Smith J L, Rost K M, Nutting P A, Elliott C E, Duan N
Center for Studies in Family Medicine, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, 1180 Clermont Street, Box B155, Denver, Colorado 80220, USA.
J Rural Health. 2000 Fall;16(4):313-23. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-0361.2000.tb00482.x.
To assess a guideline-based intervention's impact on depression care provided in rural vs. urban primary care settings, 12 community primary care practices (four rural, eight urban) were randomized to enhanced (i.e., intervention) and usual care study conditions. The study enrolled 479 depressed patients, with 432 (90.2 percent) completing telephone follow-up at six months. Multilevel analytic models revealed that rural enhanced care patients had 2.70 times the odds (P = 0.02) of rural usual care patients of taking a three-month course of antidepressant medication at recommended dosages in the six months following baseline; urban enhanced care patients had 2.43 times the odds compared with their urban usual care counterparts (P = 0.007). Rural enhanced care patients had 3.00 times the odds of rural usual care patients of making eight or more visits to a mental health specialist for counseling in the six months following baseline (P = 0.03). Comparisons of patients in enhanced care practices showed that rural enhanced care patients had 2.00 times the odds (P = 0.12) of urban enhanced care patients of making at least one visit to a mental health specialist for counseling in the six months following baseline and had comparable odds to urban enhanced care patients (odds ratio [OR] = 1.06, P = 0.77) of making eight or more visits to such specialists during that interval. The study's intervention improved the care received by both rural and urban depressed primary care patients. Moreover, the intervention's effect appears to have been greater in rural settings, particularly in terms of increasing depressed rural patients' use of mental health specialists for counseling.
为评估基于指南的干预措施对农村和城市基层医疗环境中抑郁症护理的影响,12个社区基层医疗机构(4个农村、8个城市)被随机分配到强化(即干预)护理和常规护理研究组。该研究纳入了479名抑郁症患者,其中432名(90.2%)在6个月时完成了电话随访。多水平分析模型显示,农村强化护理组患者在基线后6个月内按照推荐剂量服用3个月抗抑郁药物疗程的几率是农村常规护理组患者的2.70倍(P = 0.02);城市强化护理组患者与城市常规护理组患者相比,这一几率为2.43倍(P = 0.007)。农村强化护理组患者在基线后6个月内前往心理健康专家处进行8次或更多次咨询的几率是农村常规护理组患者的3.00倍(P = 0.03)。强化护理机构中患者的比较显示,农村强化护理组患者在基线后6个月内至少前往心理健康专家处进行1次咨询的几率是城市强化护理组患者的2.00倍(P = 0.12),且在该时间段内前往此类专家处进行8次或更多次咨询的几率与城市强化护理组患者相当(优势比[OR] = 1.06,P = 0.77)。该研究的干预措施改善了农村和城市抑郁症基层医疗患者所接受的护理。此外,干预措施在农村环境中的效果似乎更大,特别是在增加农村抑郁症患者利用心理健康专家进行咨询方面。