K3 – The Great Debate 5.0: Integrated Care’s Questions and Controversies

Summary

Some of America’s most important debates were contested in Philadelphia. In that tradition, we present 3 debates at the heart of integrated care. We will strive for robust empiricism, but might settle for strong rhetoric where we lack solid data. Regardless, you will leave informed of the latest science and most relevant policy advances. As participants in an emergent and largely untested healthcare model, our leaders and practitioners face daily quandaries for which we lack data for making an informed decision. By convening the leading researchers and thought leaders of our field, we aim to shed light on some of the most important dilemmas. These will be actual debates using recent research and important policy advances for supporting arguments. They will be adjudicated by the audience and the debater who made the most compelling case will be awarded a signed copy of his or her opponent’s most important literary work. DEBATE 1: IS TRAUMA-INFORMED CARE AN EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE? In the years since the publication of the ACEs research, trauma-informed care has brought major re-consideration to our clinical environments and services. While the client-centeredness of these changes is not in dispute, can it be said that the scientific literature endorses these approaches as evidence-based practices? Cara Pozun will debate the affirmative, Stacy Ogbeide the negative. DEBATE 2: ARE THE PHQ AND GAD OVER-UTILIZED? No quality metric has been more widely adopted than universal screening for depression, with screening for anxiety often done concurrently. We rely on the 2/9 AND 2/7 to identify need and assess outcomes. And yet, the United States Preventive Services Task-Force is mixed in support of their utilization. Additionally, as they are so embedded into EMRs, they crowd out other tools that might be more useful. Deepu George will debate their prominence is merited and CR Macchi will counter that they are over-utilized. DEBATE 3: DOES THE EMR INHIBIT OR FACILITATE COLLABORATION? Few innovations have changed healthcare more than the EMR. This revolution has brought many advantages (easy access to records, metrics and data, asynchronous communication), they have also disrupted much of what clinicians value most in their careers (human interaction, efficiency, unimpeded time away from work). What has been the overall impact of the EMR on interprofessional collaboration? Paul Simmons will highlight the benefits of the EMR and Barry Jacobs will convince us of the challenges. Each debate will last approximately 15 minutes, with 4 minutes for each of the opening statements, 2 minutes for each rebuttal, and 1 minute for closing statements TIMELINE: :00 – :05 Welcome and introduction of format :05 – :20 Debate 1 :20 – :35 Debate 2 :35 – :50 Debate 3 :50 – :60 Group discussion of the current status of the integrated care evidence-base and presentation of awards.