Jin Hui Joo1, Seungyoung Hwang2, Hawa Abu3, Joseph J Gallo2. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: jjoo1@jhmi.edu. 2. Department of Mental Health, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. 3. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Traditional mental health services are not used by a majority of older adults with depression, suggesting a need for new methods of health service delivery. We conducted a pilot study using peer mentors to deliver depression care to older adults in collaboration with a mental health professional. We evaluated the acceptability of peer mentors to older adults and examined patient experiences of the intervention. METHODS: Six peer mentors met 30 patients for 1 hour weekly for 8 weeks. A mental health professional provided an initial clinical evaluation as well as supervision and guidance to peer mentors concurrent with patient meetings. We measured depressive symptoms at baseline and after study completion, and depressive symptoms and working alliance at weekly peer-patient meetings. We also interviewed participants and peer mentors to assess their experiences of the intervention. RESULTS: Ninety-six percent of patients attended all eight meetings with the peer mentor and PHQ-9 scores decreased for 85% of patients. Patients formed strong, trusting relationships with peer mentors. Patients emphasized the importance of trust, of developing a strong relationship, and of the credibility and communication skills of the peer mentor. Participants described benefits such as feeling hopeful, and reported changes in attitude, behavior, and insight. CONCLUSIONS: Use of peer mentors working in collaboration with a mental health professional is promising as a model of depression care delivery for older adults. Testing of effectiveness is needed and processes of recruitment, role definition, and supervision should be further developed.
OBJECTIVES: Traditional mental health services are not used by a majority of older adults with depression, suggesting a need for new methods of health service delivery. We conducted a pilot study using peer mentors to deliver depression care to older adults in collaboration with a mental health professional. We evaluated the acceptability of peer mentors to older adults and examined patient experiences of the intervention. METHODS: Six peer mentors met 30 patients for 1 hour weekly for 8 weeks. A mental health professional provided an initial clinical evaluation as well as supervision and guidance to peer mentors concurrent with patient meetings. We measured depressive symptoms at baseline and after study completion, and depressive symptoms and working alliance at weekly peer-patient meetings. We also interviewed participants and peer mentors to assess their experiences of the intervention. RESULTS: Ninety-six percent of patients attended all eight meetings with the peer mentor and PHQ-9 scores decreased for 85% of patients. Patients formed strong, trusting relationships with peer mentors. Patients emphasized the importance of trust, of developing a strong relationship, and of the credibility and communication skills of the peer mentor. Participants described benefits such as feeling hopeful, and reported changes in attitude, behavior, and insight. CONCLUSIONS: Use of peer mentors working in collaboration with a mental health professional is promising as a model of depression care delivery for older adults. Testing of effectiveness is needed and processes of recruitment, role definition, and supervision should be further developed.
Authors: D V Sheehan; Y Lecrubier; K H Sheehan; P Amorim; J Janavs; E Weiller; T Hergueta; R Baker; G C Dunbar Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 1998 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Ashwin A Kotwal; Shannon M Fuller; Janet J Myers; Daniel Hill; Soe Han Tha; Alexander K Smith; Carla M Perissinotto Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2021-09-04 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Jessica P S Tang; Tianyin Liu; Shiyu Lu; C Y Sing; Lesley C Y Sze; Terry Y S Lum; Samson Tse Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2022-05-19 Impact factor: 4.070
Authors: Timothy C Guetterman; Rae V Sakakibara; Vicki L Plano Clark; Mark Luborsky; Sarah M Murray; Felipe González Castro; John W Creswell; Charles Deutsch; Joseph J Gallo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-11-15 Impact factor: 3.240