Abstract

Objective This article presents the Intervisions cliniques program, a continuing Medical Education (CME) initiative for psychiatrists and general practitioners which uses case discussion to foster the acquisition of mental health care knowledge. Method This project is a case study, using qualitative methods. An operational model of Intervisions Cliniques was drawn for analysis. Data mainly come from the program-related literature, direct observation and interviews with 9 key actors, assembled in 2 groups of promoters and participants of the program. Findings The findings help to define the context and vision in which the Intervisions cliniques program was set up and implemented, to identify the perceived benefits and disappointments with regard to the program. Set up in the Canadian public managed care system and university-affiliated hospital, the Intervisions cliniques program helps to create lines of communication and privileged exchanges between general practitioners and psychiatrists as well as to foster mutual knowledge and a crosscutting and interactive view within a shared clinical territory. Several benefits noted by the participants and the organizing committee demonstrate the importance and multimodal effects of this type of initiative. The case-discussion format used as a CME method meets the training needs of general practitioners and is widely appreciated. However, the pressing needs expressed by the general practitioners with regard to improving shared mental health care still pose many challenges. Conclusions Making the link with the duties of responding psychiatrists, who are now funded in Québec, seems to be part of the solution. Maintaining and disseminating the Intervisions Cliniques program will require provincial-wide system implementation strategies to train psychiatrist, support them and regional managers to monitor the quality of this innovative practice within a public managed care system. Clinical implications • In the context of Continuing Medical Education (CME), case discussions are valued because they help to address the full complexity of clinical situations. • In the development of shared mental health care, direct contacts between general practitioners and psychiatrists are an optimal way to foster mutual knowledge and a crosscutting and interactive view within a shared clinical territory. • The Intervisions cliniques program contributes to shared mental health care and is a CME strategy that should be reproduced. Limitations • The operational model presented cannot identify all the links which unite the structures, processes and effects of the Intervisions cliniques program. • Interviews with local and regional managers would have helped to better determine all the issues involved in maintaining and generalizing the Intervisions cliniques program. • Clinical examples illustrating experiences of shared mental health care following participation in the Intervisions cliniques program would have helped to better determine what contribution the Intervisions cliniques program has made to shared mental health care.

Authors and Affiliations