Search

Introduction The Veterans Health Administration (VA) Primary Care-Mental Health Integration (PC-MHI) initiative targets depression (MDD), anxiety/posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and alcohol misuse (AM) for care improvement. In primary care, case finding often relies on depression screening. Whereas clinical practice guidelines solely inform management of depression, minimal information exists to guide treatment when psychiatric symptom clusters coexist. We provide descriptive clinical information for care planners about VA PC patients with depression alone, depression plus alcohol misuse, and depression with complex psychiatric comorbidities (PTSD and/or probable bipolar disorder). Method We examined data from a VA study that used a visit-based sampling procedure to screen 10,929 VA PC patients for depression; 761 patients with probable major depression completed baseline measures of health and care engagement. Follow-up assessments were completed at 7 months. Results At baseline, 53% of patients evidenced mental health conditions in addition to depression; 10% had concurrent AM, and 43% had psychiatrically complex depression (either with or without AM). Compared with patients with depression alone or depression with AM, those with psychiatrically complex depression evinced longer standing and more severe mood disturbance, higher likelihood of suicidal ideation, higher unemployment, and higher levels of polypharmacy. Baseline depression complexity predicted worse mental health status and functioning at follow-up. Discussion A substantial proportion of VA primary care patients with depression presented with high medical multimorbidity and elevated safety concerns. Psychiatrically complex depression predicted lower treatment effectiveness, suggesting that PC-MHI interventions should co-ordinate and individualize care for these patients. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Introduction: Collaborative care improves depression and anxiety outcomes. In this naturalistic, observational case study, we adapted an evidence-based depression collaborative care protocol for the assessment and treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and sought to demonstrate that the protocol could be implemented in Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care. Method: Based on feedback from a content expert panel, clinical stakeholders, and a pilot study conducted in a postdeployment clinic, the original depression collaborative care protocol was modified to include PTSD assessment and support for PTSD medication adherence, self-management, and engagement in evidence-based PTSD care. Results: The modified program was implemented from November 2012 to March 2017, and 239 patients with PTSD were referred. Nearly two thirds (n = 185) enrolled, and they participated in the program for an average of 4 to 5 months and completed calls approximately once per month. Among patients with more than one assessment of clinical outcomes, 53.4% (n = 94) reported clinically significant improvement in depression on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (≥ 5-point decrease), and 42.2% (n = 35) reported clinically significant improvement on the PTSD Checklist (≥ 10-point decrease). Veterans and clinical staff described the modified collaborative care program positively in qualitative interviews. Discussion: Our findings suggest that a depression collaborative care program can be modified to support treatment of PTSD in primary care. The modified program was acceptable to both veterans and clinical staff and showed potential for positive clinical change in an uncontrolled quality improvement study. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The Veterans Health Administration (VA) has invested substantially in evidence-based mental health care. Yet no electronic performance measures for assessing the level at which the population of Veterans with depression receive appropriate care have proven robust enough to support rigorous evaluation of the VA's depression initiatives.Our objectives were to develop prototype longitudinal electronic population-based measures of depression care quality, validate the measures using expert panel judgment by VA and non-VA experts, and examine detection, follow-up and treatment rates over a decade (2000-2010). We describe our development methodology and the challenges to creating measures that capture the longitudinal course of clinical care from detection to treatment.Data come from the National Patient Care Database and Pharmacy Benefits Management Database for primary care patients from 1999 to 2011, from nine Veteran Integrated Service Networks.We developed four population-based quality metrics for depression care that incorporate a 6-month look back and 1-year follow-up: detection of a new episode of depression, 84 and 180 day follow-up, and minimum appropriate treatment 1-year post detection. Expert panel techniques were used to evaluate the measure development methodology and results. Key challenges to creating valid longitudinal measures are discussed.Over the decade, the rates for detection of new episodes of depression remained stable at 7-8 %. Follow-up at 84 and 180 days were 37 % and 45 % in 2000 and increased to 56 % and 63 % by 2010. Minimum appropriate treatment remained relatively stable over the decade (82-84 %).The development of valid longitudinal, population-based quality measures for depression care is a complex process with numerous challenges. If the full spectrum of care from detection to follow-up and treatment is not captured, performance measures could actually mask the clinical areas in need of quality improvement efforts.

Whereas stigma regarding mental health concerns exists, the evidence for stigma as a depression treatment barrier among patients in Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care (PC) is mixed.This study tests whether stigma, defined as depression label avoidance, predicted patients' preferences for depression treatment providers, patients' prospective engagement in depression care, and care quality.We conducted cross-sectional and prospective analyses of existing data from 761 VA PC patients with probable major depression.Relative to low-stigma patients, those with high stigma were less likely to prefer treatment from mental health specialists. In prospective controlled analyses, high stigma predicted lower likelihood of the following: taking medications for mood, treatment by mental health specialists, treatment for emotional concerns in PC, and appropriate depression care.High stigma is associated with lower preferences for care from mental health specialists and confers risk for minimal depression treatment engagement.

In an attempt to guide planning and optimize outcomes for population-specific smoking cessation efforts, the present study examined smoking prevalence and the demographic, clinical and psychosocial characteristics associated with smoking among a sample of Veterans Affairs primary care patients with probable major depression. Survey data were collected between 2003 and 2004 from 761 patients with probable major depression who attended one of 10 geographically dispersed VA primary care clinics. Current smoking prevalence was 39.8%. Relative to nonsmokers with probable major depression, bivariate comparisons revealed that current smokers had higher depression severity, drank more heavily, and were more likely to have comorbid PTSD. Smokers with probable major depression were also more likely than nonsmokers with probable major depression to have missed a health care appointment and to have missed medication doses in the previous 5months. Smokers were more amenable than non-smokers to depression treatment and diagnosis, and they reported more frequent visits to a mental health specialist and less social support. Alcohol abuse and low levels of social support were significant concurrent predictors of smoking status in controlled multivariable logistic regression. In conclusion, smoking prevalence was high among primary care patients with probable major depression, and these smokers reported a range of psychiatric and psychosocial characteristics with potential to complicate systems-level smoking cessation interventions.

Primary care providers (PCPs) vary in skills to effectively treat depression. Key features of evidence-based collaborative care models (CCMs) include the availability of depression care managers (DCMs) and mental health specialists (MHSs) in primary care. Little is known, however, about the relationships between PCP characteristics, CCM features, and PCP depression care.To assess relationships between various CCM features, PCP characteristics, and PCP depression management.Cross-sectional analysis of a provider survey.180 PCPs in eight VA sites nationwide.Independent variables included scales measuring comfort and difficulty with depression care; collaboration with a MHS; self-reported depression caseload; availability of a collocated MHS, and co-management with a DCM or MHS. Covariates included provider type and gender. For outcomes, we assessed PCP self-reported performance of key depression management behaviors in primary care in the past 6 months.Response rate was 52 % overall, with 47 % attending physicians, 34 % residents, and 19 % nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Half (52 %) reported greater than eight veterans with depression in their panels and a MHS collocated in primary care (50 %). Seven of the eight clinics had a DCM. In multivariable analysis, significant predictors for PCP depression management included comfort, difficulty, co-management with MHSs and numbers of veterans with depression in their panels.PCPs who felt greater ease and comfort in managing depression, co-managed with MHSs, and reported higher depression caseloads, were more likely to report performing depression management behaviors. Neither a collocated MHS, collaborating with a MHS, nor co-managing with a DCM independently predicted PCP depression management. Because the success of collaborative care for depression depends on the ability and willingness of PCPs to engage in managing depression themselves, along with other providers, more research is necessary to understand how to engage PCPs in depression management.

Objective Associations between depression, productivity and work loss have been reported, yet few studies have examined relationships between longitudinal depression status and employment continuity. We assessed these relationships among Veterans of conventional working ages. Methods We used longitudinal survey data from Veterans receiving primary care in 1 of 10 Veterans Health Administration primary care practices in five states. Our sample included 516 participants with nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) scores indicating probable major depression (PHQ-9≥10) at baseline and who completed either the 7-month follow-up survey or follow-up surveys at both 7 and 18 months postbaseline. We examined relationships between depression persistence and employment status using multinomial logistic regression models. Results Although general employment rates remained stable (21%–23%), improved depression status was associated with an increased likelihood of becoming employed over 7 months among those who were both depressed and nonemployed at baseline. Improvements in depression status starting at 7 months and continuing through 18 months were associated with remaining employed over the 18-month period, relative to those who were depressed throughout the same time frame. Conclusions Given the pressing need to prevent socioeconomic deterioration in the increasing population of conventional working-aged Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom Veterans, further attention to the depression/employment relationship is urgently needed.

Many patients who should be treated for depression are missed without effective routine screening in primary care (PC) settings. Yearly depression screening by PC staff is mandated in the VA, yet little is known about the expected yield from such screening when administered on a practice-wide basis.We characterized the yield of practice-based screening in diverse PC settings, as well as the care needs of those assessed as having depression.Baseline enrollees in a group randomized trial of implementation of collaborative care for depression.Randomly sampled patients with a scheduled PC appointment in ten VA primary care clinics spanning five states.PHQ-2 screening followed by the full PHQ-9 for screen positives, with standardized sociodemographic and health status questions.Practice-based screening of 10,929 patients yielded 20.1% positive screens, 60% of whom were assessed as having probable major depression based on the PHQ-9 (11.8% of all screens) (n = 1,313). In total, 761 patients with probable major depression completed the baseline assessment. Comorbid mental illnesses (e.g., anxiety, PTSD) were highly prevalent. Medical comorbidities were substantial, including chronic lung disease, pneumonia, diabetes, heart attack, heart failure, cancer and stroke. Nearly one-third of the depressed PC patients reported recent suicidal ideation (based on the PHQ-9). Sexual dysfunction was also common (73.3%), being both longstanding (95.1% with onset6 months) and frequently undiscussed and untreated (46.7% discussed with any health care provider in past 6 months).Practice-wide survey-based depression screening yielded more than twice the positive-screen rate demonstrated through chart-based VA performance measures. The substantial level of comorbid physical and mental illness among PC patients precludes solo management by either PC or mental health (MH) specialists. PC practice- and provider-level guideline adherence is problematic without systems-level solutions supporting adequate MH assessment, PC treatment and, when needed, appropriate MH referral.

Objective: This study examined health care utilization and costs of care among Veterans Affairs (VA) patients with depression and with or without symptoms of comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Methods: Cross-sectional comparisons of health care utilization and costs were conducted with VA administrative data for a sample of veterans from a randomized trial of collaborative care depression treatment in ten VA primary care clinics across five states. Patients with depression or dysthymia were included in the study, and those who were acutely suicidal or had probable bipolar disorder were excluded. The sample of 606 patients was mainly male, white, and aged 55 or older. Health care utilization, costs, and medication data from VA administrative databases were analyzed over 12 months. Results: Patients with depression and PTSD (screen score ≥3) were more emotionally distressed, had more frequent mental health specialty visits (6.91 versus 1.68, p

We documented organizational costs for depression care quality improvement (QI) to develop an evidence-based, Veterans Health Administration (VA) adapted depression care model for primary care practices that performed well for patients, was sustained over time, and could be spread nationally in VA.Project records and surveys from three multistate VA administrative regions and seven of their primary care practices.Descriptive analysis.We documented project time commitments and expenses for 86 clinical QI and 42 technical expert support team participants for 4 years from initial contact through care model design, Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, and achievement of stable workloads in which models functioned as routine care. We assessed time, salary costs, and costs for conference calls, meetings, e-mails, and other activities.Over an average of 27 months, all clinics began referring patients to care managers. Clinical participants spent 1,086 hours at a cost of $84,438. Technical experts spent 2,147 hours costing $197,787. Eighty-five percent of costs derived from initial regional engagement activities and care model design.Organizational costs of the QI process for depression care in a large health care system were significant, and should be accounted for when planning for implementation of evidence-based depression care.

Depression treatment requires close monitoring to achieve optimal, long-term control. Use of multiple sources of health care can affect coordination and continuity of treatment for depression.To assess levels of non-Veterans Health Administration (VA) use among depressed primary care patients by service type and examine patient factors associated with non-VA use.Cross-sectional comparison of dual and VA-only users among depressed primary care patients. Depression was defined as PHQ-9or=10.Five hundred fifty depressed patients from the baseline sample of a group-randomized trial of collaborative care for depression in ten VA primary care practices.VA and non-VA outpatient utilization for physical and emotional health problems in the prior 6 months, patient demographics, and co-morbid conditions. All measures were self-reported and obtained at the baseline interview.Overall, 46.8% of VA depressed primary care patients utilized non-VA care. Dual users were more likely to use acute care services (emergency room or inpatient), especially for physical health problems. Dual users of physical health services had more total visits, but fewer VA visits than VA-only users, while dual users of emotional health services had fewer total and VA visits. Factors associated with dual use were urban clinic location, having other insurance coverage, and dissatisfaction with physical health care in general.Almost half of depressed primary care patients used non-VA care, with most of their non-VA use for physical rather than emotional health problems. Care management strategies for depressed patients should include communication and coordination with non-VA providers.

Although health care organizations seeking to improve quality often must change the system for delivering care, there is little available evidence on how to educate staff and providers about this change. As part of a 2002–2003 Veterans Health Administration multisite project using collaborative care to improve the management of depression, the authors implemented the Translating Initiatives for Depression into Effective Solutions (TIDES) program. Five steps were followed for teaching systems-based practice: (1) determine providers’ educational needs (through administrative data, expert opinion, and provider discussion), (2) develop educational materials (based on needs assessed), (3) help each of seven sites develop an educational intervention, (4) implement the intervention, and (5) monitor the intervention’s effectiveness. Sites relied primarily on passive educational strategies. There was variable implementation of the different components (e.g., lecture, educational outreach). No site chose to write up its education plan, as was suggested. The authors thus suggest that the educational model was successful at identifying providers’ needs and creating appropriate materials, because the program was not advertised in other ways and because almost all providers referred patients to the program. However, the educational model was only partially successful at getting sites to develop and implement an educational plan, although provider behavior did change. Overall, the program was somewhat effective at teaching systems-based practice. The authors believe the best way to enhance effectiveness is to build education into the system rather than rely on a separate system for education.

Depression is the most prevalent mental health condition in primary care (PC). Yet as the Veterans Health Administration increases resources for PC/mental health integration, including integrated care for women, there is little detailed information about depression care needs, preferences, comorbidity, and access patterns among women veterans with depression followed in PC.We sampled patients regularly engaged with Veterans Health Administration PC. We screened 10,929 (10,580 men, 349 women) with the two-item Patient Health Questionnaire. Of the 2,186 patients who screened positive (2,092 men, 94 women), 2,017 men and 93 women completed the full Patient Health Questionnaire-9 depression screening tool. Ultimately, 46 women and 715 men with probable major depression were enrolled and completed a baseline telephone survey. We conducted descriptive statistics to provide information about the depression care experiences of women veterans and to examine potential gender differences at baseline and at seven month follow-up across study variables.Among those patients who agreed to screening, 20% of women (70 of 348) had probable major depression, versus only 12% of men (1,243 of 10,505). Of the women, 48% had concurrent probable posttraumatic stress disorder and 65% reported general anxiety. Women were more likely to receive adequate depression care than men (57% vs. 39%, respectively; p .05); 46% of women and 39% of men reported depression symptom improvement at the 7-month follow-up. Women veterans were less likely than men to prefer care from a PC physician (p .01) at baseline and were more likely than men to report mental health specialist care (p .01) in the 6 months before baseline.PC/mental health integration planners should consider methods for accommodating women veterans unique care needs and preferences for mental health care delivered by health care professionals other than physicians.

Background: The chronic illness model encourages consideration of patients’ treatment preferences. Moreover, research suggests that matching treatment to preference might affect outcomes for patients with depression.Purpose: This investigation explored factors associated with treatment preference matching and the effects of matching on depression treatment outcomes.Methods: Treatment preferences were assessed among primary care patients with depression participating in a large randomized trial of depression management. Patients were offered antidepressant medication and/or counseling based on preference and several other factors. Depression was assessed at 3 and 9 months.Results: Participants who preferred medication were older, were in worse physical health, and were more likely to already be taking antidepressants. Participants who preferred both medication and counseling evidenced greater agreement with the statement that depression is a medical illness. Overall, 72% of participants were matched with their preferred treatment; matched participants demonstrated more rapid improvement in depression symptomatology than unmatched participants.Conclusions: Obtaining preferred treatment appears to contribute to improved treatment outcome. Continued attempts to assess for and accommodate treatment preferences might result in better response to depression treatment. The Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Health Services Research and Development Service supported this research. This article presents our findings and conclusions. It does not necessarily represent those of the Department of Veterans Affairs or Health Services Research and Development Service.

This study examined the incremental cost-effectiveness of a collaborative care intervention for depression compared with consult-liaison care.A total of 354 patients in a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinic who met the criteria for major depression or dysthymia were randomly assigned to one of the two care models. Under the collaborative care model, a mental health team provided a treatment plan to primary care providers, telephoned patients to encourage adherence, reviewed treatment results, and suggested modifications. Outcomes were assessed at three and nine months by telephone interviews. Health care use and costs were also assessed.A significantly greater number of collaborative care patients were treated for depression and given prescriptions for antidepressants. The collaborative care patients experienced an average of 14.6 additional depression-free days over the nine months. The mean incremental cost of the intervention per patient was $237 US dollars for depression treatment and $519 US dollars for total outpatient costs. A majority of the additional expenditures were accounted for by the intervention. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $24 US dollars per depression-free day for depression treatment costs and $33 US dollars for total outpatient cost.Better coordination and communication under collaborative care was associated with a greater number of patients being treated for depression and with moderate increases in days free of depression and in treatment cost. Additional resources are needed for effective collaborative care models for depression treatment in primary care.

To compare collaborative care for treatment of depression in primary care with consult-liaison (CL) care. In collaborative care, a mental health team provided a treatment plan to the primary care provider, telephoned patients to support adherence to the plan, reviewed treatment results, and suggested modifications to the provider. In CL care, study clinicians informed the primary care provider of the diagnosis and facilitated referrals to psychiatry residents practicing in the primary care clinic.Patients were randomly assigned to treatment model by clinic firm.VA primary care clinic.One hundred sixty-eight collaborative care and 186 CL patients who met criteria for major depression and/or dysthymia.Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-20), Short Form (SF)-36, Sheehan Disability Scale.Collaborative care produced greater improvement than CL in depressive symptomatology from baseline to 3 months (SCL-20 change scores), but at 9 months there was no significant difference. The intervention increased the proportion of patients receiving prescriptions and cognitive behavioral therapy. Collaborative care produced significantly greater improvement on the Sheehan at 3 months. A greater proportion of collaborative care patients exhibited an improvement in SF-36 Mental Component Score of 5 points or more from baseline to 9 months.Collaborative care resulted in more rapid improvement in depression symptomatology, and a more rapid and sustained improvement in mental health status compared to the more standard model. Mounting evidence indicates that collaboration between primary care providers and mental health specialists can improve depression treatment and supports the necessary changes in clinic structure and incentives.

Background: Collaborative care and care management are cornerstones of Primary Care-Mental Health Integration (PC-MHI) and have been shown to reduce depressive symptoms. Historically, the standard of Veterans Affairs (VA) collaborative care was referring patients with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to specialty care. Although referral to evidence-based specialty care is ideal, many veterans with PTSD do not receive such care. To address this issue and reduce barriers to care, VA currently recommends veterans with PTSD be offered treatment within PC-MHI as an alternative. The current project outlines a pilot implementation of an established telephone-based collaborative care model—Translating Initiatives for Depression into Effective Solutions (TIDES)—adapted for Iraq/Afghanistan War veterans with PTSD symptoms (TIDES/PTSD) seen in a postdeployment primary care clinic. Materials and Methods: Structured medical record extraction and qualitative data collection procedures were used to evaluate acceptability, feasibility, and outcomes. Results: Most participants (n=17) were male (94.1%) and white (70.6%). Average age was 31.2 (standard deviation=6.4) years. TIDES/PTSD was successfully implemented within PC-MHI and was acceptable to patients and staff. Additionally, the total number of care manager calls was positively correlated with number of psychiatry visits (r=0.63, p

Primary care is often the first point of care for individuals with depression. Depressed patients often have comorbid alcohol use disorder (AUD) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Understanding variations in treatment preferences and care satisfaction in this population can improve care planning and outcomes. The design involved a cross-sectional comparison of veterans screening positive for depression. Veterans receiving primary care during the previous year were contacted (n = 10, 929) and were screened for depression using the PHQ-2/PHQ-9. Those with probable depression (n = 761) underwent a comprehensive assessment including screens for AUD and PTSD, treatment provider preferences, treatments received, and satisfaction with care. Treatment provider preferences differed based on specific mental health comorbidities, and satisfaction with care was associated with receipt of preferred care. Depressed veterans with comorbid PTSD were more likely to prefer care from more than one provider type (e.g., a psychiatrist and a primary care provider) and were more likely to receive treatment that matched their preferences than veterans without comorbid PTSD. Veterans receiving full or partial treatment matches affirmed satisfaction with care at higher rates, and veterans with comorbid PTSD were least satisfied when care did not match their preferences. Patient satisfaction with care is an increasingly important focus for health care systems. This study found significant variations in depressed patients' satisfaction with care in terms of treatment matching, particularly among those with comorbid PTSD. Delivery of care that matches patient treatment preferences is likely to improve depressed patient's satisfaction with the care provided. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).

Opiates are commonly used to treat patients with chronic nonmalignant pain. There is much controversy over the definition, incidence, and risk factors of prescription opiate abuse in chronic pain treatment. The present study, done at the Seattle VA Medical Center, was designed to create opiate abuse criteria, test inter-rater reliability of the criteria, apply the criteria to a group of chronic pain patients, and correlate the risk of opiate abuse with the results of alcohol and drug testing.A committee of experienced pain providers designed a five-point prescription opiate abuse checklist based on DSM-III-R parameters. The criteria were then applied to patients enrolled in the pain clinic. The reliability of the criteria were determined using two providers who were familiar with every patient in the clinic. Drug, alcohol, and psychosocial testing were correlated with the risk of opiate abuse.A total of 19% (76/403) of all pain clinic patients were using chronic opiates. Thirty-four percent (26/76) met one, and 27.6% (21/76) met three or more of the abuse criteria. The criteria had an inter-rater reliability of0.9. There were no differences between chronic opiate users (n = 76) and opiate abusers (n = 21) for a history of drug or alcohol abuse or on psychosocial testing.Prescription opiate abuse criteria for use in patients with chronic nonmalignant pain were designed. The criteria had good reliability and can be applied during normal clinic interactions. The percentage of chronic opiate users who become opiate abusers in pain treatment is within the range reported by others. Past opiate or alcohol abuse or psychosocial testing on clinic admission failed to predict who would become an opiate abuser. The criteria can be used to identify patients who will subsequently require more intensive treatment or intervention or can be used as an outcome to measure to test the effectiveness of treatment strategies.

OBJECTIVE Family involvement and social support are associated with recovery from mental disorders. This project explored how family involvement in health care and social support among depressed veterans in primary care related to medication adherence and depression outcomes. METHODS During a longitudinal telephone survey, 761 Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care patients (mean age=60 years) with probable major depression were asked about depression symptoms, self-reported health, medication adherence, social support, family involvement with care, and satisfaction with clinicians' efforts to involve the patients' families in their care. Follow-up interviews at seven and 18 months assessed depression severity and medication adherence. RESULTS Most participants lived with others (71%) and reported moderately high social support. Most participants (62%) reported being very likely to discuss treatment of a major medical condition with family, but 64% reported that VA providers had not involved the participants' family in their care within the prior six months. In multivariate regression analyses, lower depression severity and better medication adherence over time were significantly linked to higher satisfaction with limited efforts by clinicians to involve families in care. Neither social support nor the extent of family involvement by itself was associated with outcomes. CONCLUSIONS The results suggested a link between patient satisfaction with family involvement by clinicians and clinical outcomes among depressed veterans. In addition, clinician responsiveness to patient wishes may be more important than the amount of family involvement per se. Further research is needed to clarify when and how clinicians should involve a patient's family in depression treatment in primary care.

Little is known about the prevalence or predictors of seeking help for depression and PTSD from spiritual counselors and clergy. We describe openness to and actual help-seeking from spiritual counselors among primary care patients with depression. We screened consecutive VA primary care patients for depression; 761 Veterans with probable major depression participated in telephone surveys (at baseline, 7 months, and 18 months). Participants were asked about (1) openness to seeking help for emotional problems from spiritual counselors/clergy and (2) actual contact with spiritual counselors/clergy in the past 6 months. At baseline, almost half of the participants, 359 (47.2%), endorsed being "very" or "somewhat likely" to seek help for emotional problems from spiritual counselors; 498 (65.4%) were open to a primary care provider, 486 (63.9%) to a psychiatrist, and 409 (66.5%) to another type of mental health provider. Ninety-one participants (12%) reported actual spiritual counselor/clergy consultation. Ninety-five (10.3%) participants reported that their VA providers had recently asked them about spiritual support; the majority of these found this discussion helpful. Participants with current PTSD symptoms, and those with a mental health visit in the past 6 months, were more likely to report openness to and actual help-seeking from clergy. Veterans with depression and PTSD are amenable to receiving help from spiritual counselors/clergy and other providers. Integration of spiritual counselors/clergy into care teams may be helpful to Veterans with PTSD. Training of such providers to address PTSD specifically may also be desirable.

Background Meta-analyses show collaborative care models (CCMs) with nurse care management are effective for improving primary care for depression. This study aimed to develop CCM approaches that could be sustained and spread within Veterans Affairs (VA). Evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) uses QI approaches within a research/clinical partnership to redesign care. The study used EBQI methods for CCM redesign, tested the effectiveness of the locally adapted model as implemented, and assessed the contextual factors shaping intervention effectiveness. Methods The study intervention is EBQI as applied to CCM implementation. The study uses a cluster randomized design as a formative evaluation tool to test and improve the effectiveness of the redesign process, with seven intervention and three non-intervention VA primary care practices in five different states. The primary study outcome is patient antidepressant use. The context evaluation is descriptive and uses subgroup analysis. The primary context evaluation measure is naturalistic primary care clinician (PCC) predilection to adopt CCM. For the randomized evaluation, trained telephone research interviewers enrolled consecutive primary care patients with major depression in the evaluation, referred enrolled patients in intervention practices to the implemented CCM, and re-surveyed at seven months. Results Interviewers enrolled 288 CCM site and 258 non-CCM site patients. Enrolled intervention site patients were more likely to receive appropriate antidepressant care (66% versus 43%, p = 0.01), but showed no significant difference in symptom improvement compared to usual care. In terms of context, only 40% of enrolled patients received complete care management per protocol. PCC predilection to adopt CCM had substantial effects on patient participation, with patients belonging to early adopter clinicians completing adequate care manager follow-up significantly more often than patients of clinicians with low predilection to adopt CCM (74% versus 48%%, p = 0.003). Conclusions Depression CCM designed and implemented by primary care practices using EBQI improved antidepressant initiation. Combining QI methods with a randomized evaluation proved challenging, but enabled new insights into the process of translating research-based CCM into practice. Future research on the effects of PCC attitudes and skills on CCM results, as well as on enhancing the link between improved antidepressant use and symptom outcomes, is needed. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00105820

Research-based queries about patients’ experiences often uncover suicidal thoughts. Human subjects review requires suicide risk management (SRM) protocols to protect patients, yet minimal information exists to guide researchers’ protocol development and implementation efforts. The purpose of this study was to examine the development and implementation of an SRM protocol employed during telephone-based screening and data collection interviews of depressed primary care patients. We describe an SRM protocol development process and employ qualitative analysis of de-identified documentation to characterize protocol-driven interactions between research clinicians and patients. Protocol development required advance planning, training, and team building. Three percent of screened patients evidenced suicidal ideation; 12% of these met protocol standards for study clinician assessment/intervention. Risk reduction activities required teamwork and extensive collaboration. Research-based SRM protocols can facilitate patient safety by (1) identifying and verifying local clinical site approaches and resources and (2) integrating these features into prevention protocols and training for research teams.

OBJECTIVE Translating Initiatives in Depression into Effective Solution (TIDES) aimed to translate research-based collaborative care for depression into an approach for the Veterans Health Administration (VA). SITES: Three multistate administrative regions and seven of their medium-sized primary care practices. INTERVENTION Researchers assisted regional leaders in adapting research-based depression care models using evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) methods. EVALUATION We evaluated model fidelity and impacts on patients. Trained nurse depression care managers collected data on patient adherence and outcomes. RESULTS Among 72% (128) of the 178 patients followed in primary care with depression care manager assistance during the 3-year study period, mean PHQ-9 scores dropped from 15.1 to 4.7 (p < .001). A total of 87% of patients achieved a PHQ-9 score lower than 10 (no major depression). 62% achieved a score lower than six (symptom resolution). Care managers referred 28% (50) TIDES patients to mental health specialty (MHS). In the MHS-referred group, mean PHQ-9 scores dropped from 16.4 to 9.0 (p < .001). A total of 58% of MHS-referred patients achieved a PHQ-9 score lower than 10, and 40%, a score less than 6. Over the 2 years following the initial development phase reported here, national policymakers endorsed TIDES through national directives and financial support. CONCLUSIONS TIDES developed an evidence-based depression collaborative care prototype for a large health care organization (VA) using EBQI methods. As expected, care managers referred sicker patients to mental health specialists; these patients also improved. Overall, TIDES achieved excellent overall patient outcomes, and the program is undergoing national spread.

Developments in the last decade show that behavioral healthcare informatics systems (BHISs) may interface effectively with medical informatics systems (MISs) and show promise for even more effective integration in the future. This chapter will provide examples of implementation techniques and current interface processes drawn primarily from developments in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).

Two opposing views have developed regarding the place of narcotics in the treatment of chronic nonmalignant pain. The authors believe the foundations of these views are based on treatment models that can be characterized as biomedical, behavioral, and moral. Conflicts arise when these incomplete models are used to addeess a very complex problem. The authors describe a biopsychosocial model and give treatment guidelines in which the prescription of opioids is a tool among others to achieve multiple goals individualized for each patient with chronic nonmalignant pain. A specific opioid protocol is used and narcotics are rarely initiated and usually discontinued over-time with the concurrence of the patient. However, a number of patients remain on low stable doses for years in the context of other nonpharmacological treatments.

Background Little is known about effective strategies for disseminating and implementing complex clinical innovations across large healthcare systems. This paper describes processes undertaken and tools developed by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Mental Health Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (MH-QUERI) to guide its efforts to partner with clinical leaders to prepare for national dissemination and implementation of collaborative care for depression. Methods An evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) process was used to develop an initial set of goals to prepare the VA for national dissemination and implementation of collaborative care. The resulting product of the EBQI process is referred to herein as a "National Dissemination Plan" (NDP). EBQI participants included: a) researchers with expertise on the collaborative care model for depression, clinical quality improvement, and implementation science, and b) VA clinical and administrative leaders with experience and expertise on how to adapt research evidence to organizational needs, resources and capacity. Based on EBQI participant feedback, drafts of the NDP were revised and refined over multiple iterations before a final version was approved by MH-QUERI leadership. 'Action Teams' were created to address each goal. A formative evaluation framework and related tools were developed to document processes, monitor progress, and identify and act upon barriers and facilitators in addressing NDP goals. Results The National Dissemination Plan suggests that effectively disseminating collaborative care for depression in the VA will likely require attention to: Guidelines and Quality Indicators (4 goals), Training in Clinical Processes and Evidence-based Quality Improvement (6 goals), Marketing (7 goals), and Informatics Support (1 goal). Action Teams are using the NDP as a blueprint for developing infrastructure to support system-wide adoption and sustained implementation of collaborative care for depression. To date, accomplishments include but are not limited to: conduct of a systematic review of the literature to update VA depression treatment guidelines to include the latest evidence on collaborative care for depression; training for clinical staff on TIDES (Translating Initiatives for Depression into Effective Solutions project) care; spread of TIDES care to new VA facilities; and integration of TIDES depression assessment tools into a planned update of software used in delivery of VA mental health services. Thus far, common barriers encountered by Action Teams in addressing NDP goals include: a) limited time to address goals due to competing tasks/priorities, b) frequent turnover of key organizational leaders/stakeholders, c) limited skills and training among team members for addressing NDP goals, and d) difficulty coordinating activities across Action Teams on related goals. Conclusion MH-QUERI has partnered with VA organizational leaders to develop a focused yet flexible plan to address key factors to prepare for national dissemination and implementation of collaborative care for depression. Early indications suggest that the plan is laying an important foundation that will enhance the likelihood of successful implementation and spread across the VA healthcare system.

Eight patients with established lower limb postamputation stump pain were given lumbar intrathecal fentanyl 25 micrograms and lidocaine 70 mg 2 weeks apart in an attempt to better understand the role of peripheral and central mechanisms in this condition. Baseline pain was recorded and then analgetic and side effects and their duration were assessed. Three self-administered questionnaires with appropriate psychometric proprieties were given to the patients. Intrathecal fentanyl always abolished the pain. Its onset was rapid being heralded within 1-2.5 min by a pleasant sensation of warmth involving the lower trunk and legs. Analgesia was complete by 5-10 min and had a median duration of 8 h. The patients had a sense of well being and were unable to elicit discomfort by pain aggravating maneuvers. Normal motor and sensory functions were retained. Pruritus was the only adverse effect unique to intrathecal fentanyl. Intrathecal lidocaine usually relieved the discomfort but was unable to abolish it in 3 of 8 patients despite adequate neural blockade. Its onset of action was slower and duration of effect shorter than fentanyl. Intrathecal fentanyl provided profound analgesia associated with normalization of stump sensations and euphoria, probably due to a segmental spinal action. The effects of lidocaine were inferior to fentanyl due to the associated motor and sensory paralyses as well as the absence of euphoria. This study suggests that, while peripheral mechanisms played a role, central mechanisms involving the spinal cord were more important in the modulation of established stump pain in the 8 subjects evaluated.

Compared to those with depression alone, depressed patients with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) experience more severe psychiatric symptomatology and factors that complicate treatment. To estimate PTSD prevalence among depressed military veteran primary care patients and compare demographic/illness characteristics of PTSD screen-positive depressed patients (MDD-PTSD+) to those with depression alone (MDD). Cross-sectional comparison of MDD patients versus MDD-PTSD+ patients. Six hundred seventy-seven randomly sampled depressed patients with at least 1 primary care visit in the previous 12 months. Participants composed the baseline sample of a group randomized trial of collaborative care for depression in 10 VA primary care practices in 5 states. The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 assessed MDD. Probable PTSD was defined as a Primary Care PTSD Screen ≥ 3. Regression-based techniques compared MDD and MDD-PTSD+ patients on demographic/illness characteristics. Thirty-six percent of depressed patients screened positive for PTSD. Adjusting for sociodemographic differences and physical illness comorbidity, MDD-PTSD+ patients reported more severe depression (P

Objective: To understand information systems components important in supporting team-based care of chronic illness through a literature search. Design: Systematic search of literature from 1996–2005 for evaluations of information systems used in the care of chronic illness. Measurements: The relationship of design, quality, information systems components, setting, and other factors with process, quality outcomes, and health care costs was evaluated. Results: In all, 109 articles were reviewed involving 112 information system descriptions. Chronic diseases targeted included diabetes (42.9% of reviewed articles), heart disease (36.6%), and mental illness (23.2%), among others. System users were primarily physicians, nurses, and patients. Sixty-seven percent of reviewed experiments had positive outcomes; 94% of uncontrolled, observational studies claimed positive results. Components closely correlated with positive experimental results were connection to an electronic medical record, computerized prompts, population management (including reports and feedback), specialized decision support, electronic scheduling, and personal health records. Barriers identified included costs, data privacy and security concerns, and failure to consider workflow. Conclusion: The majority of published studies revealed a positive impact of specific health information technology components on chronic illness care. Implications for future research and system designs are discussed.

Objective: Improving care for depressed primary care (PC) patients requires system-level interventions based on chronic illness management with collaboration among primary care providers (PCPs) and mental health providers (MHPs). We describe the development of an effective collaboration system for an ongoing multisite Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) study evaluating a multifaceted program to improve management of major depression in PC practices. Method: Translating Initiatives for Depression into Effective Solutions (TIDES) is a research project that helps VA facilities adopt depression care improvements for PC patients with depression. A regional telephone-based depression care management program used Depression Case Managers (DCMs) supervised by MHPs to assist PCPs with patient management. The Collaborative Care Workgroup (CWG) was created to facilitate collaboration between PCPs, MHPs, and DCMs. The CWG used a 3-phase process: (1) identify barriers to better depression treatment, (2) identify target problems and solutions, and (3) institutionalize ongoing problem detection and solution through new policies and procedures. Results: The CWG overcame barriers that exist between PCPs and MHPs, leading to high rates of the following: patients with depression being followed by PCPs (82%), referred PC patients with depression keeping their appointments with MHPs (88%), and PC patients with depression receiving antidepressants (76%). The CWG helped sites implement site-specific protocols for addressing patients with suicidal ideation. Conclusion: By applying these steps in PC practices, collaboration between PCPs and MHPs has been improved and maintained. These steps offer a guide to improving collaborative care to manage depression or other chronic disorders within PC clinics.

Background: Concern about underdiagnosis and undertreatment of depression in primary care has led to support for routine screening. Although multiple screening instruments exist, we are not aware of studies to date that have compared different screening strategies, e.g., how the instrument is administered: by whom and in what setting. This study compared 3 separate screening strategies in terms of patient flow, coverage, patient characteristics, and other factors with the usual care system of provider referral. Method: We analyzed existing data from a completed randomized team trial of collaborative care depression treatment in which patients who met DSM-IV criteria for current major depressive disorder, dysthymic disorder, or both were recruited using the usual care system of provider referral (provider) and 3 separate screening strategies: (1) a 2-stage waiting room screening interview (waiting), (2) an in-clinic screen consisting of 2 self-report items embedded in a larger survey (in-clinic), and (3) a 2-stage self-report mail survey (mail). The team trial and analysis were conducted between January 1998 and July 2003. Results: The usual care system of provider referral identified the most depressed patients and had relatively good coverage compared with the 3 screening strategies. Of the 3 screening strategies, the in-clinic strategy had the best coverage, while the mail strategy had the worst coverage. Provider referral patients were younger and had fewer chronic medical illnesses than did other patients. The waiting strategy identified more patients with bipolar affective disorder. Conclusion: While different strategies may be optimal for different resource levels and patient characteristics, this study suggests that an in-clinic self-report survey may be the best adjunct to provider referral for efficiently increasing coverage. This study also suggests that different screening strategies may capture different patient populations.

Background: Depressive and anxiety disorders are highly prevalent in the primary care setting. There is evidence that patients with depression and comorbid anxiety are more severely impaired than patients with depression alone and require aggressive mental health treatment. The goal of this study was to assess the impact of comorbid anxiety in a primary care population of depressed patients. Method: 342 subjects diagnosed with a DSM-IV–defined major depressive episode, dysthymia, or both were asked 2 questions about the presence of comorbid anxiety symptoms (history of panic attacks and/or flashbacks). Patient groups included depression only (N = 119), depression and panic attacks (N = 51), depression and flashbacks (N = 97), and depression and both panic attacks and flashbacks (N = 75). Groups were compared on demographics, mental health histories, and health-related quality-of-life variables. Data were gathered from January 1998 to March 1999. Results: Those patients with depression, panic attacks, and flashback symptoms as compared with those with depression alone were more likely to be younger, unmarried, and female. The group with depression, panic attacks, and flashbacks was also more likely to have more depressive symptoms, more impaired health status, worse disability, and a more complicated and persistent history of mental illness. Regression analysis revealed that the greatest impact on disability, presence of depressive symptoms, and mental health outcomes was associated with panic attacks. Conclusion: By asking 2 questions about comorbid anxiety symptoms, primary care providers evaluating depressed patients may be able to identify a group of significantly impaired patients at high risk of anxiety disorders who might benefit from collaboration with or referral to a mental health specialist.

We endeavored to assess the short-term effects of intrathecal fentanyl and lidocaine in chronic-pain patients by ascertaining whether the opioid fentanyl, by virtue of its lack of sensory and motor paralysis, conferred any diagnostic advantages over lidocaine, a local anesthetic whose effects include sensory and motor paralysis. Neuraxial administration of fentanyl has been touted as an improved diagnostic tool to distinguish between peripheral and central pain, because the absence of sensory and motor effects may avert the patient's presumption of the onset of analgesia based on these cues. Twenty-two patients with persistent low-back pain, whose investigations had determined that they were not surgical candidates, were studied using a counter-balanced, placebo-controlled, and double-blinded crossover design. Each patient received three separate lumbar intrathecal injections of equal volume (1.4 ml): cerebrospinal fluid, fentanyl 25 micrograms, and lidocaine 70 mg. Pain and symptom assessments were performed preinjection (baseline), and at regular intervals up to and including 4 h postinjection. Pain was evaluated by verbal patient response using a numerical pain-rating system of 0 to 10. Duration of analgesia, sensation of warmth, and adverse effects were noted. Statistical analyses were performed using nonparametric tests. Subjects' average age was 56 years, with a median low-back pain duration of 16 years. There were no significant differences in the baseline median-pain scores among injection types. The baseline and best cerebrospinal fluid-pain scores were significantly different, suggesting a placebo effect. The best pain scores for fentanyl and lidocaine were superior to their own baseline levels and to the best cerebrospinal fluid scores.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Neuropathic pain is often a difficult condition to treat. Clinical and laboratory studies using intravenously administered local anesthetics or antiarrhythmic agents support the use of these drugs for the treatment of neuropathic pain. The availability of the oral antiarrhythmic medication, mexiletine, has made it possible to study the effects of an orally administered medication on chronic neuropathic pain. The study used a double-blind placebo-controlled design to examine 11 subjects in whom treatment with conventional pain medications had been unsuccessful. Subjects had a history of peripheral nerve injury or dysfunction, and all complained of symptoms consistent with neuropathic pain. After baseline pain measurements, mexiletine or placebo was given in gradually increasing doses to a maximum daily dose of 750 mg mexiletine. After 1 month at steady state, the subject received the alternative medication. Mexiletine was found to produce a statistically significant reduction in reported pain when compared to baseline or placebo. Pain scores were rated on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (unbearable pain). Median pain scores prior to mexiletine were 7, after placebo treatment 7, and while receiving mexiletine (750 mg/day) 4. Side effects were mild and well-tolerated. Mexiletine may be effective in reducing neuropathic pain for patients in whom alternative pain medications have been unsatisfactory.

Background Human Subjects protections approaches, specifically those relating to research review board oversight, vary throughout the world. While all are designed to protect participants involved in research, the structure and specifics of these institutional review boards (IRBs) can and do differ. This variation affects all types of research, particularly implementation research. Methods In 2001, we began a series of inter-related studies on implementing evidence-based collaborative care for depression in Veterans Health Administration primary care. We have submitted more than 100 IRB applications, amendments, and renewals, and in doing so, we have interacted with 13 VA and University IRBs across the United States (U.S.). We present four overarching IRB-related themes encountered throughout the implementation of our projects, and within each theme, identify key challenges and suggest approaches that have proved useful. Where applicable, we showcase process aids developed to assist in resolving a particular IRB challenge. Results There are issues unique to implementation research, as this type of research may not fit within the traditional Human Subjects paradigm used to assess clinical trials. Risks in implementation research are generally related to breaches of confidentiality, rather than health risks associated with traditional clinical trials. The implementation-specific challenges discussed are: external validity considerations, Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, risk-benefit issues, the multiple roles of researchers and subjects, and system-level unit of analysis. Discussion Specific aspects of implementation research interact with variations in knowledge, procedures, and regulatory interpretations across IRBs to affect the implementation and study of best methods to increase evidence-based practice. Through lack of unambiguous guidelines and local liability concerns, IRBs are often at risk of applying both variable and inappropriate or unnecessary standards to implementation research that are not consistent with the spirit of the Belmont Report (a summary of basic ethical principles identified by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research), and which impede the conduct of evidence-based quality improvement research. While there are promising developments in the IRB community, it is incumbent upon implementation researchers to interact with IRBs in a manner that assists appropriate risk-benefit determinations and helps prevent the process from having a negative impact on efforts to reduce the lag in implementing best practices.

Cognitive recovery among male alcoholics and controls was investigated with the Trail-Making Test as an index of cognitive impairment. The test was administered twice to all Ss with an interval of approximately 1 year between testings. A reported measures analysis of variance showed that the controls performed significantly better than the alcoholics at both administrations, although the alcoholics did improve between the pre-and posttests. Reported drinking episodes that occurred between the pre-and posttests appeared to have no effect on cognitive recovery in the alcoholic group when relapsed and abstinent subgroups were compared.

The present study examined the self-concepts of 101 hospitalized alcoholics, 20 hospitalized non-alcoholics, and 20 controls using the Clinical and Research Form of the Tennessee Self-concept Scale. A moderate treatment effect on self-concept was found for the hospitalized alcoholics. Subscale scores were not related to treatment completion. Examination of the self-concept of hospitalized and normal controls suggested that the former group has a more negative self-concept than the latter. The possibility is raised that hospitalization played an unexamined but important role in previous studies of alcoholics' self-concepts.

Alcoholic Ss were categorized into four subtypes based upon differential levels of perceived locus of control and experienced control. The relationship between generalized psychopathology, as measured by the MMPI, and subtype classification was investigated. Alcoholics with an internal locus of control and high levels of experienced control exhibited the least psychopathology. The greatest degree of psychopathology was found among Ss with an external locus of control and minimal levels of experienced control. The implications of these results with respect to psychosocial functioning and drinking behavior among alcoholic subgroups were discussed.