Browsing by Author "Sharp, Hunter D."

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on outpatient psychiatric population well-being and symptomology utilizing COVID-19 Events Checklist (CEC) and Measurement Based Care
    Jones, Sydney B.; Ko, Hayoung; Gatto, Alyssa J.; Kablinger, Anita S.; Sharp, Hunter D.; Cooper, Lee D.; Tenzer, Martha M.; O’Brien, Virginia C.; McNamara, Robert S. (2024-11-21)
    Background: This study examines the impact of SARS-CoV-2 (i.e., coronavirus, COVID, COVID-19) using data from a measurement-based care (MBC) system utilized in an outpatient psychiatric clinic providing telemedicine care. A novel Patient Rated Outcome Measure (PROM), the COVID-19 Events Checklist (CEC) was administered in a hospital system based ambulatory clinic beginning April 2020 to track COVID-19-19’s impact on patients’ mental, emotional, and health-related behaviors during the pandemic. The study (1) provides descriptive CEC data, and (2) compares CEC results with PROMs evaluating anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7; GAD-7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire; PHQ-9), and psychological distress (Brief Adjustment Scale-6; BASE-6). Methods: This retrospective observational study included patient intake data collected from April 2020 to March 2021. Patient (N = 842) reports on the CEC’s five domain questions were aggregated to calculate average reports of COVID-19 related impacts at intake over the initial 12 months of the pandemic. Trends in COVID-19 related impacts were examined, and non-aggregated scores on the PHQ-9, GAD-7, and BASE-6 were compared to primary dichotomous (yes/no) CEC survey questions via Wilcoxon rank- sum testing. Results: Results capture the relationship between COVID-19 exposure, COVID-19- related sequelae and behaviors, and psychological symptom severity. Specifically, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests indicate that social determinants of health (SDOH), negative mental health impacts, and positive coping skill use were significantly associated with psychological symptomatology including overall psychological functioning via the BASE-6, anxiety via the GAD-7, and depressive symptoms via the PHQ-9. Results regarding SDOH were as follows: BASE-6 (w = 44,005, p < 0.001), GAD-7 (w = 44,116, p < 0.001), and PHQ-9 (w = 43,299, p < 0.001). Regarding negative mental health outcomes, the results were: BASE-6 (w = 38,374, p < 0.001), GAD-7 (w = 39,511, p < 0.001), and PHQ-9 (w = 40,154, p < 0.001). As the initial year of the pandemic elapsed, incoming patients demonstrated increased rates of suspected or confirmed exposure to COVID-19, (+2.29%, t = 3.19, p = 0.01), reported fewer negative impacts of COVID-19 on SDOH (−3.53%, t= −2.45, p = 0.034), and less engagement in positive coping strategies (−1.47%, t = −3.14, p = 0.010). Conclusions: Psychosocial factors related to COVID-19 are discussed, as well as opportunities for further research on the relationship between psychological symptomatology and the impact of COVID-19 on health-related behaviors.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Effects of COVID-19 on Patients in Adult Ambulatory Psychiatry: Using Patient-Rated Outcome Measures and Telemedicine
    Kablinger, Anita S.; Gatto, Alyssa J.; O'Brien, Virginia C.; Ko, Hayoung; Jones, Sydney; McNamara, Robert S.; Sharp, Hunter D.; Tenzer, Martha M.; Cooper, Lee D. (Mary Ann Liebert, 2022-02-14)
    Introduction: To examine the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on patients in an academic psychiatric ambulatory clinic, data from a measurement-based care (MBC) system were analyzed to evaluate impacts on psychiatric functioning in patients using telemedicine. Psychiatric functioning was evaluated for psychological distress (brief adjustment scale [BASE]-6), depression (patient health questionnaire [PHQ]-9), and anxiety (generalized anxiety disorder [GAD]-7), including initial alcohol (U.S. alcohol use disorders identification test) and substance use (drug abuse screening test-10) screening. Methods: This observational study included MBC data collected from November 2019 to March 2021. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) were examined to determine changes in symptomatology over the course of treatment, as well as symptom changes resulting from the pandemic. Patients were included in analyses if they completed at least one PROM in the MBC system. Results: A total of 2,145 patients actively participated in the MBC system completing at least one PROM, with engagement ranging from 35.07% to 83.50% depending on demographic factors, where completion rates were significantly different for age, payor status, and diagnostic group. Average baseline scores for new patients varied for the GAD-7, PHQ-9, and BASE-6. Within-person improvements in mental health before and after the pandemic were statistically significant for anxiety, depression, and psychological adjustment. Discussion: MBC is a helpful tool in determining treatment progress for patients engaging in telemedicine. This study showed that patients who engaged in psychiatric services incorporating PROMs had improvements in mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additional research is needed exploring whether PROMs might serve as a protective or facilitative factor for those with mental illness during a crisis when in-person visits are not possible.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Improving measurement-based care implementation in adult ambulatory psychiatry: a virtual focus group interview with multidisciplinary healthcare professionals
    Ko, Hayoung; Gatto, Alyssa J.; Jones, Sydney B.; O’Brien, Virginia C.; McNamara, Robert S.; Tenzer, Martha M.; Sharp, Hunter D.; Kablinger, Anita S.; Cooper, Lee D. (2023-04-26)
    Background Measurement-Based Care (MBC) is an evidence-based practice shown to enhance patient care. Despite being efficacious, MBC is not commonly used in practice. While barriers and facilitators of MBC implementation have been described in the literature, the type of clinicians and populations studied vary widely, even within the same practice setting. The current study aims to improve MBC implementation in adult ambulatory psychiatry by conducting focus group interviews while utilizing a novel virtual brainwriting premortem method. Methods Semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted with clinicians (n = 18) and staff (n = 7) to identify their current attitudes, facilitators, and barriers of MBC implementation in their healthcare setting. Virtual video-conferencing software was used to conduct focus groups, and based on transcribed verbatin, emergent barriers/facilitators and four themes were identified. Mixed methods approach was utilized for this study. Specifically, qualitative data was aggregated and re-coded separately by three doctoral-level coders. Quantitative analyses were conducted from a follow-up questionnaire surveying clinician attitudes and satisfaction with MBC. Results The clinician and staff focus groups resulted in 291 and 91 unique codes, respectively. While clinicians identified a similar number of barriers (40.9%) and facilitators (44.3%), staff identified more barriers (67%) than facilitators (24.7%) for MBC. Four themes emerged from the analysis; (1) a description of current status/neutral opinion on MBC; (2) positive themes that include benefits of MBC, facilitators, enablers, or reasons on why they conduct MBC in their practice, (3) negative themes that include barriers or issues that hinder them from incorporating MBC into their practice, and (4) requests and suggestions for future MBC implementation. Both participant groups raised more negative themes highlighting critical challenges to MBC implementation than positive themes. The follow-up questionnaire regarding MBC attitudes showed the areas that clinicians emphasized the most and the least in their clinical practice. Conclusion The virtual brainwriting premortem focus groups provided critical information on the shortcomings and strengths of MBC in adult ambulatory psychiatry. Our findings underscore implementation challenges in healthcare settings and provide insight for both research and clinical practice in mental health fields. The barriers and facilitators identified in this study can inform future training to increase sustainability and better integrate MBC with positive downstream outcomes in patient care.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess the Effectiveness of Hybrid Psychiatric Visits
    O'Brien, Virginia C.; Kablinger, Anita S.; Ko, Hayoung; Jones, Sydney B.; McNamara, Robert S.; Phenes, Ashlie R.; Hankey, Maria Stack; Gatto, Alyssa J.; Tenzer, Martha M.; Sharp, Hunter D.; Cooper, Lee D. (American Psychiatric Association, 2024-06-12)
    Objective: Little empirical evidence exists to support the effectiveness of hybrid psychiatric care, defined as care delivered through a combination of telephone, videoconferencing, and in-person visits. The authors aimed to investigate the effectiveness of hybrid psychiatric care compared with outpatient waitlist groups, assessed with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Method: Participants were recruited from an adult psychiatry clinic waitlist on which the most common primary diagnoses were unipolar depression, generalized anxiety disorder, and bipolar disorder. Patients (N=148) were randomly assigned to one of two waitlist groups that completed PROMs once or monthly before treatment initiation. PROMs were used to assess symptoms of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9]), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 [GAD-7]), and daily psychological functioning (Brief Adjustment Scale-6 [BASE-6]). Patient measures were summarized descriptively with means, medians, and SDs and then compared by using the Kruskal-Wallis test; associated effect sizes were calculated. PROM scores for patients who received hybrid psychiatric treatment during a different period (N=272) were compared with scores of the waitlist groups. Results: PROM assessments of patients who engaged in hybrid care indicated significant improvements in symptom severity compared with the waitlist groups, regardless of the number of PROMs completed while patients were on the waitlist. Between the hybrid care and waitlist groups, the effect size for the PHQ-9 score was moderate (d=0.66); effect sizes were small for the GAD-7 (d=0.46) and BASE-6 (d=0.45) scores. Conclusions: The findings indicate the clinical effectiveness of hybrid care and that PROMs can be used to assess this effectiveness.