Skip to main content
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
  • Blog
  • Newsroom
  • Find It Fast
  • Help Center
  • Subscribe
  • Careers
  • Contact Us

PCORI

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

Search form

  • About Us
    Close mega-menu

    About Us

    • Our Programs
    • Governance
    • Financials and Reports
    • Procurement Opportunities
    • Our Staff
    • Our Vision & Mission
    • Contact Us

    Fact Sheets: Learn More About PCORI

    Download fact sheets about out work, the research we fund, and our programs and initiatives.

    Find It Fast

    Browse through an alphabetical list of frequently accessed and searched terms for information and resources.

    Subscribe to PCORI Email Alerts

    Sign up for weekly emails to stay current on the latest results of our funded projects, and more.

  • Research & Results
    Close mega-menu

    Research & Results

    • Explore Our Portfolio
    • Research Fundamentals
    • Research Results Highlights
    • Putting Evidence to Work
    • Peer Review
    • Evidence Synthesis
    • About Our Research

    Evidence Updates from PCORI-Funded Studies

    These updates capture highlights of findings from systematic reviews and our funded research studies.

    Journal Articles About Our Funded Research

    Browse through a collection of journal publications that provides insights into PCORI-funded work.

    Explore Our Portfolio of Funded Projects

    Find out about projects based on the health conditions they focus on, the state they are in, and if they have results.

  • Topics
    Close mega-menu

    Topics

    • Addressing Disparities
    • Arthritis
    • Asthma
    • Cancer
    • Cardiovascular Disease
    • Children's Health
    • Community Health Workers
    • COVID-19
    • Dementia and Cognitive Impairment
    • Diabetes
    • Kidney Disease
    • Medicaid
    • Men's Health
    • Mental and Behavioral Health
    • Minority Mental Health
    • Multiple Chronic Conditions
    • Multiple Sclerosis
    • Obesity
    • Older Adults' Health
    • Pain Care and Opioids
    • Rare Diseases
    • Rural Health
    • Shared Decision Making
    • Telehealth
    • Transitional Care
    • Veterans Health
    • Women's Health

    Featured Topic: Women's Health

    Learn more about the projects we support on conditions that specifically or more often affect women.

  • Engagement
    Close mega-menu

    Engagement

    • The Value of Engagement
    • Engagement in Health Research Literature Explorer
    • Influencing the Culture of Research
    • Engagement Awards
    • Engagement Resources
    • Engage with Us

    Engagement Tools and Resources for Research

    This searchable peer-to-peer repository includes resources that can inform future work in patient-centered outcomes research.

    Explore Engagement in Health Literature

    This tool enables searching for published articles about engagement in health research.

    Research Fundamentals: A New On-Demand Training

    It enables those new to health research or patient-centered research to learn more about the research process.

  • Funding Opportunities
    Close mega-menu

    Funding Opportunities

    • What & Who We Fund
    • What You Need to Know to Apply
    • Applicant Training
    • Merit Review
    • Awardee Resources
    • Help Center

    PCORI Funding Opportunities

    View and learn about the newly opened funding announcements and the upcoming PFAs in 2021.

    Tips for Submitting a Responsive LOI

    Find out what PCORI looks for in a letter of intent (LOI) along with other helpful tips.

    PCORI Awardee Resources

    These resources can help awardees in complying with the terms and conditions of their contract.

  • Meetings & Events
    Close mega-menu

    Meetings & Events

    • Upcoming
    • Past Events

    PCORI Webinar: February 2, 2pm ET

    Hear from PCORI leaders about ways to get involved in PCOR, improvements to our funding opportunities, and more. Register

    Confronting COVID-19: A Webinar Series

    Learn more about the series and access recordings and summary reports of all six sessions.

    2020 PCORI Annual Meeting

    Watch recordings of all sessions, and view titles and descriptions of the posters presented at the virtual meeting.

You are here

  • Research & Results
  • Explore Our Portfolio
  • Effect of Integrating Mental and Phys...

This project has results

Effect of Integrating Mental and Physical Health on Patients' Experiences of Care

Sign Up for Updates to This Study  

Results Summary and Professional Abstract

Results Summary

Results Summary

Download Summary Español (pdf) Audio Recording (mp3)

What was the research about?

Behavioral health integration, or BHI, is when clinics manage both physical and mental health care in the same place. The goal of BHI is to improve the coordination of services to better meet patients’ needs.

In this study, the research team wanted to learn if BHI improved patients’ experiences of care. The team looked at clinics that were using BHI and scored them on staff training, how well staff work together, and other aspects of BHI. Then the team looked at whether clinics with higher scores had better

  • Patient-reported experiences of care
  • Patient-reported experiences of being judged, or stigma, in a healthcare setting
  • Quality of care

The team also looked at whether patients who felt stigma were less likely to get their healthcare needs met.

What were the results?

The study didn’t find a relationship between clinics’ scores on BHI and patients’ experiences of care or of stigma. In addition, overall scores on BHI didn’t relate to clinics’ quality of care. But the study found that

  • Patients receiving care from clinics that had higher scores for training staff on BHI had fewer unnecessary emergency room visits.
  • Clinics with higher scores for how well staff worked together did a better job of monitoring patients who took medicine for six months or longer.
  • Clinics with higher scores for integrating their financial systems for physical and mental health services did a better job of following up with patients and monitoring those who took medicine for six months or longer.

Also, patients who experienced stigma were more likely to report that they didn’t get their healthcare needs met.

Who was in the study?

The study included 2,524 adult patients receiving care at 1 of 12 clinics in Oregon. Of these, 88 percent were white. The average age was 53, and 68 percent were women. In addition, 52 percent of patients had a mental health condition. All patients lived in Oregon and had a commercial, Medicaid, or Medicare Advantage insurance plan.

What did the research team do?

Staff at each clinic completed a survey. The survey asked about ways the clinic integrated physical and mental health care, including training and overall cooperation in managing the two kinds of services.

Patients completed a survey about their healthcare experiences during the study’s first year and again one year later. The survey asked how quickly patients got care, if the care was hassle free, and whether people felt stigma when they went to the clinic. To assess the quality of care that patients received, the research team looked at health records for 20,279 patients at the clinics.

Then the research team looked at the relationship between clinics’ scores for BHI and patients’ experiences.

A patient advisory team gave input on the study.

What were the limits of the study?

All clinics in the study used BHI. Results may differ if the research team had been able to compare clinics that were using BHI with those that weren’t.

Future research could compare patient experiences of care at clinics using BHI with clinics not using BHI.

How can people use the results?

Healthcare clinics can use these results when planning ways to help patients improve their mental and physical health.

Professional Abstract

Professional Abstract

Objective

To observe the effects of behavioral health integration (BHI) efforts on patient experience, perceived stigma, and claims-based quality of care

Study Design

Design Elements Description
Design Cluster nonrandomized longitudinal observational study
Population

Survey: 2,524 patients in 12 clinics in Oregon

Claims data: 20,729 patients seen in 1 of 12 clinics in the past 21 months
Interventions/
Comparators
Level of integration of behavioral and physical health care in primary care clinics
Outcomes Patient experience and perceived stigma, claims-based quality of care
Timeframe Up to 2-year follow-up for study outcomes

In this prospective cluster nonrandomized longitudinal observational study, the research team examined whether there was an association between the integration of behavioral and physical health care in primary care clinics and three outcomes: patient experience, claims-based quality of care, and perceived stigma. The team also examined the relationship between stigma and patient experience and the impact of integration on this relationship.

The research team collected data in 12 primary care and safety net clinics. All clinics are part of Oregon’s Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations and were integrating physical and behavioral health care as part of a statewide policy initiative. Clinic staff completed a clinic audit tool that measured five BHI domains: integrated care staffing and training, data sharing between mental and physical health providers, workflow and collaboration, integrated financial arrangements, and overall BHI integration.

In the first and second year of the project, 2,524 adult patients receiving care at the clinics completed patient experience surveys. Of these, 88% were white, and the average age was 53. In addition, 68% were female, and 52% of respondents reported at least one behavioral health diagnosis. All patients were Oregon residents enrolled in a commercial, Medicaid, or Medicare Advantage insurance plan.

The research team used a survey to assess perceived stigma and four domains of the patient experience: all care needs met, timely access to care, hassle-free care, and provider-to-provider communication. The team measured quality of care using five items from Oregon’s All Payer All Claims data set. Data were from 20,279 patients receiving care at one of the 12 clinics over a 21-month period.

A patient advisory team assisted in study design and survey development.

Results

BHI scores were not associated with improved patient experience or reduced perceived stigma over time. Stigma was strongly associated with poor patient experience outcomes, but integration did not change this.

The research team also found no associations between overall BHI scores and any of the five quality of care indicators. However, three BHI domains were positively associated with quality of care indicators. Clinics with better integrated care training had a lower rate of avoidable emergency department visits (p<0.05); clinics with integrated workflows had better monitoring of patients on persistent medications (p<0.05); and integrated financing was associated with better patient follow-up within seven days of a mental health discharge (p<0.05) and better monitoring of patients on persistent medications (p<0.05).

Limitations

The research team measured the degree to which elements of structural integration were associated with patient outcomes, but the study cannot offer evidence of a causal relationship. The measure of clinic integration may not have been optimal for determining association. Other measures of integration may have yielded different results. Survey response rates were low; which may have affected results.

Conclusions and Relevance

At two-year follow-up, integrated care was not associated with patients’ quality of care or perceived stigma.

Future Research Needs

Future research could measure BHI differently or incorporate research designs better suited to test a causal relationship. Researchers could also explore further whether reducing stigma in clinical settings may improve the patient experience and enable BHI programs to have a stronger impact.

Final Research Report

View this project's final research report.

Journal Articles

Results of This Project

The journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research

Behavioral Health Integration and Outcomes that Matter to Patients: a Longitudinal Mixed-Methods Observational Study

Related Articles

Psychology, Health & Medicine

Patient experiences in behavioral health integrated primary care settings: the role of stigma in shaping patient outcomes over time

Engagement Resources

Patient Advisory Team Application for Effect of Integrating Mental and Physical Health on Patients' Experiences of Care Research Study

More on this Project  

Peer-Review Summary

Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.

The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments. 

Peer reviewers commented, and the researchers made changes or provided responses. The comments and responses included the following:

  • The reviewers asked for more details on the 12 practices involved in the study. The researchers responded that they had collected health-integration information but did not collect additional details about each practice, such as provider characteristics. In response to reviewers, they were able to add some information about patient characteristics, such as illness severity. The researchers explained that what interested them the most was the structural elements of care, rather than process or clinical characteristics.
  • The reviewers asked for additional specific information about how the clinic audit tool described and measured behavioral health integration. The researchers expanded their description of the clinic audit tool and explained that the tool was specifically designed to measure changes in health-integration practices that Oregon state policy promoted. The researchers acknowledged that the tool has not been formally tested for reliability, but its use in the state-wide initiative made it the right tool to use if this study was going to influence state policy. The researchers also noted that they completed a series of cognitive interviews to gauge the tool’s face validity.
  • Reviewers suggested the study design would have been more powerful with a control group of clinics that did not use behavioral health integration practices. The researchers agreed but said that because clinics generally used at least some behavioral health integration practices, they could not establish a control group. Instead, they compared clinics by stratifying them based on their level of behavioral health integration.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

View the COI disclosure form.

Project Details

Principal Investigator
Bill Wright, PhD
Project Status
Completed; PCORI Public and Professional Abstracts, and Final Research Report Posted
Project Title
Caring for the Whole Person: A Patient-Centered Assessment of Integrated Care Models in Vulnerable Populations
Board Approval Date
July 2014
Project End Date
November 2018
Organization
Providence Portland Medical Center
Year Awarded
2014
State
Oregon
Year Completed
2018
Project Type
Research Project
Health Conditions  
Mental/Behavioral Health
Addiction/Substance Abuse
Depression
Multiple/Comorbid Chronic Conditions
Intervention Strategies
Other Health Services Interventions
Populations
Individuals with Multiple Chronic/co-morbid Conditions
Low Income
Racial/Ethnic Minorities
Rural
Urban
Women
Funding Announcement
Improving Healthcare Systems
Project Budget
$2,190,390
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
10.25302/03.2020.IHS.131008388
Study Registration Information
HSRP20152236
NCT03034369
Page Last Updated: 
March 11, 2020

About Us

  • Our Programs
  • Governance
  • Financials and Reports
  • Procurement Opportunities
  • Our Staff
  • Our Vision & Mission
  • Contact Us

Research & Results

  • Explore Our Portfolio
  • Research Fundamentals
  • Research Results Highlights
  • Putting Evidence to Work
  • Peer Review
  • Evidence Synthesis
  • About Our Research

Engagement

  • The Value of Engagement
  • Engagement in Health Research Literature Explorer
  • Influencing the Culture of Research
  • Engagement Awards
  • Engagement Resources
  • Engage with Us

Funding Opportunities

  • What & Who We Fund
  • What You Need to Know to Apply
  • Applicant Training
  • Merit Review
  • Awardee Resources
  • Help Center

Meetings & Events

February 2
PCORI 2021 and Beyond: Opportunities for Funding and Involvement in Patient-Centered Research
February 9
Board of Governors Meeting: February 9, 2021
February 11
Advisory Panel on Patient Engagement Winter 2021 Meeting

PCORI

Footer contact address

Patient-Centered Outcomes
Research Institute

1828 L Street, NW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 827-7700 | Fax: (202) 355-9558
[email protected]

Subscribe to Newsletter

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Vimeo

© 2011-2021 Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademark Usage Guidelines | Credits | Help Center