ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the extent to which stigma-related concerns about mental health care account for the underuse of mental health services among low-income immigrant and U.S.-born black and Latina women. METHODS: Participants included 15,383 low-income women screened for depression in county entitlement services who were asked about barriers to care, stigma-related concerns, and whether they wanted or were getting mental health care. RESULTS: Among those who were depressed, compared with U.S.-born white women, each of the black groups were more likely to report stigma concerns (African immigrants, odds ratio [OR]=3.28, p=.004; Caribbean immigrants, OR=6.17, p=.005; U.S.-born blacks, OR=6.17, p=.06). Compared with U.S.-born white women, immigrant African women (OR=.18, p<.001), immigrant Caribbean women (OR=.11, p=.001), U.S.-born black women (OR=.31, p<.001), and U.S.-born Latinas (OR=.32, p=.03) were less likely to want treatment. Conversely, compared with U.S.-born white women, immigrant Latinas (OR=2.17, p=.02) were more likely to want treatment. There was a significant stigma-by-immigrant interaction predicting interest in treatment (p<.001). Stigma reduced the desire for mental health treatment for immigrant women with depression (OR=.35, p<.001) to a greater extent than it did for U.S.-born white women with depression (OR=.52, p=.24). CONCLUSIONS: Stigma-related concerns are most common among immigrant women and may partly account for underutilization of mental health care services by disadvantaged women from ethnic minority groups.
Subject(s)
Black or African American , Emigrants and Immigrants/psychology , Hispanic or Latino , Mental Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Poverty , Stereotyping , Adult , California , Female , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Logistic Models , Mental Disorders/ethnologyABSTRACT
This study examines 1-year depressive symptom and functional outcomes of 267 predominantly lowincome, young minority women randomly assigned to antidepressant medication, group or individual cognitive- behavioral therapy (CBT), or community referral. Seventy-six percent assigned to medications received 9 or more weeks of guideline-concordant doses of medications; 36% assigned to psychotherapy received 6 or more CBT sessions. Intent-to-treat, repeated measures analyses revealed that medication (p=.001) and CBT (p=.02) were superior to community referral in lowering depressive symptoms across 1-year follow-up. At Month 12, 50.9% assigned to antidepressants, 56.9% assigned to CBT, and 37.1% assigned to community referral were no longer clinically depressed. These findings suggest that both antidepressant medications and CBT result in clinically significant decreases in depression for low-income minority women.
Subject(s)
Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation/administration & dosage , Bupropion/administration & dosage , Cognitive Behavioral Therapy , Depressive Disorder/therapy , Minority Groups/psychology , Paroxetine/administration & dosage , Poverty/psychology , Psychotherapy, Group , Adult , Combined Modality Therapy , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Patient Education as TopicABSTRACT
CONTEXT: Impoverished minority women experience a higher burden from depression than do white women because they are less likely to receive appropriate care. Little is known about the effectiveness of guideline-based care for depression with impoverished minority women, most of whom do not seek care. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of an intervention to deliver guideline-based care for depression compared with referral to community care with low-income and minority women. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized controlled trial conducted in the Washington, DC, suburban area from March 1997 through May 2002 of 267 women with current major depression, who attended county-run Women, Infants, and Children food subsidy programs and Title X family planning clinics. Outcomes Hamilton Depression Rating Scale measured monthly from baseline through 6 months; instrumental role functioning (Social Adjustment Scale) and social functioning (Short Form 36-Item Health Survey) measured at baseline and 3 and 6 months. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned to an antidepressant medication intervention (trial of paroxetine switched to buproprion, if lack of response) (n = 88), a psychotherapy intervention (8 weeks of manual-guided cognitive behavior therapy) (n = 90), or referral to community mental health services (n = 89). RESULTS: Both the medication intervention (P<.001) and the psychotherapy intervention (P =.006) reduced depressive symptoms more than the community referral did. The medication intervention also resulted in improved instrumental role (P =.006) and social (P =.001) functioning. The psychotherapy intervention resulted in improved social functioning (P =.02). Women randomly assigned to receive medications were twice as likely (odds ratio, 2.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-4.27; P =.057) to achieve a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score of 7 or less by month 6 as were those referred to community care. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline-concordant care for major depression is effective for these ethnically diverse and impoverished patients. More women engaged in a sufficient duration of treatment with medications compared with psychotherapy, and outcome gains were more extensive and robust for medications.
