Abstract
As the profession of marriage and family therapy (MFT), as well as the emerging sub-specialty of medical family therapy (MedFT),
continue to grow and evolve within the current healthcare system, the arena of integrated primary care (IPC) presents an ideal
environment for professionals who are relationally and systemically inclined. Although there has been a inundation of literature
detailing collaborative systems of healthcare, several gaps still exist: (a) a lack of horizontally integrated models (i.e.,
models that do not target specific diseases or demographic populations), (b) a lack of model utilization regardless of disease
trajectory (i.e., decline, stabilization, improvement), and (c) a lack of IPC models explicitly utilizing MedFT/MFTs as the
mental health providers within the system. In lieu of these gaps, the authors present a framework for IPC, utilizing MedFTs/MFTs,
that is neither population nor disease specific, as well as a model geared towards implementation regardless of disease trajectory.
The framework, which was obtained using ethnography of communication, details MedFTs’ interactions with front line medical
providers and patients from initial contact through coordination of a shared treatment plan. Recommendations for future research
studies incorporating the use of MedFTs in integrated primary care settings are extended in the context of a three world view
framework (Peek in Collaborative medicine case studies: Evidence in practice. Springer, New York, pp 25–38, 2008; Peek and Heinrich in Family Syst Med 13:327–342, 1995, Integrated primary care: the future of medical and mental health collaboration. Norton, New York, pp 167–202, 1998).
continue to grow and evolve within the current healthcare system, the arena of integrated primary care (IPC) presents an ideal
environment for professionals who are relationally and systemically inclined. Although there has been a inundation of literature
detailing collaborative systems of healthcare, several gaps still exist: (a) a lack of horizontally integrated models (i.e.,
models that do not target specific diseases or demographic populations), (b) a lack of model utilization regardless of disease
trajectory (i.e., decline, stabilization, improvement), and (c) a lack of IPC models explicitly utilizing MedFT/MFTs as the
mental health providers within the system. In lieu of these gaps, the authors present a framework for IPC, utilizing MedFTs/MFTs,
that is neither population nor disease specific, as well as a model geared towards implementation regardless of disease trajectory.
The framework, which was obtained using ethnography of communication, details MedFTs’ interactions with front line medical
providers and patients from initial contact through coordination of a shared treatment plan. Recommendations for future research
studies incorporating the use of MedFTs in integrated primary care settings are extended in the context of a three world view
framework (Peek in Collaborative medicine case studies: Evidence in practice. Springer, New York, pp 25–38, 2008; Peek and Heinrich in Family Syst Med 13:327–342, 1995, Integrated primary care: the future of medical and mental health collaboration. Norton, New York, pp 167–202, 1998).
- Content Type Journal Article
- Category Original Paper
- Pages 1-15
- DOI 10.1007/s10591-012-9195-5
- Authors
- Dan Marlowe, Family Medicine Residency Program, Duke/Southern Regional AHEC, 1601 Owen Dr., Fayetteville, NC 28304, USA
- Jennifer Hodgson, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA
- Angela Lamson, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA
- Mark White, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA
- Tom Irons, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA
- Journal Contemporary Family Therapy
- Online ISSN 1573-3335
- Print ISSN 0892-2764