OBJECTIVE: Colocation of mental health screening, assessment, and treatment in primary care reduces stigma, improves access, and increases coordination of care between mental health and primary care providers. However, little information exists regarding older adults' attitudes about screening for mental health problems in primary care. The objective of this study was to evaluate older primary care patients' acceptance of and satisfaction with screening for depression and anxiety. METHODS: The study was conducted at an urban, academically affiliated primary care practice serving older adults. Study patients (N = 107) were screened for depression/anxiety and underwent a post-screening survey/interview to assess their reactions to the screening experience. RESULTS: Most patients (88.6%) found the length of the screening to be "just right." A majority found the screening questions somewhat or very acceptable (73.4%) and not at all difficult (81.9%). Most participants did not find the questions stressful (84.9%) or intrusive (91.5%); and a majority were not at all embarrassed (93.4%), upset (93.4%), or uncomfortable (88.8%) during the screening process. When asked about frequency of screening, most patients (72.4%) desired screening for depression/anxiety yearly or more. Of the 79 patients who had spoken with their physicians about mental health during the visit, 89.8% reported that it was easy or very easy to talk with their physicians about depression/anxiety. Multivariate results showed that patients with higher anxiety had a lower positive reaction to the screen when controlling for gender, age, and patient-physician communication. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate strong patient support for depression and anxiety screening in primary care.
OBJECTIVE: Colocation of mental health screening, assessment, and treatment in primary care reduces stigma, improves access, and increases coordination of care between mental health and primary care providers. However, little information exists regarding older adults' attitudes about screening for mental health problems in primary care. The objective of this study was to evaluate older primary care patients' acceptance of and satisfaction with screening for depression and anxiety. METHODS: The study was conducted at an urban, academically affiliated primary care practice serving older adults. Study patients (N = 107) were screened for depression/anxiety and underwent a post-screening survey/interview to assess their reactions to the screening experience. RESULTS: Most patients (88.6%) found the length of the screening to be "just right." A majority found the screening questions somewhat or very acceptable (73.4%) and not at all difficult (81.9%). Most participants did not find the questions stressful (84.9%) or intrusive (91.5%); and a majority were not at all embarrassed (93.4%), upset (93.4%), or uncomfortable (88.8%) during the screening process. When asked about frequency of screening, most patients (72.4%) desired screening for depression/anxiety yearly or more. Of the 79 patients who had spoken with their physicians about mental health during the visit, 89.8% reported that it was easy or very easy to talk with their physicians about depression/anxiety. Multivariate results showed that patients with higher anxiety had a lower positive reaction to the screen when controlling for gender, age, and patient-physician communication. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate strong patient support for depression and anxiety screening in primary care.
Authors: Jürgen Unützer; Wayne Katon; Christopher M Callahan; John W Williams; Enid Hunkeler; Linda Harpole; Marc Hoffing; Richard D Della Penna; Polly Hitchcock Noël; Elizabeth H B Lin; Patricia A Areán; Mark T Hegel; Lingqi Tang; Thomas R Belin; Sabine Oishi; Christopher Langston Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-12-11 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Yuhua Bao; George S Alexopoulos; Lawrence P Casalino; Thomas R Ten Have; Julie M Donohue; Edward P Post; Bruce R Schackman; Martha L Bruce Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2011-06
Authors: Enid M Hunkeler; Wayne Katon; Lingqi Tang; John W Williams; Kurt Kroenke; Elizabeth H B Lin; Linda H Harpole; Patricia Arean; Stuart Levine; Lydia M Grypma; William A Hargreaves; Jürgen Unützer Journal: BMJ Date: 2006-01-20
Authors: Kurt Kroenke; Robert L Spitzer; Janet B W Williams; Patrick O Monahan; Bernd Löwe Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2007-03-06 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Martha L Bruce; Thomas R Ten Have; Charles F Reynolds; Ira I Katz; Herbert C Schulberg; Benoit H Mulsant; Gregory K Brown; Gail J McAvay; Jane L Pearson; George S Alexopoulos Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-03-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: George S Alexopoulos; Charles F Reynolds; Martha L Bruce; Ira R Katz; Patrick J Raue; Benoit H Mulsant; David W Oslin; Thomas Ten Have Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2009-06-15 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Robert C Abrams; Blanca Boné; M Cary Reid; Ronald D Adelman; Risa Breckman; Ronald Goralewicz; Marlena Palombo; Amy Stern; Rouzi Shengelia; Jeanne Teresi Journal: J Geriatr Date: 2015
Authors: Kaitlyn E Brodar; Annette M La Greca; Rafael O Leite; Daniella Marchetti; Manuela Jaramillo; Maria Luzuriaga; Rajesh Garg; Patrice Saab Journal: J Clin Psychol Med Settings Date: 2022-03-22