BACKGROUND: As medical homes are developing under health reform, little is known regarding depression services need and use by diverse safety-net populations in under-resourced communities. For chronic conditions like depression, primary care services may face new opportunities to partner with diverse community service providers, such as those in social service and substance abuse centers, to support a collaborative care model of treating depression. OBJECTIVE: To understand the distribution of need and current burden of services for depression in under-resourced, diverse communities in Los Angeles. DESIGN: Baseline phase of a participatory trial to improve depression services with data from client screening and follow-up surveys. PARTICIPANTS: Of 4,440 clients screened from 93 programs (primary care, mental health, substance abuse, homeless, social and other community services) in 50 agencies, 1,322 were depressed according to an eight-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) and gave contact information; 1,246 enrolled and 981 completed surveys. Ninety-three programs, including 17 primary care/public health, 18 mental health, 20 substance abuse, ten homeless services, and 28 social/other community services, participated. MAIN MEASURES: Comparisons by setting in 6-month retrospective recall of depression services use. KEY RESULTS:Depression prevalence ranged from 51.9 % in mental health to 17.2 % in social-community programs. Depressed clients used two settings on average to receive depression services; 82 % used any setting. More clients preferred counseling over medication for depression treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Need for depression care was high, and a broad range of agencies provide depression care. Although most participants had contact with primary care, most depression services occurred outside of primary care settings, emphasizing the need to coordinate and support the quality of community-based services across diverse community settings.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: As medical homes are developing under health reform, little is known regarding depression services need and use by diverse safety-net populations in under-resourced communities. For chronic conditions like depression, primary care services may face new opportunities to partner with diverse community service providers, such as those in social service and substance abuse centers, to support a collaborative care model of treating depression. OBJECTIVE: To understand the distribution of need and current burden of services for depression in under-resourced, diverse communities in Los Angeles. DESIGN: Baseline phase of a participatory trial to improve depression services with data from client screening and follow-up surveys. PARTICIPANTS: Of 4,440 clients screened from 93 programs (primary care, mental health, substance abuse, homeless, social and other community services) in 50 agencies, 1,322 were depressed according to an eight-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) and gave contact information; 1,246 enrolled and 981 completed surveys. Ninety-three programs, including 17 primary care/public health, 18 mental health, 20 substance abuse, ten homeless services, and 28 social/other community services, participated. MAIN MEASURES: Comparisons by setting in 6-month retrospective recall of depression services use. KEY RESULTS:Depression prevalence ranged from 51.9 % in mental health to 17.2 % in social-community programs. Depressed clients used two settings on average to receive depression services; 82 % used any setting. More clients preferred counseling over medication for depression treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Need for depression care was high, and a broad range of agencies provide depression care. Although most participants had contact with primary care, most depression services occurred outside of primary care settings, emphasizing the need to coordinate and support the quality of community-based services across diverse community settings.
Authors: Barbara A Israel; Chris M Coombe; Rebecca R Cheezum; Amy J Schulz; Robert J McGranaghan; Richard Lichtenstein; Angela G Reyes; Jaye Clement; Akosua Burris Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2010-09-23 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: David L Katz; Mary Murimi; Anjelica Gonzalez; Valentine Njike; Lawrence W Green Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2011-06-16 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Katherine E Watkins; Sarah B Hunter; Kimberly A Hepner; Susan M Paddock; Erin de la Cruz; Annie J Zhou; Jim Gilmore Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2011-06
Authors: Deborah Dobransky-Fasiska; Mary Patricia Nowalk; Harold Alan Pincus; Enrico Castillo; Brenda E Lee; Adrienne L Walnoha; Charles F Reynolds; Charlotte Brown Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Bruce L Rollman; Bea Herbeck Belnap; Michelle S LeMenager; Sati Mazumdar; Patricia R Houck; Peter J Counihan; Wishwa N Kapoor; Herbert C Schulberg; Charles F Reynolds Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-11-16 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Thomas R Belin; Andrea Jones; Lingqi Tang; Bowen Chung; Susan E Stockdale; Felica Jones; Aziza Wright; Cathy D Sherbourne; Judy Perlman; Esmeralda Pulido; Michael K Ong; James Gilmore; Jeanne Miranda; Elizabeth Dixon; Loretta Jones; Kenneth B Wells Journal: Ethn Dis Date: 2018-09-06 Impact factor: 1.847
Authors: Linda Weinreb; Carole C Upshur; Debbian Fletcher-Blake; George Reed; Christine Frisard Journal: Prim Care Companion CNS Disord Date: 2016-04-21
Authors: Keyonna M King; D'Ann Morris; Loretta Jones; Aziza Lucas-Wright; Felica Jones; Homero E Del Pino; Courtney Porter; Roberto Vargas; Katherine Kahn; Arleen F Brown; Keith C Norris Journal: HSOA J Community Med Public Health Care Date: 2015-06-15
Authors: Bowen Chung; Michael Ong; Susan L Ettner; Felica Jones; James Gilmore; Michael McCreary; Cathy Sherbourne; Victoria Ngo; Paul Koegel; Lingqi Tang; Elizabeth Dixon; Jeanne Miranda; Thomas R Belin; Kenneth B Wells Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2014-11-18 Impact factor: 25.391