Skip to content

✪ Time and Organizational Cost for Facilitating Implementation of Primary Care Mental Health Integration

Authors:

Mona J. Ritchie, JoAnn E. Kirchner, James C. Townsend, Jeffery A. Pitcock, Katherine M. Dollar, & Chuan-Fen Liu

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: December 2019

Read the full text open access in the subscription access Journal of General Internal Medicine

Abstract:

Background

Integrating mental health services into primary care settings is complex and challenging. Although facilitation strategies have successfully supported implementation of primary care mental health integration and other complex innovations, we know little about the time required or its cost.

Objective

To examine the time and organizational cost of facilitating implementation of primary care mental health integration.

Design

Descriptive analysis.

Participants

One expert external facilitator and two internal regional facilitators who helped healthcare system stakeholders, e.g., leaders, managers, clinicians, and non-clinical staff, implement primary care mental health integration at eight clinics.

Intervention

Implementation facilitation tailored to the needs and resources of the setting and its stakeholders.

Main Measures

We documented facilitators’ and stakeholders’ time and types of activities using a structured spreadsheet collected from facilitators on a weekly basis. We obtained travel costs and salary information. We conducted descriptive analysis of time data and estimated organizational cost.

Key Results

The external facilitator devoted 263 h (0.09 FTE), including travel, across all 8 clinics over 28 months. Internal facilitator time varied across networks (1792 h versus 1169 h), as well as clinics. Stakeholder participation time was similar across networks (1280.6 versus 1363.4 person hours) but the number of stakeholders varied (133 versus 199 stakeholders). The organizational cost of providing implementation facilitation also varied across networks ($263,490 versus $258,127). Stakeholder participation accounted for 35% of the cost of facilitation activities in one network and 47% of the cost in the other.

Conclusions

Although facilitation can improve implementation of primary care mental health integration, it requires substantial organizational investments that may vary by site and implementation effort. Furthermore, the cost of using an external expert to transfer facilitation skills and build capacity for implementation efforts appears to be minimal.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

✪ Implementation strategy and cost of Mozambique’s HPV vaccine demonstration project

Authors:

Caroline Soi, Joseph B. Babigumira, Baltazar Chilundo, Vasco Muchanga, Luisa Matsinhe, Sarah Gimbel, Orvalho Augusto & Kenneth Sherr
University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: October 2019

Read the full text in the open access journal BMC Public Health

Abstract:

Background

Cost is an important determinant of health program implementation. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the implementation strategy of Mozambique’s school-based HPV vaccine demonstration project. We sought to estimate the total costs for the program, cost per fully immunized girl (FIG), and compute projections for the total cost of implementing a similar national level vaccination program.

Methods

We collected primary data through document review, participatory observation, and key informant interviews at all levels of the national health system and Ministry of Education. We used a combination of micro-costing methods—identification and measurement of resource quantities and valuation by application of unit costs, and gross costing—for consideration of resource bundles as they apply to the number of vaccinated girls. We extrapolated the cost per FIG to the HPV-vaccine-eligible population of Mozambique, to demonstrate the projected total annual cost for two scenarios of a similarly executed HPV vaccine program.

Results

The total cost of the Mozambique HPV vaccine demonstration project was $523,602. The mean cost per FIG was $72 (Credibility Intervals (CI): $62 - $83) in year one, $38 (CI: $37 - $40) in year two, and $54 CI: $49 - $61) for years one and two. The mean cost per FIG with the third HPV vaccine dose excluded from consideration was $60 (CI: $50 - $72) in year one, $38 (CI: $31 - $46) in year two, and $48 (CI: $42 - $55) for years one and two. The mean cost per FIG when only one HPV vaccine dose is considered was $30 (CI: $27 - $33)) in year one, $19 (CI: $15–$23) in year two, and $24 (CI: $22–$27) for both years. The projected annual cost of a two-and one-dose vaccine program targeting all 10-year-old girls in the country was $18.2 m (CI: $15.9 m - $20.7 m) and $9 m (CI: $8 m - $10 m) respectively.

Conclusion

National adaptation and scale-up of Mozambique’s school-based HPV vaccine strategy may result in substantial costs depending on dosing. For sustainability, stakeholders will need to negotiate vaccine price and achieve higher efficiency in startup activities and demand creation.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

✪ Costs of implementing and sustaining enhanced collaborative care programs involving community partners

Authors:

Theresa J. Hoeft, Heather Wilcox, Ladson Hinton & Jürgen Unützer

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

Published: April 2019

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

 

BACK TO THE ARCHIVE

Abstract:

Background

Collaborative care is an evidence-based program for treating depression in primary care. We sought to expand this model by recruiting clinics interested in incorporating community partners (i.e., community-based organizations (CBO) and/or family members) in the care team. Seven sites implemented evidence-based collaborative care programs with community partners while collecting information on costs of implementing and sustaining programs.

Methods

Sites retrospectively collected data on planning and implementation costs with technical assistance from study researchers. Sites also prospectively collected cost of care activities over a 1-month period once the program was implemented to determine resources needed to sustain programs. Personnel salary costs were adjusted, adding 30% for benefits and 30% for administrative overhead.

Results

The programs implemented varied considerably in staffing, involvement of care partners, and allocation of costs. Total planning and implementation costs varied from $39,280 to $60,575. The largest implementation cost category involved workflow development and ranged from $16,325 to $31,375 with the highest costs in this category attributed to the most successful implementation among clinic-CBO programs. Following implementation, cost per patient over the 1-month period ranged from $154 to $544. Ongoing strategic decision-making and administrative costs, which were included in cost of care, ranged from $284 to $2328 for the month.

Conclusions

Sites implemented collaborative care through differing partnerships, staffing, and related costs. Costs to implement and sustain programs developed in partnership are often not collected but are crucial to understanding financial aspects of developing sustainable partnerships. Assessing such costs is feasible and can inform future partnership efforts.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

✪ Evaluating the sustainability, scalability, and replicability of an STH transmission interruption intervention: The DeWorm3 implementation science protocol

Authors:

Arianna Rubin Means, Sitara S. R. Ajjampur, Robin Bailey, Katya Galactionova, Marie-Claire Gwayi-Chore, Katherine Halliday, Moudachirou Ibikounle, Sanjay Juvekar, Khumbo Kalua, Gagandeep Kang, Pallavi Lele, Adrian J. F. Luty, Rachel Pullan, Rajiv Sarkar, Fabian Schär, Fabrizio Tediosi, Bryan J. Weiner, Elodie Yard, & Judd Walson, on behalf of the DeWorm3 Implementation Science Team

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: January 2018

Read the full text in the open access journal PLOS: Neglected Tropical Diseases

Abstract:

[SECTION NAME]

[ABSTRACT TEXT]

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

✪ An individually tailored family-centered intervention for pediatric obesity in primary care: study protocol of a randomized type II hybrid effectiveness–implementation trial (Raising Healthy Children study)

Authors:

Justin D. Smith, Cady Berkel, Neil Jordan, David C. Atkins, Shrikanth S. Narayanan, Carlos Gallo, Kevin J. Grimm, Thomas J. Dishion, Anne M. Mauricio, Jenna Rudo-Stern, Mariah K. Meachum, Emily Winslow and Meg M. Bruening

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: January 2018

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Pediatric obesity is a multi-faceted public health concern that can lead to cardiovascular diseases, cancers, and early mortality. Small changes in diet, physical activity, or BMI can significantly reduce the possibility of developing cardiometabolic risk factors. Family-based behavioral interventions are an underutilized, evidence-based approach that have been found to significantly prevent excess weight gain and obesity in children and adolescents. Poor program availability, low participation rates, and non-adherence are noted barriers to positive outcomes. Effective interventions for pediatric obesity in primary care are hampered by low family functioning, motivation, and adherence to recommendations.

Methods

This (type II) hybrid effectiveness–implementation randomized trial tests the Family Check-Up 4 Health (FCU4Health) program, which was designed to target health behavior change in children by improving family management practices and parenting skills, with the goal of preventing obesity and excess weight gain. The FCU4Health is assessment driven to tailor services and increase parent motivation. A sample of 350 families with children aged 6 to 12 years who are identified as overweight or obese (BMI ≥ 85th percentile for age and gender) will be enrolled at three primary care clinics [two Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers (FQHCs) and a children’s hospital]. All clinics serve predominantly Medicaid patients and a large ethnic minority population, including Latinos, African Americans, and American Indians who face disparities in obesity, cardiometabolic risk, and access to care. The FCU4Health will be coordinated with usual care, using two different delivery strategies: an embedded approach for the two FQHCs and a referral model for the hospital-based clinic. To assess program effectiveness (BMI, body composition, child health behaviors, parenting, and utilization of support services) and implementation outcomes (such outcomes as acceptability, adoption, feasibility, appropriateness, fidelity, and cost), we use a multi-method and multi-informant assessment strategy including electronic health record data, behavioral observation, questionnaires, interviews, and cost capture methods.

Discussion

This study has the potential to prevent excess weight gain, obesity, and health disparities in children by establishing the effectiveness of the FCU4Health and collecting information critical for healthcare decision makers to support sustainable implementation of family-based programs in primary care.

Trial registration

NCT03013309 ClinicalTrials.gov
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

Costs of integrating cervical cancer screening at an HIV clinic in Kenya

Authors:

Elisabeth L. Vodicka, Joseph B. Babigumira, Marita R. Mann, Rose J. Kosgei, Fan Lee, Nelly R. Mugo, Timothy C. Okech, Samah R. Sakr, Louis P. Garrison Jr., Michael H. Chung

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

Subscription Required for Full Text Access

Published: October 2016

Read the full text in the subscription access International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics