Integrated, or collaborative, care is the future of health care delivery, and physicians and physicians-to-be at all levels of training and professional life need to be trained in emerging models of collaboration with primary care and other specialties.
That’s the conclusion of a comprehensive report by APA’s Council on Medical Education and Lifelong Learning that was published online in Academic Psychiatry this month, with specific recommendations for undergraduate, graduate, and continuing medical education (see box). The report, “Training Psychiatrists for Integrated Behavioral Healthcare,” also offers perspectives on future directions for interprofessional and interspecialty training.
The report, which was presented at the December 2014 meeting of the APA Board of Trustees, had its genesis two years ago in discussions among council members when Richard Summers, M.D., became chair of the council.
“We identified the emerging integrated care models as really important in terms of overall system change and therefore important to the world of education, because practitioners were going to need to develop a new set of skills, new ways of collaborating, new knowledge, and new cultural values to be able to practice in these new models,” Summers told Psychiatric News.
The report emphasizes that the nature of integrated care models is evolving and that integrated care will likely take different forms in different parts of the country and different systems of care and practice settings—public, private, small-group, and large organized systems of care. The report also stresses that models for reimbursement of collaborative care—which will be especially fateful for the success or failure of integrated care and for psychiatric participation—have not been realized on a systemwide scale.
“We anticipate building excitement and enthusiasm around these new models and developing psychiatrists who are both competent and confident in the provision of these new models of care,” the council report states. “We recognize that our conclusions and specific recommendations reflect the view from 2014 and know that we will learn much from greater experience with integrated care models and educating students and practitioners for these roles. These recommendations will surely need to be updated with that additional experience.”
Summers told Psychiatric News that the evolving and still-to-be-determined nature of collaborative care presents what he called a “chicken and egg” problem for educators. “The reimbursement reform that will support these models hasn’t happened yet nationally, though everyone expects it to happen,” he said. “So should we train people for working in a model that isn’t quite reimbursable yet” or wait for the models to evolve more fully?
“We decided our goal should be to drive interest and innovation in education around integrated care,” Summers said. “We want to get people excited and provide some specific recommendations and examples of best practices for educators so they can begin to implement some models for integrated care training in their own settings.”
The 36-page report addresses undergraduate, graduate, and continuing medical education as well as training for interprofessional and interspecialty collaboration; for each category, the council provides data on the extent of current training and examples of best practices.
“Interspecialty and interprofessional collaboration will need to be a priority across the continuum of medical education,” the report states. “The integrated care model rests on collaboration among health care professionals, cross-fertilization of medical knowledge across specialties, shared technology platforms, and new approaches to collecting empirical data. Education about collaboration and collaboration in education will surely improve these essential components of care.”
Within undergraduate medical education, a survey of members of the Association of Directors of Medical Student Education in Psychiatry showed that clinical rotations that give medical students exposure to integrated care are relatively rare; where they do exist, the rotations tend to be in Veterans Administration (VA) settings, federally qualified health centers, and other primary care clinics and to involve traditional psychiatric consultation with primary care providers.
“Exposure to integrated care for medical students is just the beginning,” the report concludes. “There are many exciting opportunities for modeling interspecialty collaboration, developing team participation skills, and incorporating a population-based framework for understanding illness and care. As the health care system changes to reflect these new values, and clinical services are increasingly organized along these lines, the clinical educational opportunities for medical students will surely improve.”
In May and June 2014, the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training (AADPRT) Integrated Care Task Force conducted a survey on integrated care education.
There were 88 respondents: 52 general psychiatry program directors and 36 child and adolescent program directors. Seventy-eight percent of general psychiatry program directors and 72 percent of child and adolescent psychiatry (CAP) program directors stated that they offered one or more integrated care rotations. Of these, 65 percent of general psychiatry rotations and 40 percent of CAP rotations were elective.
The most common type of integrated care rotation was psychiatric consultation within a primary care clinic, while the least common was provision of both primary care and psychiatric care by psychiatry residents. In general psychiatry residency programs, rotations were most commonly offered in VA settings, followed by other primary care clinics, while the most common sites for CAP rotations were federally qualified health centers. Forty-three percent of programs also offered didactics about integrated care.
Claudia Reardon, M.D, who co-wrote the section on residency education, emphasized in an interview with Psychiatric News that the new Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education “milestones” for psychiatry, which went into effect last July, provide benchmarks that residents are expected to meet by the time they graduate and include those that are uniquely suited for accomplishment in integrated care settings.
For example, under the domain of “systems-based practice,” the milestones state that “residents should be able to provide integrated care for psychiatric patients through collaboration with other physicians.”
(For more comprehensive coverage of the Milestone Project, see Psychiatric News, August 28, 2013.)
“Integrated care is coming close to being a requirement” for residency programs, Reardon said, noting that resident performance against the milestones will be critical in the evaluation and reaccreditation of programs: “Programs are seeing the imperative to offer these kinds of experiences. Many of these rotations at this point are elective and are offered to senior residents who have honed the skills required to practice in integrated care.”
Reardon is associate residency training director in general psychiatry at the University of Wisconsin and chair of the AADPRT Integrated Care Task Force.
“Beyond that, it is becoming increasingly clear that the typical model of psychiatric care—an individual psychiatrist providing frequent, lengthy, one-on-one sessions—will certainly continue to be an important part of the package of psychiatric care but isn’t going to be the whole story,” she said. “Integrated care is a highly efficient way we can work with primary care colleagues to manage populations of patients.” ■
The full text of the council’s report, including recommendations for undergraduate, graduate, and continuing medical education, can be accessed
here. An audio interview with Richard Summers, M.D., about the report is available
here.