Suppr超能文献

在员工模式与网络模式的管理式医疗组织中治疗抑郁症。

Treating depression in staff-model versus network-model managed care organizations.

作者信息

Meredith L S, Rubenstein L V, Rost K, Ford D E, Gordon N, Nutting P, Camp P, Wells K B

机构信息

RAND, Santa Monica, Calif 90407, USA.

出版信息

J Gen Intern Med. 1999 Jan;14(1):39-48. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.00279.x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare primary care providers' depression-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices and to understand how these reports vary for providers in staff or group-model managed care organizations (MCOs) compared with network-model MCOs including independent practice associations and preferred provider organizations.

DESIGN

Survey of primary care providers' depression-related practices in 1996.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We surveyed 410 providers, from 80 outpatient clinics, in 11 MCOs participating in four studies designed to improve the quality of depression care in primary care.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We measured knowledge based on depression guidelines, attitudes (beliefs about burden, skill, and barriers) related to depression, and reported behavior. Providers in both types of MCO are equally knowledgeable about treating depression (better knowledge of pharmacologic than psychotherapeutic treatments) and perceive equivalent skills in treating depression. However, compared with network-model providers, staff/group-model providers have stronger beliefs that treating depression is burdensome to their practice. While more staff/group-model providers reported time limitations as a barrier to optimal depression treatment, more network-model providers reported limited access to mental health specialty referral as a barrier. Accordingly, these staff/group-model providers are more likely to treat patients with major depression through referral (51% vs 38%) or to assess but not treat (17% vs 7%), and network-model providers are more likely to prescribe antidepressants (57% vs 6%) as first-line treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas the providers from staff/group-model MCOs had greater access to and relied more on referral, the providers from network-model organizations were more likely to treat depression themselves. Given varying attitudes and behaviors, improving primary care for the treatment of depression will require unique strategies beyond enhancing technical knowledge for the two types of MCOs.

摘要

目的

比较初级保健提供者与抑郁症相关的知识、态度和行为,并了解与包括独立执业协会和优选提供者组织在内的网络模式管理式医疗组织(MCO)相比,员工或团体模式MCO中的提供者的这些报告有何不同。

设计

1996年对初级保健提供者与抑郁症相关行为的调查。

背景与参与者

我们对参与四项旨在提高初级保健中抑郁症护理质量研究的11个MCO的80个门诊诊所的410名提供者进行了调查。

测量与主要结果

我们根据抑郁症指南测量知识、与抑郁症相关的态度(关于负担、技能和障碍的信念)以及报告的行为。两种类型MCO中的提供者在治疗抑郁症方面同样知识渊博(对药物治疗的了解比对心理治疗的了解更好),并且在治疗抑郁症方面感知到同等的技能。然而,与网络模式的提供者相比,员工/团体模式的提供者更强烈地认为治疗抑郁症对他们的业务来说是负担。虽然更多员工/团体模式的提供者报告时间限制是最佳抑郁症治疗的障碍,但更多网络模式的提供者报告获得心理健康专科转诊有限是障碍。因此,这些员工/团体模式的提供者更有可能通过转诊治疗重度抑郁症患者(51%对38%)或进行评估但不治疗(17%对7%),而网络模式的提供者更有可能开抗抑郁药(57%对6%)作为一线治疗。

结论

虽然来自员工/团体模式MCO的提供者有更多机会并更依赖转诊,但来自网络模式组织的提供者更有可能自行治疗抑郁症。鉴于态度和行为的差异,改善初级保健中抑郁症的治疗将需要独特的策略,而不仅仅是增强这两种类型MCO的技术知识。

相似文献

10
Competition on quality in managed care.
Int J Qual Health Care. 1998 Oct;10(5):421-6. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/10.5.421.

引用本文的文献

1
7
Children's psychosocial problems presenting in a family medicine practice.
J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2010 Sep;17(3):203-10. doi: 10.1007/s10880-010-9195-2.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验