Areán Patricia A, Ayalon Liat, Hunkeler Enid, Lin Elizabeth H B, Tang Lingqi, Harpole Linda, Hendrie Hugh, Williams John W, Unützer Jürgen
Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco, California 94143, USA.
Med Care. 2005 Apr;43(4):381-90. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000156852.09920.b1.
Few older minorities receive adequate treatment of depression in primary care. This study examines whether a collaborative care model for depression in primary care is as effective in older minorities as it is in nonminority elderly patients in improving depression treatment and outcomes.
A multisite randomized clinical trial of 1801 older adults comparing collaborative care for depression with treatment as usual in primary care. Twelve percent of the sample were black (n = 222), 8% were Latino (n = 138), and 3% (n = 53) were from other minority groups. We compared the 3 largest ethnic groups (non-Latino white, black, and Latino) on depression severity, quality of life, and mental health service use at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months after randomization to collaborative care or usual care.
Compared with care as usual, collaborative care significantly improved rates and outcomes of depression care in older adults from ethnic minority groups and in older whites. At 12 months, intervention patients from ethnic minorities (blacks and Latinos) had significantly greater rates of depression care for both antidepressant medication and psychotherapy, lower depression severity, and less health-related functional impairment than usual care participants (64%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 55-72 versus 45%, CI 36-55, P = 0.003 for antidepressant medication; 37%, CI 28-47 versus 13%, CI 6-19, P = 0.002 for psychotherapy; mean = 0.9, CI 0.8-1.1 versus mean = 1.4, CI 1.3-1.5, P < 0.001 for depression severity, range 0-4; mean = 3.7, CI 3.2-4.1, versus mean = 4.7, CI 4.3-5.1, P < 0.0001 for functional impairment, range 0-10).
Collaborative Care is significantly more effective than usual care for depressed older adults, regardless of their ethnicity. Intervention effects in ethnic minority participants were similar to those observed in whites.
在初级保健中,很少有老年少数族裔患者能得到充分的抑郁症治疗。本研究旨在探讨初级保健中抑郁症的协作护理模式在改善抑郁症治疗及预后方面,对老年少数族裔患者是否与非少数族裔老年患者一样有效。
一项针对1801名老年人的多中心随机临床试验,比较抑郁症协作护理与初级保健中的常规治疗。样本中12%为黑人(n = 222),8%为拉丁裔(n = 138),3%(n = 53)来自其他少数族裔群体。我们比较了3个最大的种族群体(非拉丁裔白人、黑人、拉丁裔)在随机分组接受协作护理或常规护理后的基线、3个月、6个月和12个月时的抑郁严重程度、生活质量和心理健康服务使用情况。
与常规护理相比,协作护理显著改善了少数族裔老年患者和老年白人的抑郁症护理率及预后。在12个月时,少数族裔(黑人和拉丁裔)的干预患者在抗抑郁药物治疗和心理治疗方面的抑郁症护理率显著高于常规护理参与者,抑郁严重程度更低,与健康相关的功能损害更小(抗抑郁药物治疗:64%,95%置信区间[CI] 55 - 72,常规护理为45%,CI 36 - 55,P = 0.0(此处原文有误,推测应为0.003);心理治疗:37%,CI 28 - 47,常规护理为13%,CI 6 - 19,P = 0.002;抑郁严重程度:均值 = 0.9,CI 0.8 - 1.1,常规护理均值 = 1.4,CI 1.3 - 1.5,P < 0.001,范围0 - 4;功能损害:均值 = 3.7,CI 3.2 - 4.1,常规护理均值 = 4.7,CI 4.3 - 5.1,P < 0.0001,范围0 - 10)。
协作护理对抑郁的老年患者比常规护理显著更有效,无论其种族如何。少数族裔参与者的干预效果与白人中观察到的效果相似。