OBJECTIVE: 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. DESIGN: Patients were randomly assigned to treatment model by clinic firm. SETTING: VA primary care clinic. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred sixty‐eight collaborative care and 186 CL patients who met criteria for major depression and/or dysthymia. MEASUREMENTS: Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL‐20), Short Form (SF)‐36, Sheehan Disability Scale. MAIN RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.
This study examines the associations among relationship power, sexual decision-making dominance, and condom use within a sample of women at risk of HIV/STDs. Data from face-to-face interviews with 112 women were analyzed to (a) describe who women perceive as more powerful and who makes sexual decisions within their heterosexual relationships, (b) explore the association between relationship power and sexual decision-making dominance, and (c) examine the relationship of power and decision making regarding condom use to condom use behavior. Women were recruited from clinics and community locations in Atlanta, Los Angeles, Oklahoma City and Portland, OR. Participants were 18-25 years of age and were primarily Hispanic and African American. Over half (58.2%) reported that they share power with their partner, 25.5% said they have more power, and 16.4% reported that their partner has more power in their relationship. For the five domains of sexual decision-making examined, over half (50.5%-75.7%) of the women reported that they and their partners make decisions together. A higher percentage of women who perceived that they have more power or share power, as compared to those who perceived that their partners have more power, reported that "I/We" make decisions about birth control use, condom use, whether to have sex, and type of sexual activity. Relationship power was not associated with condom use. Condom use was, however, significantly higher among women who reported that they make decisions about using condoms alone or with their partner as compared to those who reported that their partner makes those decisions.
BackgroundMost patients with alcohol use disorders (AUDs) never receive alcohol treatment, and experts have recommended management of AUDs in primary care. The Choosing Healthier Drinking Options In primary CarE (CHOICE) trial was a randomized controlled effectiveness trial of a novel intervention for primary care patients at high risk for AUDs. This report describes the conceptual and scientific foundation of the CHOICE model of care, critical elements of the CHOICE trial design consistent with the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR), results of recruitment, and baseline characteristics of the enrolled sample.Methods The CHOICE intervention is a multi-contact, extended counseling intervention, based on the Chronic Care Model, shared decision-making, motivational interviewing, and evidence-based options for managing AUDs, designed to be practical in primary care. Outpatients who received care at 3 Veterans Affairs primary care sites in the Pacific Northwest and reported frequent heavy drinking (≥4 drinks/day for women; ≥5 for men) were recruited (2011–2014) into a trial in which half of the participants would be offered additional alcohol-related care from a nurse. CHOICE nurses offered 12 months of patient-centered care, including proactive outreach and engagement, repeated brief motivational interventions, monitoring with and without alcohol biomarkers, medications for AUDs, and/or specialty alcohol treatment as appropriate and per patient preference. A CHOICE nurse practitioner was available to prescribe medications for AUDs.ResultsA total of 304 patients consented to participate in the CHOICE trial. Among consenting participants, 90% were men, the mean age was 51 (range 22–75), and most met DSM-IV criteria for alcohol abuse (14%) or dependence (59%). Many participants also screened positive for tobacco use (44%), depression (45%), anxiety disorders (30-41%) and non-tobacco drug use disorders (19%). At baseline, participants had a median AUDIT score of 18 [Interquartile range (IQR) 14–24] and a median readiness to change drinking score of 5 (IQR 2.75–6.25) on a 1–10 Likert scale.ConclusionThe CHOICE trial tested a patient-centered intervention for AUDs and recruited primary care patients at high risk for AUDs, with a spectrum of severity, co-morbidity, and readiness to change drinking. Trial registration The trial is registered at clinicaltrial.gov (NCT01400581).Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13722-017-0080-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.