Barry Saver and colleagues caution against the use of process and performance metrics as health care quality measures in the United States.

Although the benefits of integrating behavioral health (BH) services into primary care are well established (World Health Organization and World Organization of Family Doctors, 2012; Chiles et al. in Clin Psychol-Sci Pr 6:204-220, 1999; Cummings 1997; O'Donohue et al. 2003; Olfson et al. in Health Aff 18:79-93, 1999; Katon et al. in Ann Intern Med 124:917-925, 2001; Simon et al. in Arch Gen Psychiatry 52:850-856, 1995; Anderson et al. in Diabetes Care 24:1069-1078, 2001; Ciechanowski et al. in Arch Intern Med 160:3278-3285, 2000; Egede et al. in Diabetes Care 25:464-470, 2002), research has focused primarily on describing the types of interventions behavioral health providers (BHPs) employ rather than on reasons for referral, treatment initiation rates, or the patient characteristics that may impact them. This study presents the results of a multisite card study organized by The Collaborative Care Research Network, a subnetwork of the American Academy of Family Physicians' National Research Network devoted to conducting practice-based research focused on the provision of BH and health behavior services within primary care practices. The goals of the study included: (1) identifying the characteristics of patients referred for BH services; (2) codifying reasons for referral and whether patients were treated for the referral; (3) exploring any differences between patients who initiated BH contact and those who did not; and (4) assessing the types and frequency of BH services provided to patients who attended at least one appointment. Of the 200 patients referred to a BHP, 81 % had an initial contact, 71 % of which occurred on the same day. Men and women were equally likely to engage with a BHP although the time between appointments varied by gender. Depression and anxiety were the primary reasons for referral. Practice-based research is a viable strategy for advancing the knowledge about integrated primary care.

These data suggest that the PIP is useful, has face, content, and internal validity, and distinguishes among types of practices with known variations in integration. We discuss how the PIP may support practices and policymakers in their integration efforts and researchers assessing the degree to which integration affects patient health outcomes. (PsycINFO Database Record

Background: Our rural health system sought to (1) increase the number of primary care clinicians waivered to prescribe buprenorphine for treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) and (2) consequently increase the number of our patients receiving this treatment. Methods: We used the Project for Extension for Community Health Outcomes (ECHO) tele-education model as an implementation strategy. We examined the number of clinicians newly waivered, the number of patients treated with buprenorphine, the relationship between clinician engagement with ECHO training and rates of buprenorphine prescribing, and treatment retention at 180 days. Results: The number of clinicians with a waiver and number of patients treated increased during and after ECHO training. There was a moderate correlation between the number of ECHO sessions attended by a clinician and number of their buprenorphine prescriptions (r ¼ 0.50, p ¼ 0.01). The 180-day retention rate was 80.7%. Conclusions: Project ECHO was highly effective for increasing access to this evidence-based treatment. The high retention rate in this rural context indicates that most patients are increasing their likelihood of favorable outcomes.