Improving Mental Health Guardianship: From Prevention to Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to identify the most promising strategies for improving the mental health guardianship process in Los Angeles County for adults with mental illness who are gravely disabled. METHODS: In May and June 2019, 56 experts, working in hospitals or outpatient facilities or representing legal, advocacy, policy, or forensic organizations, participated in an online modified-Delphi panel, rating the ethical appropriateness, impact on care quality, efficiency, and feasibility of nine strategies for improvement of mental health guardianship. Agreement was determined with the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method, and comments were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: The strategy ranked highest by the participating experts was improving the administrative functioning and judicial processes of entities involved in mental health guardianship proceedings-it was the only strategy that achieved agreement among panelists and was rated highly on all four criteria. Other preferred strategies were enhancing the ability of assertive outpatient mental health teams to serve individuals before they experience a crisis and expanding the continuum of unlocked residential treatment settings. CONCLUSIONS: Opportunities exist to improve all stages of the mental health guardianship process. Experts favored strategies that streamline administrative processes, facilitate community integration into treatment, and ensure fidelity to best practices. Improving the mental health guardianship process has the potential to speed up delivery of services, better manage resources, and increase access to treatment for individuals with mental illness who are gravely disabled.

Engaging LGBTQ Communities in Community-Partnered Participatory Research: Lessons from the Resilience Against Depression Disparities Study.

BACKGROUND: The Resilience Against Depression Disparities (RADD), a community partnered, randomized comparative effectiveness study, aimed to address mental health in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer/Questioning (LGBTQ) racial/ethnic populations in New Orleans and Los Angeles. OBJECTIVES: To describe engagement methods, lessons learned, and recommendations in engaging LGBTQ individuals and agencies throughout the RADD study. METHODS: RADD used a community partnered participatory research framework to engage LGBTQ community members and agencies. Observational and quantitative data were collected to describe engagement activities and study adaptations from October 2016 to May 2019. RESULTS: Our partnered approach resulted in multiple study adaptations. The principles of cultural humility, coleadership, and addressing health determinants were important to successful engagement with LGBTQ community members and study participants. We recommend maintaining cultural humility as the tenant of all research activities. CONCLUSIONS: This project's engagement plan demonstrates that community-academic partnerships can be forged to create and modify existing study models for LGBTQ communities.

Mental Health Community and Health System Issues in COVID-19: Lessons from Academic, Community, Provider and Policy Stakeholders.

The coronavirus pandemic of 2019 (COVID-19) has created unprecedented changes to everyday life for millions of Americans due to job loss, school closures, stay-at-home orders and health and mortality consequences. In turn, physicians, academics, and policymakers have turned their attention to the public mental health toll of COVID-19. This commentary reporting from the field integrates perceptions of academic, community, health system, and policy leaders from state, county, and local levels in commenting on community mental health needs in the COVID-19 pandemic. Stakeholders noted the broad public health scope of mental health challenges while expressing concern about exacerbation of existing disparities in access and adverse social determinants, including for communities with high COVID-19 infection rates, such as African Americans and Latinos. They noted rapid changes toward telehealth and remote care, and the importance of understanding impacts of changes, including who may benefit or have limited access, with implications for future services delivery. Needs for expanded workforce and training in mental health were noted, as well as potential public health value of expanding digital resources tailored to local populations for enhancing resilience to stressors. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to changes in delivery of health care services across populations and systems. Concerns over the mental health impact of COVID-19 has enhanced interest in remote mental care delivery and preventive services, while being mindful of potential for enhanced disparities and needs to address social determinants of health. Ongoing quality improvement across systems can integrate lessons learned to enhance a public mental well-being.

Community Engagement and Planning versus Resources for Services for Implementing Depression Quality Improvement: Exploratory Analysis for Black and Latino Adults.

Objective: Racial/ethnic minorities experience disparities in depression1 and there is a paucity of evidence-based interventions to improve depression care access and outcomes. Community Partners in Care (CPIC) is a community-partnered study of depression care quality improvement (QI) in under-resourced, urban communities: Community Engagement and Planning (CEP) for multi-sector coalitions, and Resources for Services (RS) for program technical assistance.2 CEP demonstrated benefits for the overall CPIC study population; effects for Black and Latino sub-populations are unknown. Methods: This sub-analysis examines outcomes for 409 Latino and 488 Black (non-Latino) adults recruited from 90 programs who completed baseline or 6-month follow-up. Regression analyses were used to estimate CEP vs RS intervention effects on primary (Mental Health Related Quality of Life [MHRQL], Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9]) and community-prioritized (mental wellness, physical activity, risk for homelessness) outcomes at 6-months. Results: Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly by intervention in either group. In the adjusted analysis for Black adults, CEP resulted in decreased odds of poor MHRQL (OR: .62, 95% CI=.41-.94, P=.028) with a trend for reducing homelessness risk (OR: .60, .35-1.05, P=.69). For Latino adults, CEP resulted in greater probability of mental wellness (OR: 1.81, 1.05-3.13, P=.034) and a trend for increased physical activity (OR: 1.52, .93-2.49, P=.091). Conclusions: Exploratory analyses of CEP for depression quality improvement suggests significant 6-month benefits in mental health outcomes for Black and Latino participants and trends for improvement in community-prioritized outcomes for both groups. Findings may inform research in multi-sector coalitions to promote equity in depression care.

Effect of pharmacological treatment of depression on A1C and quality of life in low-income Hispanics and African Americans with diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether pharmacological treatment of depression in low-income minorities with diabetes improves A1C and quality of life (QOL). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients were screened for depression using Whooley's two-question tool at a county diabetes clinic. Depression was confirmed (or not) with the Computerized Diagnostic Interview Survey (CDIS) software program, and the severity of depression was assessed monthly by the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D). Depressed subjects with A1C levels >or=8.0% were randomly assigned to receive either sertraline or placebo. Diabetes care was provided by nurses following detailed treatment algorithms who were unaware of therapy for depression. RESULTS: A total of 150 subjects answered positively to at least one question on Whooley's questionnaire. The positive predictive value for depression diagnosed by CDIS was 69, 67, and 84% for positive answers to question 1 only, question 2 only, or both, respectively. Of the 89 subjects who entered the study, 75 completed. An intention-to-treat analysis revealed significant differences between baseline and 6 months in HAM-D and pain scores, QOL, and A1C and systolic blood pressure levels in both groups, with no differences between groups for the first three but a significantly greater decrease with sertraline in A1C and systolic blood pressure levels. Changes in HAM-D scores and A1C levels were significantly correlated in all subjects (P = 0.45 [P < 10(-6)]). CONCLUSIONS: In this low-income minority population, pharmacological treatment of depression significantly improved A1C and systolic blood pressure levels compared with placebo.

Psychiatric evaluations of heart transplant candidates: predicting post-transplant hospitalizations, rejection episodes, and survival.

The authors assessed the validity of psychiatric evaluations for orthotopic heart transplant candidates with respect to predicting adverse post-transplant outcomes. A group of 108 transplant recipients were followed for an average of 970 days, and pre-transplant evaluations were retrospectively coded for psychiatric risk factors. Previous suicide attempts, poor adherence to medical recommendations, previous drug or alcohol rehabilitation, and depression significantly predicted attenuated survival times. Also, past suicide attempt was associated with a greater risk for post-transplant infection. Assessment and early treatment for these risk factors may reduce post-transplant morbidity and mortality.