productivity and where new programs and services are generally implemented in a top-down fashion. Ultimately, all committee members expressed pride in and support of the products created, and all representatives expressed confidence in the sustainability of both the committee and the implementation.

Consumer Involvement in Partnered Research

Consumers on the committee expressed a strong satisfaction with participation, both in terms of improvement of their own self-efficacy, knowledge base, and empowerment, and their feeling of being able to support fellow consumers through their work. As noted by both the consumer and nonconsumer representatives in interviews, consumer participants were more oriented toward wellness activities (especially nutrition education) and chronic disease management than toward general medical screening. This focus derived from their own lived experience with chronic general medical conditions, and it broadened the perspective of the committee to include these elements as part of the intervention as a means to improve consumer engagement. Consumers also expressed frustration at the inability to implement more general medical and wellness services and requirements quickly and at limitations inherent to the capacities and licensing of CMH organizations, especially with regard to chronic disease management. Consumers also faced numerous barriers to being incorporated as decision makers within the organization. Despite Pacific Clinics being a progressive recovery-oriented CMH with active consumer input and representation, consumer committee members faced functional challenges of finding reliable transportation, office space, and access to Internet service, often limiting consumers’ abilities to fully engage in committee activities and communication.
Nonconsumer committee representatives also were asked about their experience working with consumers in organizational decision making, all of whom reflected that this experience was unique. Some of them expressed a level of frustration that the pace was sometimes slowed by consumers, in part due to perceived differences in knowledge level but also due to their perception that consumers occasionally prioritized their own individual experiences rather than task accomplishment and organizational needs. However, nonconsumer committee members almost universally expressed support of involvement of consumers, stating that strong consumer representation and their stories helped recognize the importance of the connection between physical and mental health, including how to use this connection to support reimbursement of general medical and wellness services in CMH. The effectiveness of consumer narratives in the committee’s work led to the incorporation of personal stories and lived experiences with general medical conditions into the designed intervention.

Conclusions

CPPR offers a framework for researchers seeking to study and implement sustainable general medical and wellness interventions in CMH settings. This framework helps to address identified barriers of role confusion, consumer engagement, sustainability, and reimbursement. The involvement of consumers offers perspectives that might otherwise not be incorporated into research or quality improvement interventions, particularly with establishing priorities most relevant to the end users of the intervention, and helps ensure that the process and outcomes are recovery oriented. Broad stakeholder representation, especially inclusion of quality assurance or other staff responsible for monitoring reimbursement and compliance, can help align organizational requirements with research so as to ensure sustainability. In this study, stakeholder and especially consumer involvement led to the creation of a novel three-step framework using whole health and wellness activities for both consumers and staff as a means toward engagement for general medical screening. While prior work on general medical health in CMH settings has focused on these elements separately, the input of stakeholders, particularly consumers, led to the design of a unique intervention bringing these two elements together and thus addressing identified barriers to screening. The partnership between consumers and staff on the committee similarly led to a unique facet of the intervention where staff and consumers “partner” in engagement through health and wellness activities, benefiting both. The inclusion of personal narratives to improve engagement around health assessment also was a direct result of the CPPR process. The effect of these novel elements on sustainability of the designed intervention is being evaluated currently.
However, participatory inclusion of stakeholders and consumers poses challenges to performing traditional effectiveness and implementation research. This is particularly true in CMH settings where financial and productivity goals may not easily fit within the CPPR process and where consumers may not be included in the organization’s decision-making structure or day-to-day operations. However, the CPPR framework provides an outlet for conflict to arise and be worked through to provide transformative change. These principles may represent a major cultural shift for more corporate organizations, such as the incorporation of consumer narratives in decision making and quality improvement interventions seen here. Nevertheless, a baseline assessment of stakeholders’ knowledge and readiness for research within a CPPR framework can help ensure success. Furthermore, ensuring organizational readiness for consumer involvement in decision making at the outset, both in terms of educating nonconsumers and addressing functional barriers, can help improve integration of consumers in the CPPR process in CMH settings.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the members of the Pacific Clinics Physical Health Stakeholder Committee for their efforts in this work: Erika Aguirre-Miyamoto, Angela Crenshaw, Dolly Ehlen, Sandra Escobar, Viola Gaffaney, Joana Garcia, Rosa Hernandez, Samantha James-Perez, Lisa Lansing, Lou Mallory, David Martel, Lana Martin, Yolanda Mendez, Nina Paddock, Irene Pines, Elizabeth Torres, and Wendy Wang.

Footnote

The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs or the United States government.

Supplementary Material

File (appi.ps.201500157.ds001.pdf)

References

1.
Saha S, Chant D, McGrath J: A systematic review of mortality in schizophrenia: is the differential mortality gap worsening over time? Archives of General Psychiatry 64:1123–1131, 2007
2.
Brown S, Kim M, Mitchell C, et al: Twenty-five year mortality of a community cohort with schizophrenia. British Journal of Psychiatry 196:116–121, 2010
3.
Crump C, Winkleby MA, Sundquist K, et al: Comorbidities and mortality in persons with schizophrenia: a Swedish national cohort study. American Journal of Psychiatry 170:324–333, 2013
4.
Druss BG, Marcus SC, Campbell J, et al: Medical services for clients in community mental health centers: results from a national survey. Psychiatric Services 59:917–920, 2008
5.
Ronsley R, Raghuram K, Davidson J, et al: Barriers and facilitators to implementation of a metabolic monitoring protocol in hospital and community settings for second-generation antipsychotic-treated youth. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 20:134–141, 2011
6.
McDonell MG, Kaufman EA, Srebnik DS, et al: Barriers to metabolic care for adults with serious mental illness: provider perspectives. International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine 41:379–387, 2011
7.
Parameswaran SG, Chang C, Swenson AK, et al: Roles in and barriers to metabolic screening for people taking antipsychotic medications: a survey of psychiatrists. Schizophrenia Research 143:395–396, 2013
8.
Scharf DM, Eberhart NK, Schmidt N, et al: Integrating primary care into community behavioral health settings: programs and early implementation experiences. Psychiatric Services 64:660–665, 2013
9.
Jones L, Wells K: Strategies for academic and clinician engagement in community-participatory partnered research. JAMA 297:407–410, 2007
10.
Wells KB, Jones L, Chung B, et al: Community-partnered cluster-randomized comparative effectiveness trial of community engagement and planning or resources for services to address depression disparities. Journal of General Internal Medicine 28:1268–1278, 2013

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Psychiatric Services
Go to Psychiatric Services

Cover: Winter Woods and Brook, by John Joseph Enneking, circa 1906. Oil on board. Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Stanton Davis (Elisabeth Kaiser, class of 1932). Davis Museum, Wellesley College. Photo credit: Davis Museum/Art Resource, New York City.

Psychiatric Services
Pages: 1268 - 1270
PubMed: 26174950

History

Published online: 15 July 2015
Published in print: December 01, 2015

Authors

Details

Sharat P. Iyer, M.D., M.S.
Dr. Iyer is with VISN3 Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, and the Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York (e-mail: [email protected]). Ms. Pancake and Ms. Dandino are with Pacific Clinics, Pasadena, California. Dr. Wells is with the Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, and the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California. Lisa B. Dixon, M.D., M.P.H., and Brian Hepburn, M.D., are editors of this column.
Laura S. Pancake, L.C.S.W.
Dr. Iyer is with VISN3 Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, and the Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York (e-mail: [email protected]). Ms. Pancake and Ms. Dandino are with Pacific Clinics, Pasadena, California. Dr. Wells is with the Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, and the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California. Lisa B. Dixon, M.D., M.P.H., and Brian Hepburn, M.D., are editors of this column.
Elizabeth S. Dandino
Dr. Iyer is with VISN3 Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, and the Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York (e-mail: [email protected]). Ms. Pancake and Ms. Dandino are with Pacific Clinics, Pasadena, California. Dr. Wells is with the Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, and the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California. Lisa B. Dixon, M.D., M.P.H., and Brian Hepburn, M.D., are editors of this column.
Kenneth B. Wells, M.D., M.P.H.
Dr. Iyer is with VISN3 Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, and the Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York (e-mail: [email protected]). Ms. Pancake and Ms. Dandino are with Pacific Clinics, Pasadena, California. Dr. Wells is with the Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, and the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California. Lisa B. Dixon, M.D., M.P.H., and Brian Hepburn, M.D., are editors of this column.

Funding Information

This material is the result of work supported with resources and the use of facilities at the James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, and the West Los Angeles VA Medical Center, Los Angeles.Funding for Dr. Iyer was provided by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars program and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.The authors report no financial relationships with commercial interests.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format
Citation style
Style
Copy to clipboard

View Options

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/EPUB

Login options

Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.

Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens login

Not a subscriber?

Subscribe Now / Learn More

PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.

Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share article link

Share