Back

Implementing electronic patient-reported outcome measures in psychiatric urgent care

Bailey, A.; Berich-Anastasio, E.; Ready, A.; Maclay, A.; Payne, M.; Schloesser, R. J.

2025-05-06 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2025.05.02.25326812 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PRO) have been shown to improve screening and assessment across health care. However, overall implementation of PROs is low in mental health care. Research on PRO implementation in psychiatric urgent care settings is particularly limited. ObjectiveTo analyze barriers and facilitators to the implementation of electronic PROs (ePROs) in psychiatric urgent care clinics. MethodsThis study examined ePRO implementation at two Maryland clinics with an average 6,000 patients treated annually. These clinics offer "walk-in" services for patients seeking immediate assessment for mental health conditions and referral to appropriate follow-up care. We used the Learning Evaluation (LE) and RE-AIM frameworks to guide and evaluate the implementation of PROs into administrative and clinical workflows using an ePRO system. Stakeholder feedback informed rapid iteration cycles, driving the development and deployment of technical and procedural modifications. Quantitative data were organized using RE-AIM metrics and analyzed through descriptive statistics and regression analyses. Qualitative data, derived from stakeholder feedback, were analyzed using deductive coding, inductive coding, and sentiment analysis. Findings22,610 care episodes were analyzed for the study. Annual ePRO completion increased from 9% in 2021 to 44% in 2023, averaging 63% post-implementation. ePRO completion varied across clinics and was lower among males, Black patients, and those with neurocognitive or substance use disorders, but higher for anxiety, ADHD, and insomnia diagnoses. Adoption increased in 2023, with 17% of care episodes including ePRO data in provider notes, averaging 59% post-implementation. Six iterative modifications were implemented, assisting with ePRO completion and documentation to varying degrees. Qualitative analyses revealed administrative, clinical, and technological factors associated with ePRO implementation and completion rates, as well as an overall positive sentiment towards ePROs. ConclusionThe findings demonstrate the feasibility and sustainability of ePRO implementation in psychiatric urgent care settings. Clinical ImplicationsIterative strategies, informed by stakeholder feedback, assist with ePRO implementation in fast-paced clinical environments and can inform future quality improvement efforts for modernization of administrative workflows and clinical practice. What is already known on this topicO_LIWhile research supports patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as effective in mental health treatment when used, multiple barriers have limited their implementation in clinical practice. Currently there is limited knowledge of implementation in psychiatric urgent care settings. C_LI What this study addsO_LIUsing established implementation and evaluation frameworks, we were able to identify and overcome individual and organizational barriers of PRO implementation in psychiatric urgent care. C_LIO_LIWe found that continuous communication and feedback can help clinicians and staff with implementation. Iterative modification development based on feedback can improve patient reach and adoption of PROs in clinical practice. C_LI How this study might affect research, practice or policyO_LIOur findings contribute to gaps in the literature about PRO implementation in psychiatric urgent care and expands on technological and administrative processes that can resolve known barriers to implementation. The methodology used in this study can be modified to numerous real-world healthcare settings for evidence-based quality improvement interventions. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMC Psychiatry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.0%
2
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.3%
3
Psychiatry Research
35 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.1%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 25%
6.8%
5
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
6.3%
6
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
4.8%
7
Journal of Affective Disorders
81 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.3%
8
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 5%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
9
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
10
BJPsych Open
25 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.6%
11
European Psychiatry
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.7%
12
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.3%
13
BMJ Mental Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
14
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
15
Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
16
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
17
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.6%
18
Acta Neuropsychiatrica
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
19
Journal of Psychiatric Research
28 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
20
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.3%
21
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
22
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
23
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
24
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
25
Schizophrenia Research
29 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
26
Psychological Medicine
74 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
27
Schizophrenia Bulletin
29 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
28
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
30
The British Journal of Psychiatry
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%