Bring It Up: An Adapted Collaborative Care Model for Depression in a Safety-Net Primary Care Clinic.

Objective: Over 90 clinical trials demonstrate the efficacy of the collaborative care model (CoCM) to treat depression in primary care but there is significant variability in real-world CoCM implementation and scalability. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of an adapted CoCM in a safety-net primary care setting. Methods: Bring It Up! (BIU) is a pilot trial comparing an adapted CoCM (intervention group) to usual care (historical controls) for primary care safety-net clinic patients with depression. Inclusion criteria: (1) age ≥18; (2) Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) score ≥10; and (3) major depressive disorder diagnosis. Patients who completed ≥6 months of treatment upon rolling enrollment (April 1, 2018-October 31, 2019) were included. Historical controls completed ≥6 months of usual care in 2017. BIU included all aspects of CoCM except accountable care and leveraged existing staff rather than a dedicated care manager. The primary outcome was depression remission (PHQ-9 <5) within 6 months. Secondary outcomes included depression response, adherence to treatment guidelines and care coordination process. Data were extracted from the electronic health record. Results: Thirty-six patients received the intervention; 41 controls received usual care. Depression remission was achieved in 33.3% of intervention patients and 0% of controls (p = 0.001). Of intervention patients, 44.4% achieved ≥50% reduction in PHQ-9 compared to 4.9% of controls (p = 0.003). Further, 66.7% of intervention patients had guideline-recommended antidepressant medication titration compared to 26.9% of controls (p = 0.003); 94.4% of intervention patients had PHQ-9 repeated compared to 53.7% of controls (p < 0.001). Conclusions: An adapted CoCM was feasible and improved depression care in a safety-net clinic.

Telemedicine and Depression Screening After the Start of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

This cohort study investigates the probability of depression screening by visit type and by patient demographic characteristics in a large health system during the early COVID-19 pandemic.

Effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial of Spanish language, digital cognitive-behavioral therapy (dCBT) intervention for depression and anxiety - protocol for the SUPERA (SUpport from PEeRs to expand Access) study.

BACKGROUND: Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Latinxs experience a longer duration of untreated depression and anxiety. LEP Latinxs have difficulty accessing mental healthcare due to insufficient Spanish-speaking behavioral/mental health clinicians to meet demand. These under-resourced healthcare systems are less likely to be the site for the implementation of innovations. Digital interventions can provide an effective option for overcoming these barriers; yet, when digital evidence-based treatments are available, uptake and engagement is often low. This manuscript presents the protocol for the SUPERA (SUpport from PEeRs to expand Access) study which will evaluate the implementation of an evidence-based, Spanish language, digital cognitive-behavioral therapy (dCBT) intervention (i.e., SilverCloud) in safety-net primary care clinics for LEP Latinx patients with depression or anxiety. METHODS: We will conduct an effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial (Type 2) design comparing engagement and clinical outcomes in two modalities of dCBT delivery (peer-supported vs. unsupported). We will also compare provider-level outreach (using a clinic patient registry) versus inreach (traditional provider referral) to compare rates of initiation, completion, and cost. Participants will be 426 LEP Latinx adults ≥18 years of age, PHQ-9 ≥ 10 or GAD-7 ≥ 8, with access to the internet via smartphone, and not currently receiving individual psychotherapy. We will collect baseline, post-intervention (8 weeks), and follow up (3 months) data. CONCLUSION: The long-term goal of this research is to aid in the implementation of digital mental health interventions that can be sustainably implemented in low-resourced settings, while reducing the reliance on professionals, overcoming workforce deficits, and increasing relevance for diverse populations.

Collaborative Care for Depression among Patients with Limited English Proficiency: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) have high rates of depression, yet face challenges accessing effective care in outpatient settings. We undertook a systematic review to investigate the effectiveness of the collaborative care model for depression for LEP patients in primary care. METHODS: We queried online PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EMBASE databases (January 1, 2000, to June 10, 2017) for quantitative studies comparing collaborative care to usual care to treat depression in adults with LEP in primary care. We evaluated the impact of collaborative care on depressive symptoms or on depression treatment. Two reviewers independently extracted key data from the studies and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane bias and quality assessment tool (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (non-RCTs). RESULTS: Of 86 titles identified, 15 were included (representing 9 studies: 5 RCTs, 3 cohort studies, and 1 case-control study). Studies included 4859 participants; 2679 (55%) reported LEP. The majority spoke Spanish (93%). The wide variability in study design and outcome definitions precluded performing a meta-analysis. Follow-up ranged from 3 months to 2 years. Three of four high-quality RCTs reported that 13-25% more patients had improved depressive symptoms when treated with culturally tailored collaborative care compared to usual care; the last had high treatment in the control arm and found equal improvement. Two non-RCT studies suggest that Spanish-speaking patients may benefit as much as, if not more than, English-speaking patients treated with collaborative care. The remaining studies reported increased receipt of preferred depression treatment (therapy vs. antidepressants) in the intervention groups. Eight of nine studies used bilingual providers to deliver the intervention. DISCUSSION: While limited by the number and variability of studies, the available research suggests that collaborative care for depression delivered by bilingual providers may be more effective than usual care among patients with LEP. Implementation studies of collaborative care, particularly among Asian and non-Spanish-speakers, are needed.

Breast and cervical cancer screening and health beliefs among African American women attending educational programs.

This article assessed the relationship between breast and cervical cancer screening rates and health beliefs in African American women participating in Witness Project of Harlem (WPH) education sessions. WPH is a culturally sensitive, faith-based breast and cervical cancer screening education program targeting African American women in medically underserved New York City communities. A questionnaire administered to women participating for the first time in a Witness Project education session collected demographics, adherence to breast and cervical cancer screening, and information about health beliefs related to cancer worry, medical mistrust, and religious faith. Screening adherence guidelines applied were as per the American Cancer Society recommendations. No statistically significant relationship was found between worry about getting breast or cervical cancer and screening adherence, or between screening adherence and agreement with statements about medical mistrust and religious beliefs. The low screening mammography and monthly breast self-exam rates emphasize the utility of programs like WPH that teach the importance of screening mammography and breast self-exam and point to the need for increased access to quality health care and cancer screening in underserved populations.

Influence of frozen-section analysis of sentinel lymph node and lumpectomy margin status on reoperation rates in patients undergoing breast-conservation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Frozen-section analysis (FS) of the sentinel lymph node (SLN) is performed to avoid reoperation for axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), but it can miss micrometastatic disease, is labor intensive for the pathologist, and does not alter the number of breast-conservation therapy (BCT) patients needing reoperation for positive margins. The purpose of this study was to determine if eliminating FS would change reoperation rates in BCT patients. STUDY DESIGN: Between January 2004 and December 2005, 1,218 patients had simultaneous BCT and SLN biopsy for invasive breast cancer. FS of the SLN was used selectively at the surgeon's discretion. Clinical and pathologic data were collected. RESULTS: Overall, 542 of 1,218 (44%) patients had positive margins. FS of the SLN was performed in 931 of 1,218 (76%) patients. In those having FS, the SLN positivity rate was 33% (306 of 931). FS identified the positive SLN in 170 of 306 (56%) patients with positive nodes, allowing for immediate ALND. But 101 of these 170 patients had positive lumpectomy margins; and FS of the SLN saved 69 of 931 (7%) patients a second operation. Of patients not having FS, 48 of 287 (17%) had a positive SLN on final pathology. Only 18 of 48 (those seen on routine hematoxylin and eosin) might have been seen on FS, potentially sparing reoperation. Half of patients not having FS required reexcision for positive margins. FS would have spared reoperation for only 8 of 287 (3%) patients in this group. Overall, of 354 of 1,218 patients with SLN metastases, 170 had immediate ALND and 98 had delayed ALND. Of those having delayed ALND, 68 of 98 also had positive margins. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients having BCT with SLN biopsy, FS identified the positive SLN in 56% of patients with positive SLNs, allowing immediate ALND, and was false negative in 44%. Margin status remains a frequent indication for reoperation in BCT; routine FS analysis of the SLN ultimately saves only a minority of patients a second operation.