BCTI was associated with decreased early readmission rates, suggesting that this model may be an effective approach to improve continuity of care for this population.

This study examines a recovery-focused care management bridging strategy implemented during time of inpatient stay with the goal to increase engagement in aftercare and reduce early psychiatric readmissions. The sample included 195 individuals who received care from a large psychiatric specialty hospital. Eighty-seven individuals were assigned to receive the intervention, while 108 individuals were assigned to the control group. Individuals in the intervention group received a brief interview prior to inpatient discharge plus usual care, and individuals in the control group received usual care. After controlling for age, living situation, and utilization, individuals in the control group were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days of an index readmission than individuals in the intervention group (OR = 2.44, p = .02). Bridging strategies utilized prior to discharge for individuals at higher risk of early mental health inpatient readmission may be used as an effective alternative to more costly interventions.

While the majority of youth appear to be receiving minimally adequate acute care for depression, a substantial number are not. Given current child mental health workforce constraints, efforts to substantially improve the provision of adequate care to depressed youth are likely to require both quality improvement and system redesign efforts.

Background Although numbers of physicians credentialed to prescribe buprenorphine has increased over time, many credentialed physicians may be reluctant to treat individuals with opioid use disorders due to discomfort with prescribing buprenorphine. Though prescribing physicians are required to complete a training course, many have questions about buprenorphine and treatment guidelines have not been updated to reflect clinical experience in recent years. We report on an expert panel process to update and expand buprenorphine guidelines. Methods We identified candidate guidelines through expert opinion and a review of the literature and used a modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to assess the validity of the candidate guidelines. An expert panel completed two rounds of rating, with a meeting to discuss the guidelines between the first and second rating. Results Through the rating process, expert panel members rated 90 candidate guideline statements across eight domains, including candidacy for buprenorphine treatment, dosing of buprenorphine, psychosocial counseling, and treatment of co-occurring depression and anxiety. A total of 65 guideline statements (72%) were rated as valid. Expert panel members had agreement in some areas, such as the treatment of co-occurring mental health problems, but disagreement in others, including the appropriate dosing of buprenorphine given patient complexities. Conclusions Through an expert panel process, we developed an updated and expanded set of buprenorphine treatment guidelines; this additional guidance may increase credentialed physicians’ comfort with prescribing buprenorphine to patients with opioid use disorders. Future efforts should focus on appropriate dosing guidance and ensuring that guidelines can be adapted to a variety of practice settings.