Mental Illness, Physical Illness
Conditions
Keywords
Veterans, Veterans Health, Patient Compliance, Primary Health Care, Health Care Providers, Health Promotion
Brief summary
In August 2014, the White House issued an Executive Action mandating that 25 VA medical centers place Peer Specialists (Veterans recovered from mental illness who are trained to support other Veterans with mental illness) on Primary Care Teams. Research shows that the success of adding new staff to existing teams can be improved by outside aid and facilitation. This quality improvement project will evaluate whether providing expanded support to half of the Primary Care Teams will lead to better outcomes when compared with teams that do not get extra support.
Detailed description
Peer Specialists are individuals with mental illness currently deployed to serve Veterans in specialty mental health clinics based upon their lived experiences. Peer Specialist delivered interventions have been shown to improve patient activation in multiple studies. In August 2014, the White House issued an Executive Action mandating that 25 VA medical centers pilot the deployment of Peer Specialists in their Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACTs). This project expands upon this nationally mandated Peer Specialist pilot with the integration of a cluster randomized implementation trial. This quality improvement project will evaluate the impact of facilitated implementation vs. standard implementation to support on the deployment of Peer Specialists in PACTs. The 25 sites will be divided into three cohorts (n=8,8,9). Each cohort will begin over three successive six-month blocks beginning in early 2016. Within each cohort, sites will be randomized to receive either facilitated or standard implementation. Facilitated Implementation sites will receive one year of support based on the i-PARIHS implementation model which includes training, implementation planning, ongoing external facilitation, feedback and consultation. Standard Implementation sites will receive written guidance and limited consultation by the investigators' team. The investigators will compare the groups on 1) the percent of their target population that actually received PS services; 2) ratings on PS workload productivity including ; 3) Peer Implementation and Services scores; 4) assessment of Veteran's change over time on the outcome variables of satisfaction, activation, and functioning ; 5) qualitative analysis of how well PSs were deployed and their impact.
Interventions
Facilitated Implementation sites will receive one year of support based on the i-PARIHS implementation model which includes training, implementation planning, ongoing external facilitation, feedback and consultation
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* Included sites must be VA PACT Primary Care Health teams with existing Peer Specialists who are able to include an existing Peer Specialist on their team for a minimum of 10 hours per week for one year
Exclusion criteria
* Non VA PACT teams, VA sites without an existing Peer Specialists, and VA PACT primary care teams that cannot commit a Peer Specialist to Primary Care for a minimum of 10 hours per week are excluded
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Patient Activation Measure Change | Baseline, 6 months, 1 year | The Patient Activation Measure (PAM) is a 13-item survey that measures an individual's perceived ability to manage his or her illness and health behaviors and act as an effective patient. It has been shown to be reliable, valid, sensitive to change and correlates with measures of improved self-management. Scores for this outcome range from Zero to One Hundred with higher scores indicating higher levels of patient activation (better outcome). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Peer Fidelity Measure | 6 months, 1 year | The Peer Fidelity Measure assesses: a) peer specialist services and b) peer specialist implementation. The first part has 5 domains of peer services critical to the VA's peer support model (e.g., being a role model that recovery is possible; share personal recovery story). The second has 7 domains of implementation factors shown to either help or hinder PS deployment (e.g., role clarity, support for PS at higher organizational levels, regular supervision). Each domain has 1-2 questions (responses ranging from 1= not at all through 5=Very much with higher scores indicating higher fidelity. Min Value=1 and Max value =5. The Peer Fidelity Measure will be administered to both Peer Specialists and their supervisors. Analyses looked at discrepancies (difference in difference) between Peer Specialists and their Supervisors at each time point. Min discrepancy score is -4 and Max discrepancy score is 4. (calculated as Peer Specialist minus Peer Supervisor score) |
| The Satisfaction Index-Mental Health | Baseline, 6 months, 1 year | The Satisfaction Index-Mental Health is a 12-item, unidimensional measure of patient satisfaction with care. It has been used with Veteran populations and has been shown to be valid, reliable, and sensitive to change in a sample of Veterans with mental illnesses being treated in primary care settings. It will be administered to Veterans who receive care from the Peer Specialists involved in the project. Minimum score is 12 and the maximum score is 72; higher scores mean more satisfaction. |
| Average Number of Visits Per Veteran Per Peer Specialist-Adjusted (First Year Only) | 1st year only | See Variable 5 above for details about adjustment. Since this variable this is a Veteran level variable, a General Linear Mixed Model (GSLMM) was used with PS specified as a random effect and Veteran age, race and gender. N's are number of Veterans |
| Team Development Measure | Baseline, 6 months, 1 year | The Team Development Measure is a 31 item self-report survey that evaluates the degree to which a team has and uses the components needed for highly effective teamwork including cohesiveness, communication, role clarity, and goals and means clarity. All components min scores are zero % and maximum is 100%; higher percentages mean positive responses. |
| Average Number of Visits Per Veteran Per Peer Specialist-Adjusted (Across Both Years) | across both years | See Variable 5 above for details about adjustment. Since this variable this is a Veteran level variable, a General Linear Mixed Model (GSLMM) was used with PS specified as a random effect and Veteran age, race and gender. N's are number of Veterans |
| Average Total Number of Services Provided-Adjusted (First Year Only and Across Both Years) | one year and across both years | This adjusted workload variables took into consideration both the employment period (many PSs did not start immediately or may have left prior to the end of the 2 years) and weekly hours worked (varying from one hour to 40 hours per week). Visits during each PS's employment period were divided by the total number of hours worked, then multiplied by 40 to calculate adjusted values for operationalization above. Because this variable was significantly skewed, we used a log transformation to improve their distributional properties. Differences between intervention conditions were then compared with a series of Analyses of Covariance models with age, gender and race as covariates. Since these variables are measured at the PS level, the covariates were the average across the Veterans sesn by each PS (mean age, percent White and percent male). N's are number of Veterans |
| Time to First Service | variable from baseline to time of first service delivered by Peer Specialists | This variable represents count of days from time study at each site started (baseline) until first service was delivered. |
| Number of Unique Veterans Seen (Adjusted for Employment Period and Hours Worked Per Week) | one year, across two years | This adjusted workload variables took into consideration both the employment period (many PSs did not start immediately or may have left prior to the end of the 2 years) and weekly hours worked (varying from one hour to 40 hours per week). Visits during each PS's employment period were divided by the total number of hours worked, then multiplied by 40 to calculate adjusted values for operationalization above. Because this variable was significantly skewed, we used a log transformation to improve their distributional properties. Differences between intervention conditions were then compared with a series of Analyses of Covariance models with age, gender and race as covariates. Since these variables are measured at the PS level, the covariates were the average across the Veterans sesn by each PS (mean age, percent White and percent male). N's are number of Veterans |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Recruitment details
numbers of participants is presented at three time points: 1. Baseline 2. 6-months, and 3. 1-year
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Standard Implementation Standard Implementation sites will receive written guidance and limited consultation by the investigators' team. | 194 |
| Facilitated Implementation Facilitated Implementation sites will receive one year of support based on the i-PARIHS implementation model which includes training, implementation planning, ongoing external facilitation, feedback and consultation.
Facilitated Implementation: Facilitated Implementation sites will receive one year of support based on the i-PARIHS implementation model which includes training, implementation planning, ongoing external facilitation, feedback and consultation | 221 |
| Total | 415 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Facilitated Implementation | Total | Standard Implementation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 61.2 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.8 | 61.2 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.5 | 61.1 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.7 |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 64 Participants | 101 Participants | 37 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 11 Participants | 17 Participants | 6 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 121 Participants | 230 Participants | 109 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 17 Participants | 45 Participants | 28 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 186 Participants | 318 Participants | 132 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 |
Outcome results
Patient Activation Measure Change
The Patient Activation Measure (PAM) is a 13-item survey that measures an individual's perceived ability to manage his or her illness and health behaviors and act as an effective patient. It has been shown to be reliable, valid, sensitive to change and correlates with measures of improved self-management. Scores for this outcome range from Zero to One Hundred with higher scores indicating higher levels of patient activation (better outcome).
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 1 year
Population: Comparison across two conditions on PAM Total Score - PAM Total Score (0-100)
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Implementation | Patient Activation Measure Change | Baseline-PAM Total | 41.0 Score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.9 |
| Standard Implementation | Patient Activation Measure Change | 6-Month-PAM Total | 39.9 Score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.6 |
| Standard Implementation | Patient Activation Measure Change | 1-year-PAM Total | 39.8 Score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.2 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Patient Activation Measure Change | Baseline-PAM Total | 41.6 Score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.2 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Patient Activation Measure Change | 6-Month-PAM Total | 40.6 Score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.7 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Patient Activation Measure Change | 1-year-PAM Total | 40.8 Score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.5 |
Average Number of Visits Per Veteran Per Peer Specialist-Adjusted (Across Both Years)
See Variable 5 above for details about adjustment. Since this variable this is a Veteran level variable, a General Linear Mixed Model (GSLMM) was used with PS specified as a random effect and Veteran age, race and gender. N's are number of Veterans
Time frame: across both years
Population: Number of Visits per Veteran
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Implementation | Average Number of Visits Per Veteran Per Peer Specialist-Adjusted (Across Both Years) | 2.2 Count of Visits | Standard Deviation 3 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Average Number of Visits Per Veteran Per Peer Specialist-Adjusted (Across Both Years) | 3.2 Count of Visits | Standard Deviation 5.6 |
Average Number of Visits Per Veteran Per Peer Specialist-Adjusted (First Year Only)
See Variable 5 above for details about adjustment. Since this variable this is a Veteran level variable, a General Linear Mixed Model (GSLMM) was used with PS specified as a random effect and Veteran age, race and gender. N's are number of Veterans
Time frame: 1st year only
Population: number of visits per Veteran
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Implementation | Average Number of Visits Per Veteran Per Peer Specialist-Adjusted (First Year Only) | 2.0 Count of Visits | Standard Deviation 2.1 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Average Number of Visits Per Veteran Per Peer Specialist-Adjusted (First Year Only) | 2.6 Count of Visits | Standard Deviation 3.6 |
Average Total Number of Services Provided-Adjusted (First Year Only and Across Both Years)
This adjusted workload variables took into consideration both the employment period (many PSs did not start immediately or may have left prior to the end of the 2 years) and weekly hours worked (varying from one hour to 40 hours per week). Visits during each PS's employment period were divided by the total number of hours worked, then multiplied by 40 to calculate adjusted values for operationalization above. Because this variable was significantly skewed, we used a log transformation to improve their distributional properties. Differences between intervention conditions were then compared with a series of Analyses of Covariance models with age, gender and race as covariates. Since these variables are measured at the PS level, the covariates were the average across the Veterans sesn by each PS (mean age, percent White and percent male). N's are number of Veterans
Time frame: one year and across both years
Population: Services Provided by each Peer Specialist
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Implementation | Average Total Number of Services Provided-Adjusted (First Year Only and Across Both Years) | 1st Year Only | 2.7 Count of services | Standard Deviation 2.7 |
| Standard Implementation | Average Total Number of Services Provided-Adjusted (First Year Only and Across Both Years) | Across Both Years | 9.8 Count of services | Standard Deviation 8.7 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Average Total Number of Services Provided-Adjusted (First Year Only and Across Both Years) | 1st Year Only | 8.4 Count of services | Standard Deviation 8.7 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Average Total Number of Services Provided-Adjusted (First Year Only and Across Both Years) | Across Both Years | 12.4 Count of services | Standard Deviation 8.7 |
Number of Unique Veterans Seen (Adjusted for Employment Period and Hours Worked Per Week)
This adjusted workload variables took into consideration both the employment period (many PSs did not start immediately or may have left prior to the end of the 2 years) and weekly hours worked (varying from one hour to 40 hours per week). Visits during each PS's employment period were divided by the total number of hours worked, then multiplied by 40 to calculate adjusted values for operationalization above. Because this variable was significantly skewed, we used a log transformation to improve their distributional properties. Differences between intervention conditions were then compared with a series of Analyses of Covariance models with age, gender and race as covariates. Since these variables are measured at the PS level, the covariates were the average across the Veterans sesn by each PS (mean age, percent White and percent male). N's are number of Veterans
Time frame: one year, across two years
Population: Unique Veteran encounters
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Implementation | Number of Unique Veterans Seen (Adjusted for Employment Period and Hours Worked Per Week) | 1st year | 1.3 count of Veterans | Standard Deviation 1.3 |
| Standard Implementation | Number of Unique Veterans Seen (Adjusted for Employment Period and Hours Worked Per Week) | across both years | 5.8 count of Veterans | Standard Deviation 8.5 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Number of Unique Veterans Seen (Adjusted for Employment Period and Hours Worked Per Week) | 1st year | 4.8 count of Veterans | Standard Deviation 6.1 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Number of Unique Veterans Seen (Adjusted for Employment Period and Hours Worked Per Week) | across both years | 6.0 count of Veterans | Standard Deviation 5.8 |
Peer Fidelity Measure
The Peer Fidelity Measure assesses: a) peer specialist services and b) peer specialist implementation. The first part has 5 domains of peer services critical to the VA's peer support model (e.g., being a role model that recovery is possible; share personal recovery story). The second has 7 domains of implementation factors shown to either help or hinder PS deployment (e.g., role clarity, support for PS at higher organizational levels, regular supervision). Each domain has 1-2 questions (responses ranging from 1= not at all through 5=Very much with higher scores indicating higher fidelity. Min Value=1 and Max value =5. The Peer Fidelity Measure will be administered to both Peer Specialists and their supervisors. Analyses looked at discrepancies (difference in difference) between Peer Specialists and their Supervisors at each time point. Min discrepancy score is -4 and Max discrepancy score is 4. (calculated as Peer Specialist minus Peer Supervisor score)
Time frame: 6 months, 1 year
Population: 6 months and 1 year
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Teams Integration and Relationships 6-mo | -0.4 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.3 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Collaborate-Promoting Health 6-mo | 0.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.7 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Peer Specialist as Liaison 6-mo | -0.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.2 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Provides Info on Services 6 mo | -0.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Symptoms and Medications 6-mo | 0.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.2 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Training and Preparation 6-mo | 0.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Core Peer Specialist 6-moFunctions | 0.3 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.3 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Leadership Support 6-mo | 0.01 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.2 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Fits to Experience and Needs 6-mo | -0.4 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.6 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Role Clarity 6-mo | -0.3 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.2 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Resources 6-mo | -0.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.2 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Performance Reviews 6-mo | -0.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.2 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Core PS functions 1-yr | 0.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.5 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Collaborate on Promoting Health 1 year | 0.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.1 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Peer Specialist as Liaison 1 year | 0.8 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | provides info on services 1 year | 0.0 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Symptoms and Medication 1 year | 0.8 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.5 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Training and Preparation 1 year | 0.5 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.2 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Team Integration and relationships 1 year | 1.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.4 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Leadership Support 1 year | 2.5 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.7 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Fit to experience and need 1 year | 0.0 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.8 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Role Clarity 1 year | 1.3 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Resources | -0.5 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.4 |
| Standard Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Performance Review 1 year | 0.8 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.4 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Resources | -0.3 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.5 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Core Peer Specialist 6-moFunctions | 0.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Core PS functions 1-yr | -0.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.41 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Collaborate-Promoting Health 6-mo | 0.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.2 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Team Integration and relationships 1 year | -0.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.5 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Peer Specialist as Liaison 6-mo | 1.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.4 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Collaborate on Promoting Health 1 year | -0.01 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Provides Info on Services 6 mo | 0.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.8 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Role Clarity 1 year | -0.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.9 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Symptoms and Medications 6-mo | 1.0 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Peer Specialist as Liaison 1 year | -0.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Training and Preparation 6-mo | 0.4 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.6 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Leadership Support 1 year | 0.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Teams Integration and Relationships 6-mo | 0.5 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.5 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | provides info on services 1 year | -0.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.5 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Leadership Support 6-mo | -0.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.8 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Performance Review 1 year | -0.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.2 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Fits to Experience and Needs 6-mo | -0.4 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.1 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Symptoms and Medication 1 year | -0.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.1 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Role Clarity 6-mo | 0.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.3 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Fit to experience and need 1 year | -0.3 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.8 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Resources 6-mo | 0.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.6 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Training and Preparation 1 year | -0.4 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.1 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Peer Fidelity Measure | Performance Reviews 6-mo | -0.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.3 |
Team Development Measure
The Team Development Measure is a 31 item self-report survey that evaluates the degree to which a team has and uses the components needed for highly effective teamwork including cohesiveness, communication, role clarity, and goals and means clarity. All components min scores are zero % and maximum is 100%; higher percentages mean positive responses.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 1 year
Population: number of site based leadership and supervisors who responded
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | cohesiveness-Baseline | 91.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 15.5 |
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | Communication Baseline | 85.0 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 22.4 |
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | Role Clarity Baseline | 76.0 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 28.6 |
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | Goals Baseline | 67.9 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 38.9 |
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | Cohesiveness 6 month | 89.6 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 21.8 |
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | Communication 6 month | 84.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 26.9 |
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | Role Clarity 6 months | 77.0 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 31.8 |
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | Goals 6 months | 74.8 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 28.6 |
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | Cohesiveness 1 year | 85.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 35 |
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | Communication 1 year | 80.0 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 32.1 |
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | Role Clarity 1 year | 70.8 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 40.6 |
| Standard Implementation | Team Development Measure | Goals 1 year | 77.5 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 24.9 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | Role Clarity 1 year | 82.3 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 21.5 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | cohesiveness-Baseline | 96.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.3 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | Role Clarity 6 months | 83.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 22.3 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | Communication Baseline | 93.0 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 19.5 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | Communication 1 year | 83.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 22.9 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | Role Clarity Baseline | 84.4 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 16.3 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | Goals 6 months | 77.0 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 19.8 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | Goals Baseline | 82.0 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 29.9 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | Goals 1 year | 87.5 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 17.7 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | Cohesiveness 6 month | 89.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 23.5 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | Cohesiveness 1 year | 94.3 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 13.2 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Team Development Measure | Communication 6 month | 86.0 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 26.9 |
The Satisfaction Index-Mental Health
The Satisfaction Index-Mental Health is a 12-item, unidimensional measure of patient satisfaction with care. It has been used with Veteran populations and has been shown to be valid, reliable, and sensitive to change in a sample of Veterans with mental illnesses being treated in primary care settings. It will be administered to Veterans who receive care from the Peer Specialists involved in the project. Minimum score is 12 and the maximum score is 72; higher scores mean more satisfaction.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 1 year
Population: Veterans responding to survey
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Implementation | The Satisfaction Index-Mental Health | Baseline | 47.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 12.1 |
| Standard Implementation | The Satisfaction Index-Mental Health | 6-months | 49.7 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 12.7 |
| Standard Implementation | The Satisfaction Index-Mental Health | 1-year | 50.6 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 13 |
| Facilitated Implementation | The Satisfaction Index-Mental Health | Baseline | 51.3 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.5 |
| Facilitated Implementation | The Satisfaction Index-Mental Health | 6-months | 52.3 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 12.6 |
| Facilitated Implementation | The Satisfaction Index-Mental Health | 1-year | 51.2 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 13.6 |
Time to First Service
This variable represents count of days from time study at each site started (baseline) until first service was delivered.
Time frame: variable from baseline to time of first service delivered by Peer Specialists
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Implementation | Time to First Service | 188.2 Number of Days | Standard Deviation 123.4 |
| Facilitated Implementation | Time to First Service | 88.7 Number of Days | Standard Deviation 65 |