PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Edmund F Chaney

Publications and source records attributed to Edmund F Chaney.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Depression diagnosis and antidepressant treatment among depressed VA primary care patients.

This study examined the extent to which 3559 VA primary care patients with depression symptomatology received depression diagnoses and/or antidepressant prescriptions. Symptomatology was classified as mild (13%), moderate (42%) or severe (45%) based on SCL-20 scores. Diagnosis and treatment was related to depression severity and other patient characteristics. Overall, 44% were neither diagnosed nor treated. Only 22% of those neither diagnosed nor treated for depression received treatment for other psychopathology. Depression treatment performance measures dependent on diagnoses and antidepressant prescriptions from administrative databases exclude undiagnosed patients with significant, treatable, symptomatology.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

The influence of patient preference on depression treatment in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The chronic illness model encourages consideration of patients' treatment preferences. Moreover, research suggests that matching treatment to preference might affect outcomes for patients with depression. PURPOSE: This investigation explored factors associated with treatment preference matching and the effects of matching on depression treatment outcomes. METHODS: Treatment preferences were assessed among primary care patients with depression participating in a large randomized trial of depression management. Patients were offered antidepressant medication and/or counseling based on preference and several other factors. Depression was assessed at 3 and 9 months. RESULTS: Participants who preferred medication were older, were in worse physical health, and were more likely to already be taking antidepressants. Participants who preferred both medication and counseling evidenced greater agreement with the statement that depression is a medical illness. Overall, 72% of participants were matched with their preferred treatment; matched participants demonstrated more rapid improvement in depression symptomatology than unmatched participants. CONCLUSIONS: Obtaining preferred treatment appears to contribute to improved treatment outcome. Continued attempts to assess for and accommodate treatment preferences might result in better response to depression treatment.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Preliminary outcomes from an integrated mental health primary care team.

The effects of establishing a multidisciplinary mental health primary care team in a Veterans Affairs internal medicine primary care clinic were evaluated. The multidisciplinary team worked in collaboration with primary care providers to evaluate and treat their patients, who had a wide variety of psychiatric disorders, in the primary care clinic. In the first year of operation preliminary outcomes indicated that the rate of referrals to specialty mental health care dropped from 38 percent to 14 percent. The mean number of appointments with the team for evaluation and stabilization was 2.5. These outcomes suggest that a multidisciplinary mental health primary care team can rapidly evaluate and stabilize patients with a wide range of psychiatric disorders, reduce the number of referrals to specialty mental health care, and improve collaborative care.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Effectiveness of collaborative care depression treatment in Veterans' Affairs primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To compare collaborative care for treatment of depression in primary care with consult-liaison (CL) care. In collaborative care, a mental health team provided a treatment plan to the primary care provider, telephoned patients to support adherence to the plan, reviewed treatment results, and suggested modifications to the provider. In CL care, study clinicians informed the primary care provider of the diagnosis and facilitated referrals to psychiatry residents practicing in the primary care clinic. DESIGN: Patients were randomly assigned to treatment model by clinic firm. SETTING: VA primary care clinic. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred sixty-eight collaborative care and 186 CL patients who met criteria for major depression and/or dysthymia. MEASUREMENTS: Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-20), Short Form (SF)-36, Sheehan Disability Scale. MAIN RESULTS: Collaborative care produced greater improvement than CL in depressive symptomatology from baseline to 3 months (SCL-20 change scores), but at 9 months there was no significant difference. The intervention increased the proportion of patients receiving prescriptions and cognitive behavioral therapy. Collaborative care produced significantly greater improvement on the Sheehan at 3 months. A greater proportion of collaborative care patients exhibited an improvement in SF-36 Mental Component Score of 5 points or more from baseline to 9 months. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative care resulted in more rapid improvement in depression symptomatology, and a more rapid and sustained improvement in mental health status compared to the more standard model. Mounting evidence indicates that collaboration between primary care providers and mental health specialists can improve depression treatment and supports the necessary changes in clinic structure and incentives.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

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.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed1990

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.

Adult↗