Standardized assessment of cognitive function of post-acute care patients.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of cognitive function in post-acute care (PAC) settings is important for understanding an individual's condition and care needs, developing better person-directed care plans, predicting resource needs and understanding case mix. Therefore, we tested the feasibility and reliability of cognitive function assessments, including the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), Confusion Assessment Method (CAM©), Expression and Understanding, and Behavioral Signs and Symptoms for patients in PAC under the intent of the IMPACT Act of 2014. METHODS: We conducted a national test of assessments of four standardized cognitive function data elements among patients in PAC. One hundred and forty-three PAC settings (57 home health agencies, 28 inpatient rehabilitation facilities, 28 long-term care hospitals, and 73 Skilled Nursing Facilities) across 14 U.S. markets from November 2017 to August 2018. At least one of four cognitive function data elements were assessed in 3026 patients. We assessed descriptive statistics, percent of missing data, time to complete, and interrater reliability between paired research nurse and facility staff assessors, and assessor feedback. RESULTS: The BIMS, CAM©, Expression and Understanding, and Behavioral Signs and Symptoms demonstrated low rates of missing data (less than 2%), high percent agreement, and substantial support from assessors. The prevalence of Behavioral Signs and Symptoms was low in our sample of PAC settings. CONCLUSION: Findings provide support for feasibility of implementing standardized assessment of all our cognitive function data elements for patients in PAC settings. The BIMS and CAM© were adopted into federal Quality Reporting Programs in the fiscal year/calendar year 2020 final rules. Future work could consider implementing additional cognitive items that assess areas not covered by the BIMS and CAM©.

Life Events, Barriers to Care, and Outcomes Among Minority Women Experiencing Depression: A Longitudinal, Mixed-Method Examination.

ABSTRACT: The long-term course of depression is not well-understood among minority women. We assessed depression trajectory, barriers to depression care, and life difficulties among minority women accessing health and social service programs as part of the Community Partners in Care study. Data include surveys ( N = 339) and interviews ( n = 58) administered at 3-year follow-up with African American and Latina women with improved versus persistent depression. The majority of the sample reported persistent depression (224/339, 66.1%), ≥1 barrier to mental health care (226/339, 72.4%), and multiple life difficulties (mean, 2.7; SD, 2.3). Many barriers to care ( i.e. , related to stigma and care experience, finances, and logistics) and life difficulties ( i.e. , related to finances, trauma, and relationships) were more common among individuals reporting persistent depression. Results suggest the importance of past experiences with depression treatment, ongoing barriers to care, and negative life events as contributors to inequities in depression outcomes experienced by minority women.

Resilience Against Depression Disparities (RADD): a protocol for a randomised comparative effectiveness trial for depression among predominantly low-income, racial/ethnic, sexual and gender minorities.

INTRODUCTION: Depression is the leading cause of adult disability and common among sexual and gender minority (SGM) adults. The current study builds on findings showing the effectiveness of depression quality improvement (QI) and delivery of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) skills provided by community health workers in reducing depression. Depression QI approaches across healthcare and social/community services in safety-net settings have shown improvements in mental wellness, mental health quality of life and depression over 12 months. Further, a randomised study showed improved depression among low-income racial/ethnic minorities enrolled in a CBT-informed resiliency class (Building Resilience and Increasing Community Hope (B-RICH)). The current protocol describes a comparativeness effectiveness study to evaluate whether predominantly low-income, SGM racial/ethnic minority adults randomised to a CBT-informed resiliency class have improvements in depressive symptoms over and above community-engaged QI resources and training only. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study approached three clusters of four to five programs serving predominantly SGM and racial/ethnic minority communities in the USA: two clusters in Los Angeles, California, and one in New Orleans, Louisiana. Clusters are comprised of one primary care, one mental health and two to three community agencies (eg, faith-based, social services/support, advocacy). All programs received depression QI training. The current study employed a community-partnered participatory research model to adapt the CBT-informed resiliency class, B-RICH+, to SGM communities. Study participants were screened and recruited in person from participating programs, and will complete baseline, 6- and 12-month survey follow-ups. Participants were depressed adults (8-item Patient Health Questionnaire ≥10; ≥18 years of age) who provided contact information. Enrolled participants were individually randomised to B-RICH+ or depression QI alone. Primary outcomes are depressive symptoms; secondary outcomes are mental health quality of life, mental wellness and physical health quality of life. Data collection for this study is ongoing. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The current study was approved by the UCLA Institutional Review Board. Study findings will be disseminated through scientific publications and community conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02986126.

12-Month Cost Outcomes of Community Engagement Versus Technical Assistance for Depression Quality Improvement: A Partnered, Cluster Randomized, Comparative-Effectiveness Trial.

Objective: To compare community engagement and planning (CEP) for coalition support to implement depression quality improvement (QI) to resources for services (RS) effects on service-use costs over a 12-month period. Design: Matched health and community programs (N=93) were cluster-randomized within communities to CEP or RS. Setting: Two Los Angeles communities. Participants: Adults (N=1,013) with depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) ≥10); 85% African American and Latino. Interventions: CEP and RS to support programs in depression QI. Main Outcome Measures: Intervention training and service-use costs over 12 months. Results: CEP planning and training costs were almost 3 times higher than RS, largely due to greater CEP provider training participation vs RS, with no significant differences in 12-month service-use costs. Conclusions: Compared with RS, CEP had higher planning and training costs with similar service-use costs.

Community Resilience Learning Collaborative and Research Network (C-LEARN): Study Protocol with Participatory Planning for a Randomized, Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

This manuscript presents the protocol and participatory planning process for implementing the Community Resilience Learning Collaborative and Research Network (C-LEARN) study. C-LEARN is designed to determine how to build a service program and individual client capacity to improve mental health-related quality of life among individuals at risk for depression, with exposure to social risk factors or concerns about environmental hazards in areas of Southern Louisiana at risk for events such as hurricanes and storms. The study uses a Community Partnered Participatory Research (CPPR) framework to incorporate community priorities into study design and implementation. The first phase of C-LEARN is assessment of community priorities, assets, and opportunities for building resilience through key informant interviews and community agency outreach. Findings from this phase will inform the implementation of a two-level (program-level and individual client level) randomized study in up to four South Louisiana communities. Within communities, health and social-community service programs will be randomized to Community Engagement and Planning (CEP) for multi-sector coalition support or Technical Assistance (TA) for individual program support to implement evidence-based and community-prioritized intervention toolkits, including an expanded version of depression collaborative care and resources (referrals, manuals) to address social risk factors such as financial or housing instability and for a community resilience approach to disaster preparedness and response. Within each arm, the study will randomize individual adult clients to one of two mobile applications that provide informational resources on services for depression, social risk factors, and disaster response or also provide psychoeducation on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy to enhance coping with stress and mood. Planned data collection includes baseline, six-month and brief monthly surveys for clients, and baseline and 12-month surveys for administrators and staff.

Standardization of health outcomes assessment for depression and anxiety: recommendations from the ICHOM Depression and Anxiety Working Group.

PURPOSE: National initiatives, such as the UK Improving Access to Psychological Therapies program (IAPT), demonstrate the feasibility of conducting empirical mental health assessments on a large scale, and similar initiatives exist in other countries. However, there is a lack of international consensus on which outcome domains are most salient to monitor treatment progress and how they should be measured. The aim of this project was to propose (1) an essential set of outcome domains relevant across countries and cultures, (2) a set of easily accessible patient-reported instruments, and (3) a psychometric approach to make scores from different instruments comparable. METHODS: Twenty-four experts, including ten health outcomes researchers, ten clinical experts from all continents, two patient advocates, and two ICHOM coordinators worked for seven months in a consensus building exercise to develop recommendations based on existing evidence using a structured consensus-driven modified Delphi technique. RESULTS: The group proposes to combine an assessment of potential outcome predictors at baseline (47 items: demographics, functional, clinical status, etc.), with repeated assessments of disease-specific symptoms during the treatment process (19 items: symptoms, side effects, etc.), and a comprehensive annual assessment of broader treatment outcomes (45 items: remission, absenteeism, etc.). Further, it is suggested reporting disease-specific symptoms for depression and anxiety on a standardized metric to increase comparability with other legacy instruments. All recommended instruments are provided online ( www.ichom.org ). CONCLUSION: An international standard of health outcomes assessment has the potential to improve clinical decision making, enhance health care for the benefit of patients, and facilitate scientific knowledge.

Community Engagement Compared With Technical Assistance to Disseminate Depression Care Among Low-Income, Minority Women: A Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of a (CEP) versus a technical assistance approach (Resources for Services, or RS) to disseminate depression care for low-income ethnic minority women. METHODS: We conducted secondary analyses of intervention effects for largely low-income, minority women subsample (n = 595; 45.1% Latino and 45.4% African American) in a matched, clustered, randomized control trial conducted in 2 low-resource communities in Los Angeles, California, between 2010 and 2012. Outcomes assessed included mental health, socioeconomic factors, and service use at 6- and 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Although we found no intervention difference for depressive symptoms, there were statistically significant effects for mental health quality of life, resiliency, homelessness risk, and financial difficulties at 6 months, as well as missed work days, self-efficacy, and care barriers at 12 months favoring CEP relative to RS. CEP increased use of outpatient substance abuse services and faith-based depression visits at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Engaging health care and social community programs may offer modest improvements on key functional and socioeconomic outcomes, reduce care barriers, and increase engagement in alternative depression services for low-income, predominantly ethnic minority women.

Perceived social support mediates anxiety and depressive symptom changes following primary care intervention.

BACKGROUND: The current study tested whether perceived social support serves as a mediator of anxiety and depressive symptom change following evidence-based anxiety treatment in the primary care setting. Gender, age, and race were tested as moderators. METHODS: Data were obtained from 1004 adult patients (age M = 43, SD = 13; 71% female; 56% White, 20% Hispanic, 12% Black) who participated in a randomized effectiveness trial (coordinated anxiety learning and management [CALM] study) comparing evidence-based intervention (cognitive-behavioral therapy and/or psychopharmacology) to usual care in the primary care setting. Patients were assessed with a battery of questionnaires at baseline, as well as at 6, 12, and 18 months following baseline. Measures utilized in the mediation analyses included the Abbreviated Medical Outcomes (MOS) Social Support Survey, the Brief Symptom Index (BSI)-Somatic and Anxiety subscales, and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). RESULTS: There was a mediating effect over time of perceived social support on symptom change following treatment, with stronger effects for 18-month depression than anxiety. None of the mediating pathways were moderated by gender, age, or race. CONCLUSIONS: Perceived social support may be central to anxiety and depressive symptom changes over time with evidence-based intervention in the primary care setting. These findings possibly have important implications for development of anxiety interventions.

Community-partnered cluster-randomized comparative effectiveness trial of community engagement and planning or resources for services to address depression disparities.

BACKGROUND: Depression contributes to disability and there are ethnic/racial disparities in access and outcomes of care. Quality improvement (QI) programs for depression in primary care improve outcomes relative to usual care, but health, social and other community-based service sectors also support clients in under-resourced communities. Little is known about effects on client outcomes of strategies to implement depression QI across diverse sectors. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of Community Engagement and Planning (CEP) and Resources for Services (RS) to implement depression QI on clients' mental health-related quality of life (HRQL) and services use. DESIGN: Matched programs from health, social and other service sectors were randomized to community engagement and planning (promoting inter-agency collaboration) or resources for services (individual program technical assistance plus outreach) to implement depression QI toolkits in Hollywood-Metro and South Los Angeles. PARTICIPANTS: From 93 randomized programs, 4,440 clients were screened and of 1,322 depressed by the 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) and providing contact information, 1,246 enrolled and 1,018 in 90 programs completed baseline or 6-month follow-up. MEASURES: Self-reported mental HRQL and probable depression (primary), physical activity, employment, homelessness risk factors (secondary) and services use. RESULTS: CEP was more effective than RS at improving mental HRQL, increasing physical activity and reducing homelessness risk factors, rate of behavioral health hospitalization and medication visits among specialty care users (i.e. psychiatrists, mental health providers) while increasing depression visits among users of primary care/public health for depression and users of faith-based and park programs (each p < 0.05). Employment, use of antidepressants, and total contacts were not significantly affected (each p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Community engagement to build a collaborative approach to implementing depression QI across diverse programs was more effective than resources for services for individual programs in improving mental HRQL, physical activity and homelessness risk factors, and shifted utilization away from hospitalizations and specialty medication visits toward primary care and other sectors, offering an expanded health-home model to address multiple disparities for depressed safety-net clients.

Community-partnered evaluation of depression services for clients of community-based agencies in under-resourced communities in Los Angeles.

BACKGROUND: As medical homes are developing under health reform, little is known regarding depression services need and use by diverse safety-net populations in under-resourced communities. For chronic conditions like depression, primary care services may face new opportunities to partner with diverse community service providers, such as those in social service and substance abuse centers, to support a collaborative care model of treating depression. OBJECTIVE: To understand the distribution of need and current burden of services for depression in under-resourced, diverse communities in Los Angeles. DESIGN: Baseline phase of a participatory trial to improve depression services with data from client screening and follow-up surveys. PARTICIPANTS: Of 4,440 clients screened from 93 programs (primary care, mental health, substance abuse, homeless, social and other community services) in 50 agencies, 1,322 were depressed according to an eight-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) and gave contact information; 1,246 enrolled and 981 completed surveys. Ninety-three programs, including 17 primary care/public health, 18 mental health, 20 substance abuse, ten homeless services, and 28 social/other community services, participated. MAIN MEASURES: Comparisons by setting in 6-month retrospective recall of depression services use. KEY RESULTS: Depression prevalence ranged from 51.9 % in mental health to 17.2 % in social-community programs. Depressed clients used two settings on average to receive depression services; 82 % used any setting. More clients preferred counseling over medication for depression treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Need for depression care was high, and a broad range of agencies provide depression care. Although most participants had contact with primary care, most depression services occurred outside of primary care settings, emphasizing the need to coordinate and support the quality of community-based services across diverse community settings.

Does a quality improvement intervention for anxiety result in differential outcomes for lower-income patients?

OBJECTIVE: The authors examined the effects of a collaborative care intervention for anxiety disorders in primary care on lower-income participants relative to those with higher incomes. They hypothesized that lower-income individuals would show less improvement or improve at a lower rate, given that they would experience greater economic stress over the treatment course. An alternative hypothesis was that lower-income participants would improve at a higher rate because the intervention facilitates access to evidence-based treatment, which typically is less available to persons with lower incomes. METHOD: Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with lower (N=287) and higher (N=717) income were compared using t tests and chi-square tests for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. For the longitudinal analysis of intervention effects by income group, the outcome measures were jointly modeled at baseline and at 6, 12, and 18 months by study site, income, time, intervention, time and intervention, income and time, income and intervention, and time, intervention, and income. RESULTS: Although lower-income participants were more ill and had greater disability at baseline than those with higher incomes, the two income groups were similar in clinical response. The lower-income participants experienced a comparable degree of clinical improvement, despite receiving fewer treatment sessions, less relapse prevention, and less continuous care. CONCLUSIONS: These findings contribute to the ongoing discussion as to whether or not, and to what extent, quality improvement interventions work equally well across income groups or require tailoring for specific vulnerable populations.

Anxiety treatment improves physical functioning with oblique scoring of the SF-12 short form health survey.

OBJECTIVE: No studies have found a positive effect of anxiety treatment on physical functioning, but recent investigations of the 12-item Short Form Health Questionnaire (SF-12), which is frequently used to assess physical functioning, have suggested that orthogonal scoring of the summary measure may distort representations of physical health. The current study reanalyzes whether anxiety treatment improves physical functioning using oblique scoring in the Coordinated Anxiety Learning and Management (CALM) randomized clinical trial for the treatment of anxiety disorders. Replication was tested in reanalysis of data from the earlier Collaborative Care for Anxiety and Panic (CCAP) randomized clinical trial for the treatment of panic disorder. METHOD: The CALM study included 1004 primary care patients with panic, social anxiety, generalized anxiety or posttraumatic stress disorders. Patients received usual care (UC) or an evidence-based intervention (cognitive behavioral therapy, psychotropic medication or both; ITV). Physical functioning (SF-12v2) was assessed at baseline and at 6, 12 and 18 months. Oblique and orthogonal scoring methods for the physical functioning aggregate measure from SF-12 scale items were compared. RESULTS: In CALM, physical functioning improved to a greater degree in ITV than UC for oblique but not orthogonal scoring. Findings were replicated in the CCAP data. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based treatment for anxiety disorders in primary care improves physical functioning when measured using oblique scoring of the SF-12. Due to this scoring issue, effects of mental health treatment on physical functioning may have been understated.

Implementation of the CALM intervention for anxiety disorders: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Investigators recently tested the effectiveness of a collaborative-care intervention for anxiety disorders: Coordinated Anxiety Learning and Management(CALM) []) in 17 primary care clinics around the United States. Investigators also conducted a qualitative process evaluation. Key research questions were as follows: (1) What were the facilitators/barriers to implementing CALM? (2) What were the facilitators/barriers to sustaining CALM after the study was completed? METHODS: Key informant interviews were conducted with 47 clinic staff members (18 primary care providers, 13 nurses, 8 clinic administrators, and 8 clinic staff) and 14 study-trained anxiety clinical specialists (ACSs) who coordinated the collaborative care and provided cognitive behavioral therapy. The interviews were semistructured and conducted by phone. Data were content analyzed with line-by-line analyses leading to the development and refinement of themes. RESULTS: Similar themes emerged across stakeholders. Important facilitators to implementation included the perception of "low burden" to implement, provider satisfaction with the intervention, and frequent provider interaction with ACSs. Barriers to implementation included variable provider interest in mental health, high rates of part-time providers in clinics, and high social stressors of lower socioeconomic-status patients interfering with adherence. Key sustainability facilitators were if a clinic had already incorporated collaborative care for another disorder and presence of onsite mental health staff. The main barrier to sustainability was funding for the ACS. CONCLUSIONS: The CALM intervention was relatively easy to incorporate during the effectiveness trial, and satisfaction was generally high. Numerous implementation and sustainability barriers could limit the reach and impact of widespread adoption. Findings should be interpreted with the knowledge that the ACSs in this study were provided and trained by the study. Future research should explore uptake of CALM and similar interventions without the aid of an effectiveness trial.

Nursing staff, patient, and environmental factors associated with accurate pain assessment.

CONTEXT: Although pain ranks highly among reasons for seeking care, routine pain assessment is often inaccurate. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated factors associated with nurses (e.g., registered) and other nursing support staff (e.g., licensed vocational nurses and health technicians) discordance with patients in estimates of pain in a health system where routine pain screening using a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS) is mandated. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, visit-based, cohort study that included surveys of clinic outpatients (n=465) and nursing staff (n=94) who screened for pain as part of routine vital sign measurement during intake. These data were supplemented by chart review. We compared patient pain levels documented by the nursing staff (N-NRS) with those reported by the patient during the study survey (S-NRS). RESULTS: Pain underestimation (N-NRSS-NRS) in 7% of the cases. Nursing staff used informal pain-screening techniques that did not follow established NRS protocols in half of the encounters. Pain underestimation was positively associated with more years of nursing staff work experience and patient anxiety or post-traumatic stress disorder and negatively associated with better patient-reported health status. Pain overestimation was positively associated with nursing staff's use of the full NRS protocol and with a distracting environment in which patient vitals were taken. CONCLUSION: Despite a long-standing mandate, pain-screening implementation falls short, and informal screening is common.

The effects of quality improvement for depression in primary care at nine years: results from a randomized, controlled group-level trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine 9-year outcomes of implementation of short-term quality improvement (QI) programs for depression in primary care. DATA SOURCES: Depressed primary care patients from six U.S. health care organizations. STUDY DESIGN: Group-level, randomized controlled trial. DATA COLLECTION: Patients were randomly assigned to short-term QI programs supporting education and resources for medication management (QI-Meds) or access to evidence-based psychotherapy (QI-Therapy); and usual care (UC). Of 1,088 eligible patients, 805 (74 percent) completed 9-year follow-up; results were extrapolated to 1,269 initially enrolled and living. Outcomes were psychological well-being (Mental Health Inventory, five-item version [MHI5]), unmet need, services use, and intermediate outcomes. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: At 9 years, there were no overall intervention status effects on MHI5 or unmet need (largest F (2,41)=2.34, p=.11), but relative to UC, QI-Meds worsened MHI5, reduced effectiveness of coping and among whites lowered tangible social support (smallest t(42)=2.02, p=.05). The interventions reduced outpatient visits and increased perceived barriers to care among whites, but reduced attitudinal barriers due to racial discrimination and other factors among minorities (smallest F (2,41)=3.89, p=.03). CONCLUSIONS: Main intervention effects were over but the results suggest some unintended negative consequences at 9 years particularly for the medication-resource intervention and shifts to greater perceived barriers among whites yet reduced attitudinal barriers among minorities.

Relationships among pain, anxiety, and depression in primary care.

Pain, anxiety, and depression are commonly seen in primary care patients and there is considerable evidence that these experiences are related. This study examined associations between symptoms of pain and symptoms and diagnoses of anxiety and depression in primary care patients. Results indicate that primary care patients who endorse symptoms of muscle pain, headache, or stomach pain are approximately 2.5-10 times more likely to screen positively for panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, or major depressive disorder. Endorsement of pain symptoms was also significantly associated with confirmed diagnoses of several of the anxiety disorders and/or major depression, with odds ratios ranging from approximately 3 to 9 for the diagnoses. Patients with an anxiety or depressive disorder also reported greater interference from pain. Similarly, patients endorsing pain symptoms reported lower mental health functioning and higher scores on severity measures of depression, social anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder. Mediation analyses indicated that depression mediated some, but not all of the relationships between anxiety and pain. Overall, these results reveal an association between reports of pain symptoms and not only depression, but also anxiety. An awareness of these relationships may be particularly important in primary care settings where a patient who presents with reports of pain may have an undiagnosed anxiety or depressive disorder.

Cost-effectiveness of quality improvement programs for patients with subthreshold depression or depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: This study explored the cost-effectiveness of quality-improvement interventions for depression in primary care, relative to usual care, among patients with subthreshold depression or depressive disorder. METHODS: A total of 746 primary care patients in managed care organizations with 12-month depressive disorder and 502 with current depressive symptoms but no disorder (subthreshold depression) participated in a group-level randomized controlled trial initiated between June 1996 and March 1997. Matched clinics were randomly assigned to enhanced usual care or one of two quality improvement interventions that provided education to manage depression over time and resources to facilitate access to medication management or psychotherapy for six to 12 months. RESULTS: The cost-effectiveness ratio for the pooled intervention groups versus usual care was $2,028 for patients with subthreshold depression (95% confidence interval [CI]=-$17,225 to $21,282) and $53,716 for those with depressive disorder (CI=$14,194 to $93,238), by using a measure of quality-adjusted life years (QALY) based on the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey. Similar results were obtained when alternative QALY measures were used. CONCLUSIONS: Although precision was limited, even the upper limit of the 95% CIs suggests that such interventions are as cost-effective for patients with subthreshold depression as are many widely used medical therapies. Despite lack of evidence for efficacy of treatments for subthreshold depression, disease management programs that support clinical care decisions over time for patients with subthreshold depression or depressive disorder can yield cost-effectiveness ratios comparable to those of widely adopted medical therapies. Achieving greater certainty about average cost-effectiveness would require a much larger study.

The importance of social context: neighborhood stressors, stress-buffering mechanisms, and alcohol, drug, and mental health disorders.

This study examines the relationship among neighborhood stressors, stress-buffering mechanisms, and likelihood of alcohol, drug, and mental health (ADM) disorders in adults from 60 US communities (n=12,716). Research shows that larger support structures may interact with individual support factors to affect mental health, but few studies have explored buffering effects of these neighborhood characteristics. We test a conceptual model that explores effects of neighborhood stressors and stress-buffering mechanisms on ADM disorders. Using Health Care for Communities with census and other data, we found a lower likelihood of disorders in neighborhoods with a greater presence of stress-buffering mechanisms. Higher neighborhood average household occupancy and churches per capita were associated with a lower likelihood of disorders. Cross-level interactions revealed that violence-exposed individuals in high crime neighborhoods are vulnerable to depressive/anxiety disorders. Likewise, individuals with low social support in neighborhoods with high social isolation (i.e., low-average household occupancy) had a higher likelihood of disorders. If replicated by future studies using longitudinal data, our results have implications for policies and programs targeting neighborhoods to reduce ADM disorders.

Adherence to treatment among economically disadvantaged patients with panic disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the feelings of disadvantaged patients about and experiences of treatment for anxiety disorders in primary care settings. METHODS: The patients had participated in the Collaborative Care for Anxiety and Panic study, which tested the effectiveness of an intervention to help primary care providers treat panic disorder. The treatment comprised cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) combined with pharmacotherapy administered by primary care physicians with the expert advice of a psychiatrist. Post hoc semistructured interviews were conducted with 21 intervention participants who were classified according to adherence or nonadherence to treatment. The interview focused on reactions to CBT; reactions to the different features of the intervention, such as therapy sessions, demonstration videotapes, exercises, and a workbook; and comfort with the therapist. Two members of the research team independently coded, analyzed, and interpreted the data. RESULTS: Three themes emerged: information was empowering and reduced the sense of isolation experienced by participants, participants engaged in a dynamic and iterative personalized assessment of the intervention, and barriers to adherence were predominantly logistical. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that the extent to which patients chose to remain in treatment and follow treatment recommendations was rarely an all-or-nothing phenomenon. In a disadvantaged population such decisions seem to be influenced by the beliefs of the patient about what will and will not be effective in his or her individual case, an ongoing self-assessment of well-being, and the logistical barriers that come into play.

Poverty and response to treatment among panic disorder patients in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: Despite well-established links between poverty and poor mental illness outcome as well as recent reports exploring racial and ethnic health disparities, little is known about the outcomes of evidence-based psychiatric treatment for poor individuals. METHOD: Primary care patients with panic disorder (N=232) who were participating in a randomized controlled trial comparing a cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) and pharmacotherapy intervention to usual care were divided into those patients above (N=152) and below (N=80) the poverty line. Telephone assessments at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months were used to compare the amount of evidence-based care received as well as clinical and functional outcomes. RESULTS: Poor subjects were more severely ill at baseline, with more medical and psychiatric comorbidity. The increases in the amount of evidence-based care and reductions in clinical symptoms and disability were comparable in the two groups such that poorer individuals, although responding equivalently, continued to be more ill and disabled at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The comparable response of poor individuals in this study suggests that standard CBT and pharmacotherapy treatments for panic disorder do not need to be "tailored" to be effective in poor populations. However, the more severe illness both at baseline and follow-up in these poor individuals suggests that treatment programs may need to be extended in order to treat residual symptoms and disability in these patients so that they might achieve comparable levels of remission.