Duncan G Campbell1, Laura M Bonner2,3,4, Cory R Bolkan5, Andrew B Lanto6, Kara Zivin7,8,9, Thomas J Waltz7,10, Ruth Klap6, Lisa V Rubenstein6,11,12, Edmund F Chaney3,4. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA. duncan.campbell@umontana.edu. 2. Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA. 3. Health Services Research and Development Service, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA. 4. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA. 5. Department of Human Development, Washington State University Vancouver, Vancouver, WA, USA. 6. VA HSR&D Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation and Policy (CSHIIP), VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 7. Center for Clinical Management Research, Health Services Research and Development Service, VA Ann Arbor Health Care System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 8. Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 9. Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 10. Department of Psychology, Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI, USA. 11. UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 12. RAND Health Program, Santa Monica, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: 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. PURPOSE: 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. METHODS: We conducted cross-sectional and prospective analyses of existing data from 761 VA PC patients with probable major depression. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: High stigma is associated with lower preferences for care from mental health specialists and confers risk for minimal depression treatment engagement.
BACKGROUND: 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. PURPOSE: 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. METHODS: We conducted cross-sectional and prospective analyses of existing data from 761 VA PC patients with probable major depression. RESULTS: Relative to low-stigmapatients, 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. CONCLUSIONS:High stigma is associated with lower preferences for care from mental health specialists and confers risk for minimal depression treatment engagement.
Authors: Charlotte Brown; Deena R Battista; Susan M Sereika; Richard D Bruehlman; Jacqueline Dunbar-Jacob; Michael E Thase Journal: J Fam Pract Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 0.493
Authors: Craig S Rosen; Mark A Greenbaum; Julie E Fitt; Charlene Laffaye; Virginia A Norris; Rachel Kimerling Journal: J Nerv Ment Dis Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 2.254
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: Ronald C Kessler; Patricia Berglund; Olga Demler; Robert Jin; Doreen Koretz; Kathleen R Merikangas; A John Rush; Ellen E Walters; Philip S Wang Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-06-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Mariana Flávia de Souza Tursi; Cristiane von Werne Baes; Fabio Ribeiro de Barros Camacho; Sandra Marcia de Carvalho Tofoli; Mario Francisco Juruena Journal: Aust N Z J Psychiatry Date: 2013-06-05 Impact factor: 5.744
Authors: Edmund F Chaney; Lisa V Rubenstein; Chuan-Fen Liu; Elizabeth M Yano; Cory Bolkan; Martin Lee; Barbara Simon; Andy Lanto; Bradford Felker; Jane Uman Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2011-10-27 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Beth Waitzfelder; Christine Stewart; Karen J Coleman; Rebecca Rossom; Brian K Ahmedani; Arne Beck; John E Zeber; Yihe G Daida; Connie Trinacty; Samuel Hubley; Gregory E Simon Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Audrey L Jones; Maria K Mor; Gretchen L Haas; Adam J Gordon; John P Cashy; James H Schaefer; Leslie R M Hausmann Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-06-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Kevin A Hallgren; Elizabeth Witwer; Imara West; Laura-Mae Baldwin; Dennis Donovan; Brenda Stuvek; Gina A Keppel; Brenda Mollis; Kari A Stephens Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2019-11-16
Authors: Stefan G Kertesz; Aerin J deRussy; Young-Il Kim; April E Hoge; Erika L Austin; Adam J Gordon; Lillian Gelberg; Sonya E Gabrielian; Kevin R Riggs; John R Blosnich; Ann E Montgomery; Sally K Holmes; Allyson L Varley; David E Pollio; Adi V Gundlapalli; Audrey L Jones Journal: Med Care Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 3.178
Authors: Sarju Sing Rai; Elena V Syurina; Ruth M H Peters; Annisa Ika Putri; Marjolein B M Zweekhorst Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-09-12 Impact factor: 3.390