Effect of Computer-Assisted Cognitive Behavior Therapy vs Usual Care on Depression Among Adults in Primary Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Depression is a common disorder that may go untreated or receive suboptimal care in primary care settings. Computer-assisted cognitive behavior therapy (CCBT) has been proposed as a method for improving access to effective psychotherapy, reducing cost, and increasing the convenience and efficiency of treatment for depression. Objectives: To evaluate whether clinician-supported CCBT is more effective than treatment as usual (TAU) in primary care patients with depression and to examine the feasibility and implementation of CCBT in a primary care population with substantial numbers of patients with low income, limited internet access, and low levels of educational attainment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial included adult primary care patients from clinical practices at the University of Louisville who scored 10 or greater on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and were randomly assigned to CCBT or TAU for 12 weeks of active treatment. Follow-up assessments were conducted 3 and 6 months after treatment completion. Enrollment occurred from June 24, 2016, to May 13, 2019. The last follow-up assessment was conducted on January 30, 2020. Interventions: CCBT included use of the 9-lesson computer program Good Days Ahead, along with as many as 12 weekly telephonic support sessions of approximately 20 minutes with a master's level therapist, in addition to TAU, which consisted of the standard clinical management procedures at the primary care sites. TAU was uncontrolled, but use of antidepressants and psychotherapy other than CCBT was recorded. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure (PHQ-9) and secondary outcome measures (Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire for negative cognitions, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, and the Satisfaction with Life Scale for quality of life) were administered at baseline, 12 weeks, and 3 and 6 months after treatment completion. Satisfaction with treatment was assessed with the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8. Results: The sample of 175 patients was predominately female (147 of 174 [84.5%]) and had a high proportion of individuals who identified as racial and ethnic minority groups (African American, 44 of 162 patients who reported [27.2%]; American Indian or Alaska Native, 2 [1.2%]; Hispanic, 4 [2.5%]; multiracial, 14 [8.6%]). An annual income of less than $30 000 was reported by 88 of 143 patients (61.5%). Overall, 95 patients (54.3%) were randomly assigned to CCBT and 80 (45.7%) to TAU. Dropout rates were 22.1% for CCBT (21 patients) and 30.0% for TAU (24 patients). An intent-to-treat analysis found that CCBT led to significantly greater improvement in PHQ-9 scores than TAU at posttreatment (mean difference, -2.5; 95% CI, -4.5 to -0.8; P = .005) and 3 month (mean difference, -2.3; 95% CI, -4.5 to -0.8; P = .006) and 6 month (mean difference, -3.2; 95% CI, -4.5 to -0.8; P = .007) follow-up points. Posttreatment response and remission rates were also significantly higher for CCBT (response, 58.4% [95% CI, 46.4-70.4%]; remission, 27.3% [95% CI, 16.4%-38.2%]) than TAU (response, 33.1% [95% CI, 20.7%-45.5%]; remission, 12.0% [95% CI, 3.3%- 20.7%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, CCBT was found to have significantly greater effects on depressive symptoms than TAU in primary care patients with depression. Because the study population included people with lower income and lack of internet access who typically have been underrepresented or not included in earlier investigations of CCBT, results suggest that this form of treatment can be acceptable and useful in diverse primary care settings. Additional studies with larger samples are needed to address implementation procedures that could enhance the effectiveness of CCBT and to examine potential factors associated with treatment outcome. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02700009.

Human Flourishing and Integrated Care Models: The Development of the Flourish Index.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In evaluating integrated care models, traditional quality measures do not account for functional and quality of life factors, affecting older adults with multiple chronic conditions. The objective of this study was the development and validation of the Flourish Index (FI), an instrument to evaluate integrated care, using a determinants of health model. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The study took place within the evaluation study of the Flourish Model (FM). The FM provides care coordination services using an integrated primary care and community-based services model. Baseline data from 70 older adults were used in the validation study. Twenty-seven quality of care indicators within six determinants of health, namely biological, psychological, individual health behaviors, health services, environmental, and social, formed part of the FI. RESULTS: Categorical principal components analysis showed a 5-dimensional structure with psychological determinants loading on the biological determinants of health. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) for the determinants was as follows: biological/psychological = 0.73, individual = 0.58, environmental = 0.62, health services = 0.65, social = 0.67, total score = 0.97. Sensitivity to change was shown for the total FI score (F1,22 = 8.82, p = .01) and social (F1,22 = 5.82, p = .02), with a trend toward sensitivity for individual health behaviors (F1,22 = 3.95, p = .06) and health services (F1,22 = 3.26, p = .09). DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The preliminary analysis of the FI shows promise for the usability of the index to provide insight into the fundamental challenges of aging. It brings greater clarity in caring for older adults and supports quality evaluation of integrated care coordination models.

Overcoming barriers to interprofessional education in gerontology: the Interprofessional Curriculum for the Care of Older Adults.

A fragmented workforce consisting of multiple disciplines with varying levels of training and limited ability to work as a team often provides care to older adults. Interprofessional education (IPE) is essential for preparing practitioners for the effective teamwork required for community-based, holistic, person-centered care of the older adults. Despite numerous programs and offerings to advance education and interdisciplinary patient care, there is an unmet need for geriatric IPE, especially as it relates to community-dwelling older adults and caregivers in medically underserved areas. A core group of university faculty from multiple disciplines received funding from the Health Resources and Services Administration Geriatric Workforce Enhancement Program to collaborate with community-based providers from several Area Agencies on Aging in the creation and implementation of the Interprofessional Curriculum for the Care of Older Adults (iCCOA). This geriatric curriculum is interprofessional, comprehensive, and community-based. Learners include third-year nursing students, nurse practitioner students, third-year medical students, internal medicine and family medicine residents, master's level social work students, third-year pharmacy students, pharmacy residents, third-year dental students, dental hygiene students, community-based organization professionals, practicing community organizers, and community health navigators. This article describes the efforts, successes, and challenges experienced with this endeavor, including securing funding, ensuring equal representation of the disciplines, adding new components to already crowded curricula, building curriculum on best practices, improving faculty expertise in IPE, managing logistics, and ensuring comprehensive evaluation. The results summarize the iCCOA components, as well as the interprofessional domains, knowledge, and competencies.