Biomedical subjects

Linda H Harpole

Publications and source records attributed to Linda H Harpole.

9 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Long term outcomes from the IMPACT randomised trial for depressed elderly patients in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the long term effectiveness of collaborative care management for depression in late life. DESIGN: Two arm, randomised, clinical trial; intervention one year and follow-up two years. SETTING: 18 primary care clinics in eight US healthcare organisations. Patients 1801 primary care patients aged 60 and older with major depression, dysthymia, or both. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to a 12 month collaborative care intervention (IMPACT) or usual care for depression. Teams including a depression care manager, primary care doctor, and psychiatrist offered education, behavioural activation, antidepressants, a brief, behaviour based psychotherapy (problem solving treatment), and relapse prevention geared to each patient's needs and preferences. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Interviewers, blinded to treatment assignment, conducted interviews in person at baseline and by telephone at each subsequent follow up. They measured depression (SCL-20), overall functional impairment and quality of life (SF-12), physical functioning (PCS-12), depression treatment, and satisfaction with care. RESULTS: IMPACT patients fared significantly (P < 0.05) better than controls regarding continuation of antidepressant treatment, depressive symptoms, remission of depression, physical functioning, quality of life, self efficacy, and satisfaction with care at 18 and 24 months. One year after IMPACT resources were withdrawn, a significant difference in SCL-20 scores (0.23, P < 0.0001) favouring IMPACT patients remained. CONCLUSIONS: Tailored collaborative care actively engages older adults in treatment for depression and delivers substantial and persistent long term benefits. Benefits include less depression, better physical functioning, and an enhanced quality of life. The IMPACT model may show the way to less depression and healthier lives for older adults.

Activities of Daily Living↗

PubMed2005

Burden of illness and satisfaction with care among patients with headache seen in a primary care setting.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the current level of headache burden and the headache management needs at three diverse clinical sites. BACKGROUND: Headache is a common disabling disorder that is costly for the patient and a management challenge for physicians. The determination of whether and how to intervene to improve headache management depends on both the burden of disease and the characteristics of patients that would likely be targeted. METHODS: Patients from three healthcare organizations were identified by administrative records as having either migraine or tension-type headache and then mailed a survey that addressed demographics, headache type, headache-related disability, depression and anxiety, satisfaction with care, general health, worry about headache, problems with headache management, and healthcare utilization. Comparisons were made across sites and between patients with more and less severe headache-related impairments. RESULTS: Of the 789 patients contacted, 385 (50%) returned a survey. While the socio-demographic characteristics of the patients were diverse, headache-related characteristics were similar. These patients have significant problems with headache management, disability, pain, worry, and dissatisfaction with care. Patients who described higher headache-related impairment experienced significantly greater problems in these areas, perceived themselves to be in worse general health, and had significantly greater use of medical services than those with lower headache severity. CONCLUSIONS: Despite various elements of heterogeneity, we observed across the sites a consistent need for improvement in headache management. Future efforts should be directed at developing and evaluating methods for effectively improving headache management.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Hormone therapy does not affect depression severity in older women.

OBJECTIVE: Although estrogens are thought to have a beneficial effect on menopausal symptoms, the role of estrogen in the etiology and treatment of depression in older women remains unclear. The authors examined the relationship between hormone therapy (HT) use and depressive symptom severity. METHODS: Authors report the findings from a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from the Improving Mood: Promoting Access to Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT) Study, using data from 1,160 women age 60 years and older. RESULTS: Women who were taking HT were likely to be younger, White, married, and to have had at least some college education. They were also more likely to report good or better health and to have taken antidepressant medications in the past 3 months. Although HT use was associated with more severe depressive symptoms in the unadjusted analysis, it was not associated with depression severity in adjusted analyses. Although there was a trend for a differential effect of college education with HT use on depression scores, no significant interaction was found between HT and race. CONCLUSION: There was no evidence to suggest that women HT users differ from non-HT users in depressive symptom severity.

Aged↗

PubMed2003

Assessment of the scope and quality of clinical practice guidelines in lung cancer.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To provide an evidence-based background for developing the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) lung cancer guidelines, a systematic review of the literature was performed to identify published lung cancer guidelines and evaluate their quality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A systematic search was performed for relevant literature from MEDLINE, Cancerlit, CINAHL, HealthStar, the Cochrane Library, and the National Guidelines Clearinghouse published from January 1989 to July 2001. MEASUREMENT AND RESULTS: From 369 citations, 51 relevant guidelines were identified. Each guideline was evaluated by at least four reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument and was coded for clinical topics covered. The recommendations included in each guideline also were abstracted. Of the 51 guidelines evaluated, 27 (53%) were evidence-based. Clinical topics identified by the ACCP for their guideline effort each were represented by at least one existing guideline. Of the 880 clinical recommendations abstracted from the guidelines, only 253 (29%) were evidence-based. The AGREE instrument rates guidelines along six domains. As a group, the guidelines performed well in the scope and purpose domain, with only six guidelines (12%) scoring < 50%. For the remaining domains, however, the guidelines did not perform as well, as follows: for stakeholder involvement, 41 guidelines (80%) scored < 50%; for rigor of development, 29 guidelines (57%) scored < 50%; for clarity and presentation, 17 guidelines (33%) scored < 50%; for applicability, 46 guidelines (90%) scored < 50%; and for editorial independence, 47 guidelines (92%) scored < 50%. After considering the domain scores, the reviewers recommended only 19 of the guidelines (37%). CONCLUSIONS: All major clinical lung cancer topics are covered by at least one guideline, but no single guideline addresses all areas. Furthermore, although existing guidelines may accurately reflect clinical practice, most performed poorly when evaluated for quality. Future guideline efforts that address each item of the AGREE instrument would add substantially to the literature.

Consensus↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Improving depression outcomes in older adults with comorbid medical illness.

BACKGROUND: Depression is common in older adults and often coexists with multiple chronic diseases, which may complicate its diagnosis and treatment. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether or not the presence of multiple comorbid medical illnesses affects patient response to a multidisciplinary depression treatment program. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Preplanned analyses of Improving Mood-Promoting Access to Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT), a randomized controlled trial of 1801 depressed older adults (> or =60 years), which was performed at 18 primary care clinics from eight health care organizations in five states across the United States from July 1999 to August 2001. INTERVENTION: Intervention patients had access for up to 12 months to a depression care manager, supervised by a psychiatrist and a primary care expert, who offered education, care management and support of antidepressant management by the patient's primary care physician, or provided brief psychotherapy (Problem-Solving Treatment in Primary Care). MEASUREMENTS: Depression, quality of life (QOL; scale of 0-10) and mental health component score (MCS) of the Short-Form 12 assessed at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Patients suffered from an average of 3.8 chronic medical conditions. Although patients with more chronic medical conditions had higher depression severity at baseline, the number of chronic diseases did not affect the likelihood of response to the IMPACT intervention when compared to care as usual. Intervention patients experienced significantly lower depression during all follow-up time points as compared with patients in usual care independent of other comorbid illnesses (P<.001). Intervention patients were also more likely to experience substantial response (at least a 50% reduction in depressive symptoms) regardless of the number of comorbidities, to experience improved MCS-12 scores at 3 and 12 months, and to experience improved QOL. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of multiple comorbid medical illnesses did not affect patient response to a multidisciplinary depression treatment program. The IMPACT collaborative care model was equally effective for depressed older adults with or without comorbid medical illnesses.

Aged↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Physicians' satisfaction with a collaborative disease management program for late-life depression in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: This study describes physicians' satisfaction with care for patients with depression before and after the implementation of a primary care-based collaborative care program. METHOD: Project Improving Mood, Promoting Access to Collaborative Treatment for late-life depression (IMPACT) is a multisite, randomized controlled trial comparing a primary care-based collaborative disease management program for late-life depression with care as usual. A total of 450 primary care physicians at 18 participating clinics participated in a satisfaction survey before and 12 months after IMPACT initiation. The preintervention survey focused on physicians' satisfaction with current mental health resources and ability to provide depression care. The postintervention survey repeated these and added questions about physician's experience with the IMPACT collaborative care model. RESULTS: Before intervention, about half (54%) of the participating physicians were satisfied with resources to treat patients with depression. After intervention, more than 90% reported the intervention as helpful in treating patients with depression and 82% felt that the intervention improved patients' clinical outcomes. Participating physicians identified proactive patient follow-up and patient education as the most helpful components of the IMPACT model. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians perceived a substantial need for improving depression treatment in primary care. They were very satisfied with the IMPACT collaborative care model for treating depressed older adults and felt that similar care management models would also be helpful for treating other chronic medical illnesses.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Implementing a disease management intervention for depression in primary care: a random work sampling study.

We describe the daily work activities of 13 Depression Clinical Specialists (DCSs) at 7 national sites who served as care managers in an effective multisite randomized trial of a disease management model for depression in primary care. DCSs carried portable random-reminder beepers for a total of 147 consecutive workdays and recorded 4,030 work activities. Patient care activity comprised the largest percentage of the workday, 49.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 42.0 to 56.7%), followed by research-related activity, 18.3 % (95% CI, 14.7 to 21.9%), administrative work, 17.9% (95% CI, 12.2 to 23.7%), personal time, 9.4% (95% CI, 5.4 to 13.4%), and time in transit, 5.1% (95% CI, 2.8 to 7.4%). The DCSs delivered 19.2% (95% CI, 14.4 to 24.1%) of direct patient care by telephone. The DCSs spent a significant portion of the day alone 48.7% (95% CI, 43.3 to 54.1%), followed by time spent with patients, 37.5% (95% CI, 31.6 to 43.3%). Less than 10% (7.8%) (95% CI, 5.1 to 10.6%) of their time was spent with local study staff. Less than 4% of their time was spent with other health care providers. Our results demonstrate that the DCSs' time was primarily devoted to clinical care, a significant portion of which was delivered by telephone. They functioned independently, making efficient use of the limited amount of time that they interacted with other health care providers. This information will be helpful to those who may wish to implement this disease management strategy.

Depressive Disorder↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Headache management program improves outcome for chronic headache.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility of developing a headache management program and to assess the outcomes of patients referred to the program for treatment of chronic headache. BACKGROUND: Effective headache treatment requires that the patient receives the correct headache diagnosis; that appropriate acute and, if indicated, preventive medications be prescribed; and that the patient receives adequate education, including headache self-management skills. DESIGN/METHODS: A headache management program was established at a northern California staff-model health maintenance organization. Fifty-four patients were enrolled in the program and followed for 6 months. Patients participated in a structured program of group and individual sessions with the program manager. Data collection at baseline and 6 months included the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), the Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), a patient satisfaction survey, and 2 additional short surveys--one that assessed patient worries about their headaches and another that queried patients on their problems with headache management. RESULTS: All enrolled patients participated in the initial group visit; 74% had at least one additional visit. All but one patient suffered from more than one headache type. Sixty-one percent of patients suffered from migraine headache and 98% from tension-type headache. At baseline, patients were severely disabled, with a mean MIDAS score of 41. At 6 months, MIDAS scores decreased an average of 21.2 points (P <.005). Patients reported 14.5 fewer days with headache over the preceding 3 months (P <.0001) and experienced clinically significant improvements in 6 of the SF-36 subscales. Patients were significantly more satisfied with their headache care (P <.0001), reported less problems with their headache management (P <.0001), and were less worried about their headaches (P <.01). During the intervention, emergency department visits for headache decreased (P <.02). CONCLUSIONS: A headache management program was successfully established. Patients referred to the program experienced significant improvement in headache-related disability and functional health status and reported greater satisfaction with care. Even so, these results were obtained at one site and in a small sample that was not randomized. We currently are conducting a randomized controlled trial to better evaluate the clinical and financial impact of a headache management program for patients with chronic headache.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Depression and comorbid illness in elderly primary care patients: impact on multiple domains of health status and well-being.

PURPOSE: Our objective was to examine the relative association of depression severity and chronicity, other comorbid psychiatric conditions, and coexisting medical illnesses with multiple domains of health status among primary care patients with clinical depression. METHODS: We collected cross-sectional data as part of a treatment effectiveness trial that was conducted in 8 diverse health care organizations. Patients aged 60 years and older (N = 1,801) who met diagnostic criteria for major depression or dysthymia participated in a baseline survey. A survey instrument included questions on sociodemographic characteristics, depression severity and chronicity, neuroticism, and the presence of 11 common chronic medical illnesses, as well as questions screening for panic disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder. Measures of 4 general health indicators (physical and mental component scales of the SF-12, Sheehan Disability Index, and global quality of life) were included. We conducted separate mixed-effect regression linear models predicting each of the 4 general health indicators. RESULTS: Depression severity was significantly associated with all 4 indicators of general health after controlling for sociodemographic differences, other psychological dysfunction, and the presence of 11 chronic medical conditions. Although study participants had an average of 3.8 chronic medical illnesses, depression severity made larger independent contributions to 3 of the 4 general health indicators (mental functional status, disability, and quality of life) than the medical comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Recognition and treatment of depression has the potential to improve functioning and quality of life in spite of the presence of other medical comorbidities.

Aged↗