Publications
Department of Medicine faculty members published more than 3,600 peer-reviewed articles in 2024.
2017
2017
2017
BACKGROUND
Patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) have high rates of depression, yet face challenges accessing effective care in outpatient settings. We undertook a systematic review to investigate the effectiveness of the collaborative care model for depression for LEP patients in primary care.
METHODS
We queried online PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EMBASE databases (January 1, 2000, to June 10, 2017) for quantitative studies comparing collaborative care to usual care to treat depression in adults with LEP in primary care. We evaluated the impact of collaborative care on depressive symptoms or on depression treatment. Two reviewers independently extracted key data from the studies and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane bias and quality assessment tool (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (non-RCTs).
RESULTS
Of 86 titles identified, 15 were included (representing 9 studies: 5 RCTs, 3 cohort studies, and 1 case-control study). Studies included 4859 participants; 2679 (55%) reported LEP. The majority spoke Spanish (93%). The wide variability in study design and outcome definitions precluded performing a meta-analysis. Follow-up ranged from 3 months to 2 years. Three of four high-quality RCTs reported that 13-25% more patients had improved depressive symptoms when treated with culturally tailored collaborative care compared to usual care; the last had high treatment in the control arm and found equal improvement. Two non-RCT studies suggest that Spanish-speaking patients may benefit as much as, if not more than, English-speaking patients treated with collaborative care. The remaining studies reported increased receipt of preferred depression treatment (therapy vs. antidepressants) in the intervention groups. Eight of nine studies used bilingual providers to deliver the intervention.
DISCUSSION
While limited by the number and variability of studies, the available research suggests that collaborative care for depression delivered by bilingual providers may be more effective than usual care among patients with LEP. Implementation studies of collaborative care, particularly among Asian and non-Spanish-speakers, are needed.
View on PubMed2017
OBJECTIVE
Primary care-mental health integration (PC-MHI) aims to increase access to general mental health specialty (MHS) care for primary care patients thereby decreasing referrals to non-primary care-based MHS services. It remains unclear whether new patterns of usage of MHS services reflect good mental health care. This study examined the relationship between primary care clinic engagement in PC-MHI and use of different MHS services.
METHODS
This was a retrospective longitudinal cohort study of 66,638 primary care patients with mental illnesses in 29 Southern California Veterans Affairs clinics (2008-2013). Regression models used clinic PC-MHI engagement (proportion of all primary care clinic patients who received PC-MHI services) to predict relative rates of general MHS visits and more specialized MHS visits (for example, visits for serious mental illness services), after adjustment for year and clinic fixed effects, other clinic interventions, and patient characteristics.
RESULTS
Patients were commonly diagnosed as having depression (35%), anxiety (36%), and posttraumatic stress disorder (22%). For every 1 percentage point increase in a clinic's PC-MHI engagement rate, patients at the clinic had 1.2% fewer general MHS visits per year (p<.001) but no difference in more specialized MHS visits. The reduction in MHS visits occurred among patients with depression (-1.1%, p=.01) but not among patients with psychosis; however, the difference between the subsets was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS
Primary care clinics with greater engagement in PC-MHI showed reduced general MHS use rates, particularly for patients with depression, without accompanying reductions in use of more specialized MHS services.
View on PubMed2017
2017