State psychiatric hospitals across the United States continue to use methodologies that predate the emergence of the evidenced-based practices movement and widespread adoption of the recovery model. The cultural legacy of state psychiatric hospitals is often heavily influenced by the era of custodial treatment with an emphasis on medication and the primacy of the medical model of care. Using a recovery and wellness philosophy, combined with practices that are evidence based, represents a vision for the future of these institutions (Smith & Bartholomew, 2006). This article describes the implementation of the evidence-based practice of illness management and recovery (SAMHSA, 2008) in a state psychiatric hospital. The role of this evidence-based program, as a way of operationalizing a recovery and wellness philosophy, is discussed in addition to some of the successful implementation strategies and program barriers. Directions for future work in this area are also discussed.

Objective To examine provider competence in providing Illness Management and Recovery (IMR), an evidence-based self-management program for people with severe mental illness, and the association between implementation supports and IMR competence. Methods IMR session recordings, provided by 43 providers/provider pairs, were analyzed for IMR competence using the IMR treatment integrity scale. Providers also reported on receipt of commonly available implementation supports (e.g., training, consultation). Results Average IMR competence scores were in the “Needs Improvement” range. Clinicians demonstrated low competence in several IMR elements: significant other involvement, weekly action planning, action plan follow-up, cognitive-behavioral techniques, and behavioral tailoring for medication management. These elements were commonly absent from IMR sessions. Competence in motivational enhancement strategies and cognitive-behavioral techniques differed based on the module topic covered in a session. Generally, receipt of implementation supports was not associated with increased competence; however, motivational interviewing training was associated with increased competence in action planning and review. Conclusions and Implications for Practice IMR, as implemented in the community, may lack adequate competence and commonly available implementation supports do not appear to be adequate. Additional implementation supports that target clinician growth areas are needed.

The current study examined the association between number of hours attended of the Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) program and psychiatric readmission rates after discharge from a state psychiatric hospital. The study used archival data, N = 1186, from a large northeastern state psychiatric hospital in the United States. A Cox's regression survival analyses was conducted, adjusting for extreme outliers and controlling for sociodemographic covariates, to examine the association between different amounts of IMR and the risk for returning to the hospital. After controlling for the client characteristics of age, sex, marital status, psychiatric diagnosis, and Global Assessment of Functioning score at discharge, as well as controlling for mean daily dose of generic hospital programming and the number of days of hospitalization, it was found that, for each hour of IMR, there was an associated 1.1% reduction in the risk for returning to the hospital. This suggests that participation in IMR while in inpatient settings may assist individuals in reducing their risk for returning to the hospital.

Provider competence may affect the impact of a practice. The current study examined this relationship in sixty-three providers engaging in Illness Management and Recovery with 236 consumers. Improving upon previous research, the present study utilized a psychometrically validated competence measure in the ratings of multiple Illness Management and Recovery sessions from community providers, and mapped outcomes onto the theory underlying the practice. Provider competence was positively associated with illness self-management and adaptive coping. Results also indicated baseline self-management skills and working alliance may affect the relationship between competence and outcomes.

At a time of significant upheaval in American health policy, maintaining a focus on a "North Star" is critical. For implementation science, this star is the knowledge base on how to optimally disseminate evidence related to health and health care, how to implement interventions to improve care within the many settings where people receive health care and make health-related decisions, and how to improve the health of the global population. To that end, the end of 2016 brought over 1100 engaged and activated "disciples of D & I" to Washington, DC for the 9 th Annual Conference on the Science of Dissemination and Implementation in Health. Once again, the accompanying abstracts in this issue demonstrate the breadth, depth and vigor of this continually expanding and evolving subset of health research. During three dynamic plenaries with rows and rows of filled seats and packed concurrent sessions presenters and attendees shared findings, raised methodologic and other challenges, and discussed future priorities, trends, and next steps for this community of research. For the third year in a row, we were buoyed by a strong partnership, co-led by AcademyHealth and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), with co-sponsorship from others committed to implementation science: the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), and the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The multidisciplinary program planning committee informed the development of the key themes for the conference, identified the plenary sessions topics and speakers, established track leads to manage the review process for concurrent panels, papers, and posters, and convened a scientific advisory panel to advise on the overall conference, thus ensuring a robust, inclusive, and rigorous process. Together, the opening keynote address and the three plenary panel sessions set a tone of innovation and dialogue, raised critical issues, surfaced different perspectives, and ensured that follow on lunchtime and hallway discussions delved deeper into thorny challenges facing the field. Roy Rosin, Chief Innovation Officer for the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine, introduced the audience to a range of methods for rapid testing, innovation in healthcare delivery, and lessons learned from other industries to maximize potential of new practices to be scaled-up. Each of the three plenary panels presented a general discussion on a high priority challenge for dissemination and implementation (D & I) research. A panel on the balance between intervention and implementation fidelity and local adaptation touched on the very real dynamic that is playing out in communities across this country as policy and payment changes are driving providers and others to seek new ways to solve the challenges in their particular contexts. A panel on the longerterm decisions around sustainment or de-implementation of interventions could not be more timely given the "im...

Table of contentsA1 Introduction to the 8th Annual Conference on the Science of Dissemination and Implementation: Optimizing Personal and Population HealthDavid Chambers, Lisa SimpsonD1 Discussion forum: Population health D&I researchFelicia Hill-BriggsD2 Discussion forum: Global health D&I researchGila Neta, Cynthia VinsonD3 Discussion forum: Precision medicine and D&I researchDavid ChambersS1 Predictors of community therapists’ use of therapy techniques in a large public mental health systemRinad Beidas, Steven Marcus, Gregory Aarons, Kimberly Hoagwood, Sonja Schoenwald, Arthur Evans, Matthew Hurford, Ronnie Rubin, Trevor Hadley, Frances Barg, Lucia Walsh, Danielle Adams, David MandellS2 Implementing brief cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in primary care: Clinicians' experiences from the fieldLindsey Martin, Joseph Mignogna, Juliette Mott, Natalie Hundt, Michael Kauth, Mark Kunik, Aanand Naik, Jeffrey CullyS3 Clinician competence: Natural variation, factors affecting, and effect on patient outcomesAlan McGuire, Dominique White, Tom Bartholomew, John McGrew, Lauren Luther, Angie Rollins, Michelle SalyersS4 Exploring the multifaceted nature of sustainability in community-based prevention: A mixed-method approachBrittany Cooper, Angie FunaioleS5 Theory informed behavioral health integration in primary care: Mixed methods evaluation of the implementation of routine depression and alcohol screening and assessmentJulie Richards, Amy Lee, Gwen Lapham, Ryan Caldeiro, Paula Lozano, Tory Gildred, Carol Achtmeyer, Evette Ludman, Megan Addis, Larry Marx, Katharine BradleyS6 Enhancing the evidence for specialty mental health probation through a hybrid efficacy and implementation studyTonya VanDeinse, Amy Blank Wilson, Burgin Stacey, Byron Powell, Alicia Bunger, Gary CuddebackS7 Personalizing evidence-based child mental health care within a fiscally mandated policy reformMiya Barnett, Nicole Stadnick, Lauren Brookman-Frazee, Anna LauS8 Leveraging an existing resource for technical assistance: Community-based supervisors in public mental healthShannon Dorsey, Michael PullmannS9 SBIRT implementation for adolescents in urban federally qualified health centers: Implementation outcomesShannon Mitchell, Robert Schwartz, Arethusa Kirk, Kristi Dusek, Marla Oros, Colleen Hosler, Jan Gryczynski, Carolina Barbosa, Laura Dunlap, David Lounsbury, Kevin O'Grady, Barry BrownS10 PANEL: Tailoring Implementation Strategies to Context - Expert recommendations for tailoring strategies to contextLaura Damschroder, Thomas Waltz, Byron PowellS11 PANEL: Tailoring Implementation Strategies to Context - Extreme facilitation: Helping challenged healthcare settings implement complex programsMona RitchieS12 PANEL: Tailoring Implementation Strategies to Context - Using menu-based choice tasks to obtain expert recommendations for implementing three high-priority practices in the VAThomas WaltzS13 PANEL: The Use of Technology to Improve Efficient Monitoring of Implementation of Evidence-based Programs - Siri, rate my therapist: Using technology to automa...

No abstract

The culture of state psychiatric hospitals may make it difficult to implement recovery-oriented principles such as empowerment. The current study describes efforts of one hospital to empower consumers of psychiatric hospital services using focus groups, surveys, and a workgroup to address the issue of low program attendance. The study determined the importance of identifying consumer goals, informing consumers about options for therapeutic group programming, and matching consumer goals to treatment. Identifying these items led to development of a consumer catalog designed to allow consumers of psychiatric hospital services to choose programs that aligned with their goals while also meeting staff needs to address problem areas on a treatment plan. Limitations to the current approach and direction for future research are discussed. [Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 56(5), 40-45.].