PURPOSE: This qualitative study examined the barriers to adopting depression care management among 42 primary care clinicians in 30 practices. METHODS: The RESPECT-Depression trial worked collaboratively with 5 large health care organizations (and 60 primary care practices) to implement and disseminate an evidence-based intervention. This study used semistructured interviews with 42 primary care clinicians from 30 practice sites, 18 care managers, and 7 mental health professionals to explore experience and perceptions with depression care management for patients. Subject selection in 4 waves of interviews was driven by themes emerging from ongoing data analysis. RESULTS: Primary care clinicians reported broad appreciation of the benefits of depression care management for their patients. Lack of reimbursement and the competing demands of primary care were often cited as barriers. These clinicians at many levels of initial enthusiasm for care management increased their enthusiasm after experiencing care management through the project. Psychiatric oversight of the care manager with suggestions for the clinicians was widely seen as important and appropriate by clinicians, care managers, and psychiatrists. Clinicians and care managers emphasized the importance of establishing effective communication among themselves, as well as maintaining a consistent and continuous relationship with the patients. The clinicians were selective in which patients they referred for care management, and there was wide variation in opinion about which patients were optimal candidates. Care managers were able to operate both from within a practice and more centrally when specific attention was given to negotiating communication strategies with a clinician. CONCLUSIONS: Care management for depression is an attractive option for most primary care clinicians. Lack of reimbursement remains the single greatest obstacle to more widespread adoption.
PURPOSE: This qualitative study examined the barriers to adopting depression care management among 42 primary care clinicians in 30 practices. METHODS: The RESPECT-Depression trial worked collaboratively with 5 large health care organizations (and 60 primary care practices) to implement and disseminate an evidence-based intervention. This study used semistructured interviews with 42 primary care clinicians from 30 practice sites, 18 care managers, and 7 mental health professionals to explore experience and perceptions with depression care management for patients. Subject selection in 4 waves of interviews was driven by themes emerging from ongoing data analysis. RESULTS: Primary care clinicians reported broad appreciation of the benefits of depression care management for their patients. Lack of reimbursement and the competing demands of primary care were often cited as barriers. These clinicians at many levels of initial enthusiasm for care management increased their enthusiasm after experiencing care management through the project. Psychiatric oversight of the care manager with suggestions for the clinicians was widely seen as important and appropriate by clinicians, care managers, and psychiatrists. Clinicians and care managers emphasized the importance of establishing effective communication among themselves, as well as maintaining a consistent and continuous relationship with the patients. The clinicians were selective in which patients they referred for care management, and there was wide variation in opinion about which patients were optimal candidates. Care managers were able to operate both from within a practice and more centrally when specific attention was given to negotiating communication strategies with a clinician. CONCLUSIONS: Care management for depression is an attractive option for most primary care clinicians. Lack of reimbursement remains the single greatest obstacle to more widespread adoption.
Authors: Paul A Nutting; Kathryn Rost; Miriam Dickinson; James J Werner; Perry Dickinson; Jeffrey L Smith; Beth Gallovic Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Denise M Boudreau; Kam L Capoccia; Sean D Sullivan; David K Blough; Allan J Ellsworth; Dave L Clark; Wayne J Katon; Edward A Walker; Nancy G Stevens Journal: Ann Pharmacother Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 3.154
Authors: John Furler; Renata Kokanovic; Christopher Dowrick; Danielle Newton; Jane Gunn; Carl May Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2010 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Evelyn T Chang; Jennifer L Magnabosco; Edmund Chaney; Andrew Lanto; Barbara Simon; Elizabeth M Yano; Lisa V Rubenstein Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2014-02-25 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Joanna L Norton; Christelle Pommié; Joël Cogneau; Mark Haddad; Karen A Ritchie; Anthony H Mann Journal: Int J Psychiatry Med Date: 2011 Impact factor: 1.210
Authors: Fransina J de Jong; Kirsten M van Steenbergen-Weijenburg; Klaas M L Huijbregts; Moniek C Vlasveld; Harm W J Van Marwijk; Aartjan T F Beekman; Christina M van der Feltz-Cornelis Journal: Int J Integr Care Date: 2009-06-15 Impact factor: 5.120
Authors: Kurt C Stange; Paul A Nutting; William L Miller; Carlos R Jaén; Benjamin F Crabtree; Susan A Flocke; James M Gill Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 5.128