Biomedical subjects

Jerry L Rushton

Publications and source records attributed to Jerry L Rushton.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2002

Screening for depression in adults: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

PURPOSE: To clarify whether screening adults for depression in primary care settings improves recognition, treatment, and clinical outcomes. DATA SOURCES: The MEDLINE database was searched from 1994 through August 2001. Other relevant articles were located through other systematic reviews; focused searches of MEDLINE from 1966 to 1994; the Cochrane depression, anxiety, and neurosis database; hand searches of bibliographies; and extensive peer review. STUDY SELECTION: The researchers reviewed randomized trials conducted in primary care settings that examined the effect of screening for depression on identification, treatment, or health outcomes, including trials that tested integrated, systematic support for treatment after identification of depression. DATA EXTRACTION: A single reviewer abstracted the relevant data from the included articles. A second reviewer checked the accuracy of the tables against the original articles. DATA SYNTHESIS: Compared with usual care, feedback of depression screening results to providers generally increased recognition of depressive illness in adults. Studies examining the effect of screening and feedback on treatment rates and clinical outcomes had mixed results. Many trials lacked power to detect clinically important differences in outcomes. Meta-analysis suggests that overall, screening and feedback reduced the risk for persistent depression (summary relative risk, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.79 to 0.95]). Programs that integrated interventions aimed at improving recognition and treatment of patients with depression and that incorporated quality improvements in clinic systems had stronger effects than programs of feedback alone. CONCLUSION: Compared with usual care, screening for depression can improve outcomes, particularly when screening is coupled with system changes that help ensure adequate treatment and follow-up.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Epidemiology of depressive symptoms in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the range of depressive symptoms reported by adolescents in a nationally representative U.S. sample and to examine factors associated with persistent depressive symptoms. METHOD: Secondary analysis was done on National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (AddHealth) data from 13,568 adolescents who completed the initial survey in 1995 and follow-up 1 year later. Main outcomes of Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) scores were analyzed by chi2 comparisons and sample-weighted logistic regression. RESULTS: Over 9% of adolescents reported moderate/severe depressive symptoms at baseline (CES-D > or = 24). Females, older adolescents, and ethnic minority youths were more likely to report depressive symptoms at baseline. Only 3% of adolescents with low initial CES-D scores (CES-D < 16) developed moderate/severe depressive symptoms at follow-up. Factors associated with persistent depressive symptoms at 1-year follow-up included: female gender, fair/poor general health, school suspension, weaker family relationships, and health care utilization. Other factors, including race and socioeconomics, did not predict persistent depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Depressive symptoms are common in adolescents and have a course that is difficult to predict. Most adolescents with minimal symptoms of depression maintain their status and appear to be at low risk for depression; however, adolescents with moderate/severe depressive symptoms warrant long-term follow-up and reevaluation.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2002

Coding of pediatric behavioral and mental disorders.

BACKGROUND: In response to changing reimbursement and other pressures in the health care environment, many physicians have reported the use of alternate coding to substitute for certain clinical diagnoses. However, very little information is available on how physicians who care for children approach diagnosis and coding dilemmas for behavioral and mental disorders, which often present unique additional challenges. OBJECTIVE: Our study sought to describe the frequency of alternate coding, different approaches to coding, and attitudes toward diagnosis and coding practices by physician specialty. METHODS: We conducted a mail survey of 1492 physicians--497 developmental/behavioral pediatricians (DBP), 500 pediatricians (PED), and 495 child and adolescent psychiatrists (PSY). The main outcomes were survey items on frequency of alternate coding (never, rarely, monthly, weekly, daily), use of different coding strategies (use of somatic symptoms, modifiers, and substitution with other terms), and attitudes on coding practices (Likert scales of agreement). We analyzed outcomes by physician specialty and demographics using Pearson's chi2 and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall response rate was 62% (787 of 1269 eligible physicians). The majority of physicians had used an alternate code (DBP 83%, PED 68%, PSY 58%), and many respondents reported monthly-daily alternate coding (DBP 60%, PED 36%, PSY 27%). Physicians used multiple approaches to diagnosis and a variety of coding options, which varied by physician specialty. Financial issues were commonly cited reasons for alternate coding--both to obtain patient services and to receive physician reimbursement. However, challenges of diagnostic classification and coding subthreshold symptoms were cited as frequently as reimbursement issues. Stigmatization, confidentiality, and parental acceptance were mentioned, but reported less frequently. Very few practices and providers have organized administrative methods of alternate coding (26%) or receive feedback on denied claims (46%). Most physicians believe that alternate coding is justified in the present system; however, some physicians expressed concerns that these practices may contribute to stigmatization or lead to improper management decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Alternate coding is commonly reported; however, approaches to diagnostic coding vary by provider specialty. Reimbursement issues are important, but other challenges in diagnosis and classification hold special relevance to children with behavioral and mental disorders. There seems to be a great need to reconsider the separate goals and uses of clinical diagnosis and administrative coding. Additional study is needed to assess how reported coding practices may affect administrative data, patient care, and health care economics.

Adolescent Psychiatry↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Implementing practice guidelines for depression: applying a new framework to an old problem.

We discuss the challenges of implementing clinical practice guidelines for depression in the primary care setting. Multiple potential barriers can limit physician guideline adherence and translation of research into improved patient outcomes. Six primary barriers relate to providers (lack of awareness, lack of familiarity, lack of agreement, lack of self efficacy, lack of outcome expectancy, and inertia of previous practice). In addition, factors related to patient, guideline, and practice environment factors encompass external barriers to adherence. By delineating the underlying barriers to adherence, different interventions that are tailored to improve physician adherence to guidelines can be utilized. We review examples of these barriers, as well as interventions to improve guideline adherence. We also review characteristics of successful interventions to improve physician adherence to guidelines for depression. Since different physicians and practice settings may encounter a variety of barriers, multifaceted interventions that are not focused exclusively on the physician tend to be most effective.

Depressive Disorder↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Receipt of asthma subspecialty care by children in a managed care organization.

BACKGROUND: Although proper outpatient asthma management sometimes requires care from subspecialists, there is little information on factors affecting receipt of subspecialty care in a managed care setting. OBJECTIVE: To determine factors associated with receipt of subspecialty care for children with asthma in a managed care organization. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of the claims from 3163 children with asthma enrolled in a university-based managed care organization from January 1998 to October 2000. We used logistic regression analysis to determine factors associated with an outpatient asthma visit with an allergist or pulmonologist. RESULTS: Of the 3163 patients, 443 (14%) had at least 1 subspecialist visit for asthma; 354 (80%) were seen by an allergist, 63 (14%) were seen by a pulmonologist, and 26 (6%) were seen by both. In multivariate analysis, patients with more severe asthma (odds ratio [OR], 3.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.99-4.86) and older patients (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07) were more likely to receive care from a subspecialist. Compared with Medicaid patients, both non-Medicaid patients with copayment (OR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.85-4.43) and non-Medicaid patients without any copayment (OR, 3.40; 95% CI, 2.35-4.93) were more likely to receive care from an asthma subspecialist. CONCLUSIONS: Children insured by Medicaid are less likely to receive care from subspecialists for asthma. Reasons may be due to health care system-related factors, such as accessibility of subspecialists, to physician referral decisions, and/or to patient factors, such as adherence to recommendations to see a subspecialist. Our findings suggest a need to further investigate health care system barriers, physician referral, and patient acceptance and completion of subspecialty referral.

Adolescent↗