Skip to content

Improving Mental Health Outcomes: Building an Adaptive Implementation Strategy

Improving Mental Health Outcomes: Building an Adaptive Implementation

Status
Terminated
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02151331
Enrollment
383
Registered
2014-05-30
Start date
2014-08-31
Completion date
2017-11-30
Last updated
2018-12-12

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Bipolar Disorder, Depression, Mood Disorder

Keywords

Chronic care model, Mood disorders, Adaptive implementation

Brief summary

The overarching goal of this study is to build the most cost-effective adaptive implementation intervention involving a site-level implementation intervention strategy: Replicating Effective Programs (REP), and the augmentation of REP using either External Facilitation or a combination of an External and Internal Facilitation to improve patient outcomes and the uptake of an evidence-based program for mood disorders (Life Goals-LG) in community settings.

Detailed description

Despite the availability of psychosocial evidence-based practices (EBPs), quality and outcomes for persons with mental disorders remain suboptimal because of organizational barriers to implementation. Replicating Effective Programs (REP), a site-level implementation strategy applied to promote the use of psychosocial treatments in community-based practices, still resulted in less than half of sites actually sustaining the use of these treatments. Based on input from community partners and previous research, the study team subsequently enhanced REP to include Facilitation, a novel implementation strategy which addresses site-level organizational barriers to EBP adoption beyond REP's emphasis on fidelity. Two Facilitation roles were developed: External and Internal Facilitators. External Facilitators (EFs) reside outside the clinic, are supported by the study, and provide technical expertise to providers in adapting and using EBPs in routine practice. Internal Facilitators (IFs) are employed by the sites, have a direct reporting relationship to site leadership, and have the local knowledge to help providers implement EBPs. IFs also address site-specific organizational barriers that may not be observable at baseline or by EFs. The overarching goal of this study is to build the most cost-effective adaptive implementation intervention involving REP and the augmentation of the EF and IF roles to improve patient outcomes and the uptake of an EBP for mood disorders (Life Goals-LG) in community settings. The primary aim of this clustered randomized trial is to determine, among sites not initially responding to REP (i.e., limited LG uptake), the effect of adaptive implementation interventions in sites receiving External and Internal Facilitator (REP+EF/IF) versus External Facilitator alone (REP+EF) on improved patient-level outcomes, including mental health quality of life and decreased symptoms, as well as increased LG use among patients with mood disorders after 12 months. Secondary aims are to determine, among sites that continue to exhibit non-response after 12 months, the effect of continuing Facilitation on patient-level outcomes at 24 months, describe the implementation of EF and IF, and to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of REP+EF/IF compared to REP+EF over the 24-month period. A representative cohort of 80 community-based outpatient clinics (total 1,600 patients) from different U.S. regions (Michigan, Colorado, and Arkansas) will be included in this study. We will use a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) design to build the best adaptive implementation intervention. This groundbreaking study design will address three crucial implementation issues: First, IFs are costly for sites since they require additional administrative effort. Second, the extent to which an off-site EF alone versus the addition of an on-site IF can improve patient outcomes in community settings is unclear. Finally, among sites that continue to exhibit non-response after 12 months of Facilitation, the value of continuing the implementation strategy (i.e., delayed effect) has not been assessed, especially in smaller practices from more rural settings.

Interventions

Non-responding sites randomized to receive external facilitation

BEHAVIORALExternal + Internal Facilitation

Non-responding sites randomized to receive both internal and external facilitation

Sponsors

National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
CollaboratorNIH
University of Michigan
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
21 Years to 99 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Currently being seen at one of the clinics participating in this study * Diagnosis of or treated for a mood disorder (bipolar disorder or depression) * Ability to speak and read English and provide informed consent

Exclusion criteria

* No active substance intoxication * No acute medical illness or dementia

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Health-related Quality of Life - Mental Health Component ScoreChange from Baseline in Quality of Life at 12-monthsMental Health Quality of Life was measured using the 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12). The SF-12 has a scale range of 0-100 with higher values representing better outcomes.
Reduced Mood Disorder SymptomsChange from Baseline in Mood Disorder Symptoms at 12-monthsMood disorder symptoms were measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire (9-question). The PHQ-9 has a scale range of 0-27 with lower values representing better outcomes.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Health-related Quality of Life - Mental Health Component ScoreChange from Baseline in Quality of Life at 24-monthsHealth-related Quality of Life - Mental Health Component Score of the short form (SF)-12 survey
Reduced Mood Disorder SymptomsChange from Baseline in Mood Disorder Symptoms at 24-months

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

A total of 383 participants were consented and enrolled to participate. Of those 383 participants, only 169 were randomized participants from a non-responsive site.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
REP + EF
Replication Effective Programs (REP) augmented with External Facilitation (EF) External Facilitation: Non-responding sites randomized to receive external facilitation
77
REP + EF/IF
Replicating Effective Programs (REP) augmented with External and Internal Facilitation (EF + IF) External + Internal Facilitation: Non-responding sites randomized to receive both internal and external facilitation
92
Total169

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicREP + EF/IFTotalREP + EF
Age, Continuous43.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.19
45.38 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.43
48.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.14
Mental Health Quality of Life36.66 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.1
38.08 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.07
39.75 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.92
Mood Disorder Symptoms (PHQ-9)12.61 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.94
12.08 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.73
11.45 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.46
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Not Available
19 Participants35 Participants16 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
73 Participants134 Participants61 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
92 participants169 participants77 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
71 Participants125 Participants54 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
21 Participants44 Participants23 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 770 / 92
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 770 / 92
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 770 / 92

Outcome results

Primary

Health-related Quality of Life - Mental Health Component Score

Mental Health Quality of Life was measured using the 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12). The SF-12 has a scale range of 0-100 with higher values representing better outcomes.

Time frame: Change from Baseline in Quality of Life at 12-months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
REP + EFHealth-related Quality of Life - Mental Health Component Score2.14 score on a scale
REP + EF/IFHealth-related Quality of Life - Mental Health Component Score-0.20 score on a scale
Primary

Reduced Mood Disorder Symptoms

Mood disorder symptoms were measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire (9-question). The PHQ-9 has a scale range of 0-27 with lower values representing better outcomes.

Time frame: Change from Baseline in Mood Disorder Symptoms at 12-months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
REP + EFReduced Mood Disorder Symptoms-1.57 score on a scale
REP + EF/IFReduced Mood Disorder Symptoms-1.02 score on a scale
Secondary

Health-related Quality of Life - Mental Health Component Score

Health-related Quality of Life - Mental Health Component Score of the short form (SF)-12 survey

Time frame: Change from Baseline in Quality of Life at 24-months

Population: No analysis was completed because the funder requested terminating the study due to low enrollment. No data was collected because the study was halted prematurely.

Secondary

Reduced Mood Disorder Symptoms

Time frame: Change from Baseline in Mood Disorder Symptoms at 24-months

Population: No analysis was completed because the funder requested terminating the study due to low enrollment. No data was collected because the study was halted prematurely.

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 19, 2026