Depression Quality of Care: Measuring Quality over Time Using VA Electronic Medical Record Data.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) has invested substantially in evidence-based mental health care. Yet no electronic performance measures for assessing the level at which the population of Veterans with depression receive appropriate care have proven robust enough to support rigorous evaluation of the VA's depression initiatives. OBJECTIVE: Our objectives were to develop prototype longitudinal electronic population-based measures of depression care quality, validate the measures using expert panel judgment by VA and non-VA experts, and examine detection, follow-up and treatment rates over a decade (2000-2010). We describe our development methodology and the challenges to creating measures that capture the longitudinal course of clinical care from detection to treatment. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Data come from the National Patient Care Database and Pharmacy Benefits Management Database for primary care patients from 1999 to 2011, from nine Veteran Integrated Service Networks. MEASURES: We developed four population-based quality metrics for depression care that incorporate a 6-month look back and 1-year follow-up: detection of a new episode of depression, 84 and 180 day follow-up, and minimum appropriate treatment 1-year post detection. Expert panel techniques were used to evaluate the measure development methodology and results. Key challenges to creating valid longitudinal measures are discussed. KEY RESULTS: Over the decade, the rates for detection of new episodes of depression remained stable at 7-8 %. Follow-up at 84 and 180 days were 37 % and 45 % in 2000 and increased to 56 % and 63 % by 2010. Minimum appropriate treatment remained relatively stable over the decade (82-84 %). CONCLUSIONS: The development of valid longitudinal, population-based quality measures for depression care is a complex process with numerous challenges. If the full spectrum of care from detection to follow-up and treatment is not captured, performance measures could actually mask the clinical areas in need of quality improvement efforts.

Stigma Predicts Treatment Preferences and Care Engagement Among Veterans Affairs Primary Care Patients with Depression.

BACKGROUND: Whereas stigma regarding mental health concerns exists, the evidence for stigma as a depression treatment barrier among patients in Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care (PC) is mixed. PURPOSE: This study tests whether stigma, defined as depression label avoidance, predicted patients' preferences for depression treatment providers, patients' prospective engagement in depression care, and care quality. METHODS: We conducted cross-sectional and prospective analyses of existing data from 761 VA PC patients with probable major depression. RESULTS: Relative to low-stigma patients, those with high stigma were less likely to prefer treatment from mental health specialists. In prospective controlled analyses, high stigma predicted lower likelihood of the following: taking medications for mood, treatment by mental health specialists, treatment for emotional concerns in PC, and appropriate depression care. CONCLUSIONS: High stigma is associated with lower preferences for care from mental health specialists and confers risk for minimal depression treatment engagement.

A pilot trial of telephone-based collaborative care management for PTSD among Iraq/Afghanistan war veterans.

BACKGROUND: Collaborative care and care management are cornerstones of Primary Care-Mental Health Integration (PC-MHI) and have been shown to reduce depressive symptoms. Historically, the standard of Veterans Affairs (VA) collaborative care was referring patients with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to specialty care. Although referral to evidence-based specialty care is ideal, many veterans with PTSD do not receive such care. To address this issue and reduce barriers to care, VA currently recommends veterans with PTSD be offered treatment within PC-MHI as an alternative. The current project outlines a pilot implementation of an established telephone-based collaborative care model-Translating Initiatives for Depression into Effective Solutions (TIDES)-adapted for Iraq/Afghanistan War veterans with PTSD symptoms (TIDES/PTSD) seen in a postdeployment primary care clinic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Structured medical record extraction and qualitative data collection procedures were used to evaluate acceptability, feasibility, and outcomes. RESULTS: Most participants (n=17) were male (94.1%) and white (70.6%). Average age was 31.2 (standard deviation=6.4) years. TIDES/PTSD was successfully implemented within PC-MHI and was acceptable to patients and staff. Additionally, the total number of care manager calls was positively correlated with number of psychiatry visits (r=0.63, p<0.05) and amount of reduction in PTSD symptoms (r=0.66, p<0.05). Overall, participants in the pilot reported a significant reduction in PTSD symptoms over the course of the treatment (t=2.87, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: TIDES can be successfully adapted and implemented for use among Iraq/Afghanistan veterans with PTSD. Further work is needed to test the effectiveness and implementation of this model in other sites and among veterans of other eras.

Predictors of primary care management of depression in the Veterans Affairs healthcare system.

BACKGROUND: Primary care providers (PCPs) vary in skills to effectively treat depression. Key features of evidence-based collaborative care models (CCMs) include the availability of depression care managers (DCMs) and mental health specialists (MHSs) in primary care. Little is known, however, about the relationships between PCP characteristics, CCM features, and PCP depression care. OBJECTIVE: To assess relationships between various CCM features, PCP characteristics, and PCP depression management. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of a provider survey. PARTICIPANTS: 180 PCPs in eight VA sites nationwide. MAIN MEASURES: Independent variables included scales measuring comfort and difficulty with depression care; collaboration with a MHS; self-reported depression caseload; availability of a collocated MHS, and co-management with a DCM or MHS. Covariates included provider type and gender. For outcomes, we assessed PCP self-reported performance of key depression management behaviors in primary care in the past 6 months. KEY RESULTS: Response rate was 52 % overall, with 47 % attending physicians, 34 % residents, and 19 % nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Half (52 %) reported greater than eight veterans with depression in their panels and a MHS collocated in primary care (50 %). Seven of the eight clinics had a DCM. In multivariable analysis, significant predictors for PCP depression management included comfort, difficulty, co-management with MHSs and numbers of veterans with depression in their panels. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs who felt greater ease and comfort in managing depression, co-managed with MHSs, and reported higher depression caseloads, were more likely to report performing depression management behaviors. Neither a collocated MHS, collaborating with a MHS, nor co-managing with a DCM independently predicted PCP depression management. Because the success of collaborative care for depression depends on the ability and willingness of PCPs to engage in managing depression themselves, along with other providers, more research is necessary to understand how to engage PCPs in depression management.

Help-seeking from clergy and spiritual counselors among veterans with depression and PTSD in primary care.

Little is known about the prevalence or predictors of seeking help for depression and PTSD from spiritual counselors and clergy. We describe openness to and actual help-seeking from spiritual counselors among primary care patients with depression. We screened consecutive VA primary care patients for depression; 761 Veterans with probable major depression participated in telephone surveys (at baseline, 7 months, and 18 months). Participants were asked about (1) openness to seeking help for emotional problems from spiritual counselors/clergy and (2) actual contact with spiritual counselors/clergy in the past 6 months. At baseline, almost half of the participants, 359 (47.2%), endorsed being "very" or "somewhat likely" to seek help for emotional problems from spiritual counselors; 498 (65.4%) were open to a primary care provider, 486 (63.9%) to a psychiatrist, and 409 (66.5%) to another type of mental health provider. Ninety-one participants (12%) reported actual spiritual counselor/clergy consultation. Ninety-five (10.3%) participants reported that their VA providers had recently asked them about spiritual support; the majority of these found this discussion helpful. Participants with current PTSD symptoms, and those with a mental health visit in the past 6 months, were more likely to report openness to and actual help-seeking from clergy. Veterans with depression and PTSD are amenable to receiving help from spiritual counselors/clergy and other providers. Integration of spiritual counselors/clergy into care teams may be helpful to Veterans with PTSD. Training of such providers to address PTSD specifically may also be desirable.

Yield of practice-based depression screening in VA primary care settings.

BACKGROUND: Many patients who should be treated for depression are missed without effective routine screening in primary care (PC) settings. Yearly depression screening by PC staff is mandated in the VA, yet little is known about the expected yield from such screening when administered on a practice-wide basis. OBJECTIVE: We characterized the yield of practice-based screening in diverse PC settings, as well as the care needs of those assessed as having depression. DESIGN: Baseline enrollees in a group randomized trial of implementation of collaborative care for depression. PARTICIPANTS: Randomly sampled patients with a scheduled PC appointment in ten VA primary care clinics spanning five states. MEASUREMENTS: PHQ-2 screening followed by the full PHQ-9 for screen positives, with standardized sociodemographic and health status questions. RESULTS: Practice-based screening of 10,929 patients yielded 20.1% positive screens, 60% of whom were assessed as having probable major depression based on the PHQ-9 (11.8% of all screens) (n = 1,313). In total, 761 patients with probable major depression completed the baseline assessment. Comorbid mental illnesses (e.g., anxiety, PTSD) were highly prevalent. Medical comorbidities were substantial, including chronic lung disease, pneumonia, diabetes, heart attack, heart failure, cancer and stroke. Nearly one-third of the depressed PC patients reported recent suicidal ideation (based on the PHQ-9). Sexual dysfunction was also common (73.3%), being both longstanding (95.1% with onset >6 months) and frequently undiscussed and untreated (46.7% discussed with any health care provider in past 6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Practice-wide survey-based depression screening yielded more than twice the positive-screen rate demonstrated through chart-based VA performance measures. The substantial level of comorbid physical and mental illness among PC patients precludes solo management by either PC or mental health (MH) specialists. PC practice- and provider-level guideline adherence is problematic without systems-level solutions supporting adequate MH assessment, PC treatment and, when needed, appropriate MH referral.

Depression complexity prevalence and outcomes among veterans affairs patients in integrated primary care.

INTRODUCTION: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) Primary Care-Mental Health Integration (PC-MHI) initiative targets depression (MDD), anxiety/posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and alcohol misuse (AM) for care improvement. In primary care, case finding often relies on depression screening. Whereas clinical practice guidelines solely inform management of depression, minimal information exists to guide treatment when psychiatric symptom clusters coexist. We provide descriptive clinical information for care planners about VA PC patients with depression alone, depression plus alcohol misuse, and depression with complex psychiatric comorbidities (PTSD and/or probable bipolar disorder). METHOD: We examined data from a VA study that used a visit-based sampling procedure to screen 10,929 VA PC patients for depression; 761 patients with probable major depression completed baseline measures of health and care engagement. Follow-up assessments were completed at 7 months. RESULTS: At baseline, 53% of patients evidenced mental health conditions in addition to depression; 10% had concurrent AM, and 43% had psychiatrically complex depression (either with or without AM). Compared with patients with depression alone or depression with AM, those with psychiatrically complex depression evinced longer standing and more severe mood disturbance, higher likelihood of suicidal ideation, higher unemployment, and higher levels of polypharmacy. Baseline depression complexity predicted worse mental health status and functioning at follow-up. DISCUSSION: A substantial proportion of VA primary care patients with depression presented with high medical multimorbidity and elevated safety concerns. Psychiatrically complex depression predicted lower treatment effectiveness, suggesting that PC-MHI interventions should co-ordinate and individualize care for these patients. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Posttraumatic stress disorder collaborative care: A quality improvement study in veterans affairs primary care.

Introduction: Collaborative care improves depression and anxiety outcomes. In this naturalistic, observational case study, we adapted an evidence-based depression collaborative care protocol for the assessment and treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and sought to demonstrate that the protocol could be implemented in Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care. Method: Based on feedback from a content expert panel, clinical stakeholders, and a pilot study conducted in a postdeployment clinic, the original depression collaborative care protocol was modified to include PTSD assessment and support for PTSD medication adherence, self-management, and engagement in evidence-based PTSD care. Results: The modified program was implemented from November 2012 to March 2017, and 239 patients with PTSD were referred. Nearly two thirds (n = 185) enrolled, and they participated in the program for an average of 4 to 5 months and completed calls approximately once per month. Among patients with more than one assessment of clinical outcomes, 53.4% (n = 94) reported clinically significant improvement in depression on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (≥ 5-point decrease), and 42.2% (n = 35) reported clinically significant improvement on the PTSD Checklist (≥ 10-point decrease). Veterans and clinical staff described the modified collaborative care program positively in qualitative interviews. Discussion: Our findings suggest that a depression collaborative care program can be modified to support treatment of PTSD in primary care. The modified program was acceptable to both veterans and clinical staff and showed potential for positive clinical change in an uncontrolled quality improvement study. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Using evidence-based quality improvement methods for translating depression collaborative care research into practice.

OBJECTIVE: Translating Initiatives in Depression into Effective Solution (TIDES) aimed to translate research-based collaborative care for depression into an approach for the Veterans Health Administration (VA). SITES: Three multistate administrative regions and seven of their medium-sized primary care practices. INTERVENTION: Researchers assisted regional leaders in adapting research-based depression care models using evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) methods. EVALUATION: We evaluated model fidelity and impacts on patients. Trained nurse depression care managers collected data on patient adherence and outcomes. RESULTS: Among 72% (128) of the 178 patients followed in primary care with depression care manager assistance during the 3-year study period, mean PHQ-9 scores dropped from 15.1 to 4.7 (p < .001). A total of 87% of patients achieved a PHQ-9 score lower than 10 (no major depression). 62% achieved a score lower than six (symptom resolution). Care managers referred 28% (50) TIDES patients to mental health specialty (MHS). In the MHS-referred group, mean PHQ-9 scores dropped from 16.4 to 9.0 (p < .001). A total of 58% of MHS-referred patients achieved a PHQ-9 score lower than 10, and 40%, a score less than 6. Over the 2 years following the initial development phase reported here, national policymakers endorsed TIDES through national directives and financial support. CONCLUSIONS: TIDES developed an evidence-based depression collaborative care prototype for a large health care organization (VA) using EBQI methods. As expected, care managers referred sicker patients to mental health specialists; these patients also improved. Overall, TIDES achieved excellent overall patient outcomes, and the program is undergoing national spread.

Dual use of VA and non-VA services among primary care patients with depression.

BACKGROUND: Depression treatment requires close monitoring to achieve optimal, long-term control. Use of multiple sources of health care can affect coordination and continuity of treatment for depression. OBJECTIVES: To assess levels of non-Veterans Health Administration (VA) use among depressed primary care patients by service type and examine patient factors associated with non-VA use. DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparison of dual and VA-only users among depressed primary care patients. Depression was defined as PHQ-9 >or=10. SUBJECTS: Five hundred fifty depressed patients from the baseline sample of a group-randomized trial of collaborative care for depression in ten VA primary care practices. MEASUREMENTS: VA and non-VA outpatient utilization for physical and emotional health problems in the prior 6 months, patient demographics, and co-morbid conditions. All measures were self-reported and obtained at the baseline interview. RESULTS: Overall, 46.8% of VA depressed primary care patients utilized non-VA care. Dual users were more likely to use acute care services (emergency room or inpatient), especially for physical health problems. Dual users of physical health services had more total visits, but fewer VA visits than VA-only users, while dual users of emotional health services had fewer total and VA visits. Factors associated with dual use were urban clinic location, having other insurance coverage, and dissatisfaction with physical health care in general. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of depressed primary care patients used non-VA care, with most of their non-VA use for physical rather than emotional health problems. Care management strategies for depressed patients should include communication and coordination with non-VA providers.

Prevalence of depression-PTSD comorbidity: implications for clinical practice guidelines and primary care-based interventions.

BACKGROUND: Compared to those with depression alone, depressed patients with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) experience more severe psychiatric symptomatology and factors that complicate treatment. OBJECTIVE: To estimate PTSD prevalence among depressed military veteran primary care patients and compare demographic/illness characteristics of PTSD screen-positive depressed patients (MDD-PTSD+) to those with depression alone (MDD). DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparison of MDD patients versus MDD-PTSD+ patients. PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred seventy-seven randomly sampled depressed patients with at least 1 primary care visit in the previous 12 months. Participants composed the baseline sample of a group randomized trial of collaborative care for depression in 10 VA primary care practices in 5 states. MEASUREMENTS: The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 assessed MDD. Probable PTSD was defined as a Primary Care PTSD Screen > or = 3. Regression-based techniques compared MDD and MDD-PTSD+ patients on demographic/illness characteristics. RESULTS: Thirty-six percent of depressed patients screened positive for PTSD. Adjusting for sociodemographic differences and physical illness comorbidity, MDD-PTSD+ patients reported more severe depression (P < .001), lower social support (P < .001), more frequent outpatient health care visits (P < .001), and were more likely to report suicidal ideation (P < .001) than MDD patients. No differences were observed in alcohol consumption, self-reported general health, and physical illness comorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: PTSD is more common among depressed primary care patients than previously thought. Comorbid PTSD among depressed patients is associated with increased illness burden, poorer prognosis, and delayed response to depression treatment. Providers should consider recommending psychotherapeutic interventions for depressed patients with PTSD.

Information technology to support improved care for chronic illness.

BACKGROUND: In populations with chronic illness, outcomes improve with the use of care models that integrate clinical information, evidence-based treatments, and proactive management of care. Health information technology is believed to be critical for efficient implementation of these chronic care models. Health care organizations have implemented information technologies, such as electronic medical records, to varying degrees. However, considerable uncertainty remains regarding the relative impact of specific informatics technologies on chronic illness care. OBJECTIVE: To summarize knowledge and increase expert consensus regarding informatics components that support improvement in chronic illness care. DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature was performed. "Use case" models were then developed, based on the literature review, and guidance from clinicians and national quality improvement projects. A national expert panel process was conducted to increase consensus regarding information system components that can be used to improve chronic illness care. RESULTS: The expert panel agreed that informatics should be patient-centered, focused on improving outcomes, and provide support for illness self-management. They concurred that outcomes should be routinely assessed, provided to clinicians during the clinical encounter, and used for population-based care management. It was recommended that interactive, sequential, disorder-specific treatment pathways be implemented to quickly provide clinicians with patient clinical status, treatment history, and decision support. CONCLUSIONS: Specific informatics strategies have the potential to improve care for chronic illness. Software to implement these strategies should be developed, and rigorously evaluated within the context of organizational efforts to improve care.

Informatics systems to promote improved care for chronic illness: a literature review.

OBJECTIVE: To understand information systems components important in supporting team-based care of chronic illness through a literature search. DESIGN: Systematic search of literature from 1996-2005 for evaluations of information systems used in the care of chronic illness. MEASUREMENTS: The relationship of design, quality, information systems components, setting, and other factors with process, quality outcomes, and health care costs was evaluated. RESULTS: In all, 109 articles were reviewed involving 112 information system descriptions. Chronic diseases targeted included diabetes (42.9% of reviewed articles), heart disease (36.6%), and mental illness (23.2%), among others. System users were primarily physicians, nurses, and patients. Sixty-seven percent of reviewed experiments had positive outcomes; 94% of uncontrolled, observational studies claimed positive results. Components closely correlated with positive experimental results were connection to an electronic medical record, computerized prompts, population management (including reports and feedback), specialized decision support, electronic scheduling, and personal health records. Barriers identified included costs, data privacy and security concerns, and failure to consider workflow. CONCLUSION The majority of published studies revealed a positive impact of specific health information technology components on chronic illness care. Implications for future research and system designs are discussed.

Teaching systems-based practice to primary care physicians to foster routine implementation of evidence-based depression care.

Although health care organizations seeking to improve quality often must change the system for delivering care, there is little available evidence on how to educate staff and providers about this change. As part of a 2002-2003 Veterans Health Administration multisite project using collaborative care to improve the management of depression, the authors implemented the Translating Initiatives for Depression into Effective Solutions (TIDES) program. Five steps were followed for teaching systems-based practice: (1) determine providers' educational needs (through administrative data, expert opinion, and provider discussion), (2) develop educational materials (based on needs assessed), (3) help each of seven sites develop an educational intervention, (4) implement the intervention, and (5) monitor the intervention's effectiveness. Sites relied primarily on passive educational strategies. There was variable implementation of the different components (e.g., lecture, educational outreach). No site chose to write up its education plan, as was suggested. The authors thus suggest that the educational model was successful at identifying providers' needs and creating appropriate materials, because the program was not advertised in other ways and because almost all providers referred patients to the program. However, the educational model was only partially successful at getting sites to develop and implement an educational plan, although provider behavior did change. Overall, the program was somewhat effective at teaching systems-based practice. The authors believe the best way to enhance effectiveness is to build education into the system rather than rely on a separate system for education.

Developing effective collaboration between primary care and mental health providers.

OBJECTIVE: Improving care for depressed primary care (PC) patients requires system-level interventions based on chronic illness management with collaboration among primary care providers (PCPs) and mental health providers (MHPs). We describe the development of an effective collaboration system for an ongoing multisite Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) study evaluating a multifaceted program to improve management of major depression in PC practices. METHOD: Translating Initiatives for Depression into Effective Solutions (TIDES) is a research project that helps VA facilities adopt depression care improvements for PC patients with depression. A regional telephone-based depression care management program used Depression Case Managers (DCMs) supervised by MHPs to assist PCPs with patient management. The Collaborative Care Workgroup (CWG) was created to facilitate collaboration between PCPs, MHPs, and DCMs. The CWG used a 3-phase process: (1) identify barriers to better depression treatment, (2) identify target problems and solutions, and (3) institutionalize ongoing problem detection and solution through new policies and procedures. RESULTS: The CWG overcame barriers that exist between PCPs and MHPs, leading to high rates of the following: patients with depression being followed by PCPs (82%), referred PC patients with depression keeping their appointments with MHPs (88%), and PC patients with depression receiving antidepressants (76%). The CWG helped sites implement site-specific protocols for addressing patients with suicidal ideation. CONCLUSION: By applying these steps in PC practices, collaboration between PCPs and MHPs has been improved and maintained. These steps offer a guide to improving collaborative care to manage depression or other chronic disorders within PC clinics.

Women Veterans with Depression in Veterans Health Administration Primary Care: An Assessment of Needs and Preferences.

OBJECTIVE: Depression is the most prevalent mental health condition in primary care (PC). Yet as the Veterans Health Administration increases resources for PC/mental health integration, including integrated care for women, there is little detailed information about depression care needs, preferences, comorbidity, and access patterns among women veterans with depression followed in PC. METHODS: We sampled patients regularly engaged with Veterans Health Administration PC. We screened 10,929 (10,580 men, 349 women) with the two-item Patient Health Questionnaire. Of the 2,186 patients who screened positive (2,092 men, 94 women), 2,017 men and 93 women completed the full Patient Health Questionnaire-9 depression screening tool. Ultimately, 46 women and 715 men with probable major depression were enrolled and completed a baseline telephone survey. We conducted descriptive statistics to provide information about the depression care experiences of women veterans and to examine potential gender differences at baseline and at seven month follow-up across study variables. RESULTS: Among those patients who agreed to screening, 20% of women (70 of 348) had probable major depression, versus only 12% of men (1,243 of 10,505). Of the women, 48% had concurrent probable posttraumatic stress disorder and 65% reported general anxiety. Women were more likely to receive adequate depression care than men (57% vs. 39%, respectively; p < .05); 46% of women and 39% of men reported depression symptom improvement at the 7-month follow-up. Women veterans were less likely than men to prefer care from a PC physician (p < .01) at baseline and were more likely than men to report mental health specialist care (p < .01) in the 6 months before baseline. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: PC/mental health integration planners should consider methods for accommodating women veterans unique care needs and preferences for mental health care delivered by health care professionals other than physicians.

A comparison of the effects of intrathecal fentanyl and lidocaine on established postamputation stump pain.

Eight patients with established lower limb postamputation stump pain were given lumbar intrathecal fentanyl 25 micrograms and lidocaine 70 mg 2 weeks apart in an attempt to better understand the role of peripheral and central mechanisms in this condition. Baseline pain was recorded and then analgetic and side effects and their duration were assessed. Three self-administered questionnaires with appropriate psychometric proprieties were given to the patients. Intrathecal fentanyl always abolished the pain. Its onset was rapid being heralded within 1-2.5 min by a pleasant sensation of warmth involving the lower trunk and legs. Analgesia was complete by 5-10 min and had a median duration of 8 h. The patients had a sense of well being and were unable to elicit discomfort by pain aggravating maneuvers. Normal motor and sensory functions were retained. Pruritus was the only adverse effect unique to intrathecal fentanyl. Intrathecal lidocaine usually relieved the discomfort but was unable to abolish it in 3 of 8 patients despite adequate neural blockade. Its onset of action was slower and duration of effect shorter than fentanyl. Intrathecal fentanyl provided profound analgesia associated with normalization of stump sensations and euphoria, probably due to a segmental spinal action. The effects of lidocaine were inferior to fentanyl due to the associated motor and sensory paralyses as well as the absence of euphoria. This study suggests that, while peripheral mechanisms played a role, central mechanisms involving the spinal cord were more important in the modulation of established stump pain in the 8 subjects evaluated.

Identifying Depressed Patients With a High Risk of Comorbid Anxiety in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Depressive and anxiety disorders are highly prevalent in the primary care setting. There is evidence that patients with depression and comorbid anxiety are more severely impaired than patients with depression alone and require aggressive mental health treatment. The goal of this study was to assess the impact of comorbid anxiety in a primary care population of depressed patients. METHOD: 342 subjects diagnosed with a DSM-IV-defined major depressive episode, dysthymia, or both were asked 2 questions about the presence of comorbid anxiety symptoms (history of panic attacks and/or flashbacks). Patient groups included depression only (N = 119), depression and panic attacks (N = 51), depression and flashbacks (N = 97), and depression and both panic attacks and flashbacks (N = 75). Groups were compared on demographics, mental health histories, and health-related quality-of-life variables. Data were gathered from January 1998 to March 1999. RESULTS: Those patients with depression, panic attacks, and flashback symptoms as compared with those with depression alone were more likely to be younger, unmarried, and female. The group with depression, panic attacks, and flashbacks was also more likely to have more depressive symptoms, more impaired health status, worse disability, and a more complicated and persistent history of mental illness. Regression analysis revealed that the greatest impact on disability, presence of depressive symptoms, and mental health outcomes was associated with panic attacks. CONCLUSION: By asking 2 questions about comorbid anxiety symptoms, primary care providers evaluating depressed patients may be able to identify a group of significantly impaired patients at high risk of anxiety disorders who might benefit from collaboration with or referral to a mental health specialist.

Comparison of 3 Depression Screening Methods and Provider Referral in a Veterans Affairs Primary Care Clinic.

BACKGROUND: Concern about underdiagnosis and undertreatment of depression in primary care has led to support for routine screening. Although multiple screening instruments exist, we are not aware of studies to date that have compared different screening strategies, e.g., how the instrument is administered: by whom and in what setting. This study compared 3 separate screening strategies in terms of patient flow, coverage, patient characteristics, and other factors with the usual care system of provider referral. METHOD: We analyzed existing data from a completed randomized team trial of collaborative care depression treatment in which patients who met DSM-IV criteria for current major depressive disorder, dysthymic disorder, or both were recruited using the usual care system of provider referral (provider) and 3 separate screening strategies: (1) a 2-stage waiting room screening interview (waiting), (2) an in-clinic screen consisting of 2 self-report items embedded in a larger survey (in-clinic), and (3) a 2-stage self-report mail survey (mail). The team trial and analysis were conducted between January 1998 and July 2003. RESULTS: The usual care system of provider referral identified the most depressed patients and had relatively good coverage compared with the 3 screening strategies. Of the 3 screening strategies, the in-clinic strategy had the best coverage, while the mail strategy had the worst coverage. Provider referral patients were younger and had fewer chronic medical illnesses than did other patients. The waiting strategy identified more patients with bipolar affective disorder. CONCLUSION: While different strategies may be optimal for different resource levels and patient characteristics, this study suggests that an in-clinic self-report survey may be the best adjunct to provider referral for efficiently increasing coverage. This study also suggests that different screening strategies may capture different patient populations.

Cost-effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in a primary care veteran population.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the incremental cost-effectiveness of a collaborative care intervention for depression compared with consult-liaison care. METHODS: A total of 354 patients in a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinic who met the criteria for major depression or dysthymia were randomly assigned to one of the two care models. Under the collaborative care model, a mental health team provided a treatment plan to primary care providers, telephoned patients to encourage adherence, reviewed treatment results, and suggested modifications. Outcomes were assessed at three and nine months by telephone interviews. Health care use and costs were also assessed. RESULTS: A significantly greater number of collaborative care patients were treated for depression and given prescriptions for antidepressants. The collaborative care patients experienced an average of 14.6 additional depression-free days over the nine months. The mean incremental cost of the intervention per patient was $237 US dollars for depression treatment and $519 US dollars for total outpatient costs. A majority of the additional expenditures were accounted for by the intervention. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $24 US dollars per depression-free day for depression treatment costs and $33 US dollars for total outpatient cost. CONCLUSIONS: Better coordination and communication under collaborative care was associated with a greater number of patients being treated for depression and with moderate increases in days free of depression and in treatment cost. Additional resources are needed for effective collaborative care models for depression treatment in primary care.