Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

G E Simon

Publications and source records attributed to G E Simon.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
PubMed1997

Somatization in cross-cultural perspective: a World Health Organization study in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the phenomenon of somatization in different cultures by determining its frequency and correlates in primary care settings in 14 countries. METHOD: Consecutive primary care patients (N = 25,916) were screened with the 12-item General Health questionnaire, and a stratified sample (N = 5,438) was interviewed with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Interviewed patients were also assessed for physical disease burden, self-rated overall health, physician-rated physical health status, number of disability days, and interviewer-rated occupational role functioning. The authors determined center-specific associations with the use of logistic regression analyses in which confounding variables were controlled. RESULTS: ICD-10 defined somatization disorder was relatively uncommon in most primary care settings. A less restrictively defined form was more common. Symptom rates were much higher in South American sites. There was a modest association with low education. Otherwise, frequency of unexplained somatic symptoms did not clearly vary according to geography or level of economic development. Somatizing patients were at elevated risk for self-reported disease burden, negative perception of their health, and comorbid depression and generalized anxiety disorder. Somatization was also commonly associated with disability. Cultures did not differ markedly in the pattern of these associated features. CONCLUSION: Somatization is a common problem in primary care across cultures and is associated with significant problems and disability.

Absenteeism↗
PubMed1996

Initial antidepressant choice in primary care. Effectiveness and cost of fluoxetine vs tricyclic antidepressants.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical, functional, and economic outcomes of initially prescribing fluoxetine with outcomes of initially selecting imipramine or desipramine. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Primary care clinics of a Seattle, Wash, area staff-model health maintenance organization from 1992 through 1994. PATIENTS: A total of 536 adults beginning antidepressant treatment for depression. INTERVENTION: Random assignment of initial antidepressant prescription (desipramine, fluoxetine, or imipramine). Subsequent antidepressant treatment (doses, medication changes or discontinuation, specialty referral) was managed by the primary care physician. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessments after 1, 3, and 6 months examined clinical outcomes (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the depression subscale of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist) and quality-of-life outcomes (Medical Outcomes Study SF-36). Medication use and health care costs were assessed using the health maintenance organization's computerized data. RESULTS: Patients assigned to receive fluoxetine reported fewer adverse effects, were more likely to continue the original medication, and were more likely to reach adequate doses than patients beginning treatment with either tricyclic drug. The fluoxetine group reported marginally better clinical outcomes after 1 month, but these differences were not statistically significant and disappeared by the 3-month assessment. Quality-of-life outcomes in the 3 groups did not differ. Total health care costs over 6 months were approximately equal for the 3 groups, with higher antidepressant costs in the fluoxetine group balanced by lower outpatient visit and inpatient costs. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes, quality-of-life outcomes, and overall treatment costs provide no clear guidance on initial selection of fluoxetine or tricyclic drugs. Thus, patients' and physicians' preferences are an appropriate basis for treatment selection.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Self-report disability in an international primary care study of psychological illness.

We assessed the replicability of reliability and validity of a brief self-report disability scale, adapted from the Medical Outcomes Survey (short form), in a 15-center, cross-national, multilingual study of psychological illness among primary care patients (n = 5438). Across all 15 centers in the World Health Organization Collaborative Study of Psychological Problems in General Health Care, the reliability of the disability scale was high and individual items were responsive at similar levels of disability. Self-report disability was consistently correlated with disability in work role (including housework) as rated by interviewers according to the Groningen Social Disability Schedule, a semistructured method taking local norms into account. Disability as measured by the self-report questionnaire was also consistently correlated with depressive symptoms as measured by the General Health Questionnaire. At each center, the disability items formed a moderately to strongly hierarchical (Guttman-like) scale. These findings support the feasibility of using self-report disability scales in cross-national primary care research.

Depression↗
PubMed1996

Predictors of chronic benzodiazepine use in a health maintenance organization sample.

While expert recommendations caution against long-term benzodiazepine use in the elderly, survey data suggest increasing benzodiazepine use with age. Computerized pharmacy records of staff-model HMO were used to examine benzodiazepine prescribing. Six-month prevalence of benzodiazepine use (2.8%) and prevalence of continued use (0.7%) were lower than earlier reports. Prevalence was higher in women and increased steadily with age. Among 7012 patients beginning benzodiazepine treatment, duration of use increased with patient age, prescription by a psychiatrist (vs. primary care or medical/surgical specialist), use of higher-potency drugs (lorazepam, and alprazolem, clonazepam) and larger number of pills in the initial prescription. Individual physicians varied significantly in drug choice, initial prescription size, and likelihood of chronic use. Among 200 patients treated in primary care, the physician-recorded indication for prescription was anxiety or depression in 27%, insomnia in 20%, and pain symptoms in 38%. These findings indicate a gap between benzodiazepine efficacy research and current clinical practice.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1996

Impact of visit copayments on outpatient mental health utilization by members of a health maintenance organization.

OBJECTIVE: The authors examined the impact of increasing cost sharing on use of outpatient mental health services. METHOD: A quasi-experimental design was used to study outpatient utilization by members of a health maintenance organization (HMO) who were subject to increasing copayments for mental health visits (state government employees and dependents). Their outpatient mental health utilization was compared with that of similar HMO members who were not subject to cost sharing (federal government employees and dependents). Analyses compared both likelihood of any service use and number of visits per year among service users. RESULTS: Institution of $20/visit copayments was associated with a 16% decrease in likelihood of service use but no change in visit rate among service users. A subsequent copayment increase to $30/visit resulted in no significant change in likelihood of use but was associated with a 9% decrease in visits per year among those using services. The impact of the first copayment change on likelihood of using services did not vary according to level of clinical need (as measured by prior service use and psychotropic drug use). CONCLUSIONS: In this staff-model HMO, modest visit copayments significantly reduced initial access to mental health treatment and had a smaller effect on treatment intensity. Copayments restricted access regardless of clinical need. Designers of mental health benefits must consider the impact of copayments on those with the greatest need for treatment.

Ambulatory Care↗
PubMed1996

Occurrence, recognition, and outcome of psychological disorders in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: The authors' goal was to cross-validate the earlier finding of the Groningen Primary Care Study that recognition of psychological disorders was associated with better patient outcomes. METHOD: The 12-item General Health Questionnaire was used to screen 1,271 consecutive primary care patients. A stratified sample of 340 of these patients participated in the second-stage baseline series of interviews, which included the Composite International Diagnostic Interview, the occupational role section of the Social Disability Schedule, the 28-item General Health Questionnaire, and the SCL-90. Three months later 209 of the patients completed the 28-item General Health Questionnaire and the SCL-90, and 12 months later 213 of the patients completed the second-stage baseline series of interviews. The study was carried out in six primary care practices (11 general practitioners) in the northern part of The Netherlands. RESULTS: Recognition of psychological disorders was associated with higher initial severity of psychopathology and occupational disability and with a psychological reason for the medical encounter. Recognition rates were higher for anxiety than for depression. Patients whose psychological disorders were recognized did not have better outcomes than those whose psychological disorders were not recognized. CONCLUSIONS: Recognition of psychological disorders was not associated with better outcome. Recognition is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for delivery of treatment according to clinical guidelines. Increasing recognition is likely to improve outcomes only if general practitioners have the skills and resources to deliver adequate interventions.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1995

Collaborative management to achieve treatment guidelines. Impact on depression in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention in patients with depression in primary care with the effectiveness of "usual care" by the primary care physician. DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial among primary care patients with major depression or minor depression. PATIENTS: Over a 12-month period a total of 217 primary care patients who were recognized as depressed by their primary care physicians and were willing to take antidepressant medication were randomized, with 91 patients meeting criteria for major depression and 126 for minor depression. INTERVENTIONS: Intervention patients received increased intensity and frequency of visits over the first 4 to 6 weeks of treatment (visits 1 and 3 with a primary care physician, visits 2 and 4 with a psychiatrist) and continued surveillance of adherence to medication regimens during the continuation and maintenance phases of treatment. Patient education in these visits was supplemented by videotaped and written materials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures included short-term (30-day) and long-term (90-day) use of antidepressant medication at guideline dosage levels, satisfaction with overall care for depression and antidepressant medication, and reduction in depressive symptoms. RESULTS: In patients with major depression, the intervention group had greater adherence than the usual care controls to adequate dosage of antidepressant medication for 90 days or more (75.5% vs 50.0%; P < .01), were more likely to rate the quality of the care they received for depression as good to excellent (93.0% vs 75.0%; P < .03), and were more likely to rate antidepressant medications as helping somewhat to helping a great deal (88.1% vs 63.3%; P < .01). Seventy-four percent of intervention patients with major depression showed 50% or more improvement on the Symptom Checklist-90 Depressive Symptom Scale compared with 43.8% of controls (P < .01), and the intervention patients also demonstrated a significantly greater decrease in depression severity over time compared with controls (P < .004). In patients with minor depression, the intervention group had significantly greater adherence than controls to adequate dosage of antidepressant medication for 90 days or more (79.7% vs 40.3%; P < .001) and more often rated antidepressant medication as helping somewhat to helping a great deal (81.8% vs 61.4%; P < .02). However, no significant differences were found between the intervention and control groups in the percentage of patients who were satisfied with the care they received for depression (94.4% vs 89.3%), in the percentage who experienced a 50% or more decrease in depressive symptoms, or in the decrease of depressive symptoms over time. CONCLUSION: A multifaceted intervention consisting of collaborative management by the primary care physician and a consulting psychiatrist, intensive patient education, and surveillance of continued refills of antidepressant medication improved adherence to antidepressant regimens in patients with major and with minor depression. It improved satisfaction with care and resulted in more favorable depressive outcomes in patients with major, but not minor, depression.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Recognition, management, and outcomes of depression in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the recognition, management, and outcomes of depressed patients presenting in primary care. DESIGN: Epidemiologic survey with 12-month follow-up. SETTING: Primary care clinics of a staff-model health maintenance organization. PATIENTS AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Consecutive primary care attenders aged 18 to 65 years (n = 1952) were screened using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), and a stratified random sample (n = 373) completed a psychiatric assessment, including the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), the 28-item GHQ, and a brief self-rated disability questionnaire (BDQ). Three-month follow-up assessment (n = 347) repeated the GHQ-28 and BDQ, and 12-month follow-up (n = 308) repeated the CIDI, GHQ-28, and BDQ. Use of psychotropic drugs and mental health services was assessed using computerized pharmacy and visit registration records. RESULTS: Structured interviews found 64 cases of current major depression (weighted prevalence, 6.6%) and 58 cases of current subthreshold depression (weighted prevalence, 8.8%). Of those with major depression, 64% (n = 41) were recognized as psychologically distressed by the primary care physician, 56% (n = 36) filled at least one antidepressant prescription during the next 3 months, and 39% (n = 25) made at least one specialty mental health visit. Compared with recognized cases, those with unrecognized major depression were less symptomatic at baseline (GHQ-28 score, 15.31 vs 11.07; P = .006) but showed a similar rate of improvement over 12 months (F test for difference in slopes, P = .93). CONCLUSIONS: While many depressed primary care patients may go unrecognized and untreated, this group appears to have milder and more self-limited depression. A narrow focus on increased recognition may not improve overall outcomes. Treatment resources might be best directed toward more intensive follow-up and relapse prevention among those now treated.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Health care costs of primary care patients with recognized depression.

BACKGROUND: While an extensive literature documents the influence of depression on general medical services utilization, estimates of the economic burden of depression have focused on the direct costs of depression treatment. Higher use of general medical services may contribute significantly to the true cost of depressive illness. METHODS: Computerized record systems of a large staff-model health maintenance organization (HMO) were used to identify consecutive primary care patients with visit diagnoses of depression (n = 6257) and a comparison sample of primary care patients with no depression diagnosis (n = 6257). The HMO accounting records were used to compare components of health care costs. RESULTS: Patients diagnosed as depressed had higher annual health care costs ($4246 vs $2371, P < .001) and higher costs for every category of care (eg, primary care, medical specialty, medical inpatient, pharmacy, laboratory). Similar cost differences were observed for each of the subgroups examined (patients treated with antidepressants, those not treated with antidepressants, and those diagnosed at routine physical examination visits). Pharmacy records indicated greater chronic medical illness in the diagnosed depression group, but large cost differences remained after adjustment ($3971 vs $2644). Twofold cost differences persisted for at least 12 months after initiation of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis of depression is associated with a generalized increase in use of health services that is only partially explained by comorbid medical conditions. In the primary care sector, this greater medical utilization exceeds direct treatment costs for depression. The persistence of utilization differences suggests that recognition and initiation of treatment alone are not adequate to reduce utilization differences.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Outcomes of "inadequate" antidepressant treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To examine outcomes of primary care patients receiving low levels of antidepressant treatment. DESIGN: Cohort study comparing patients receiving anti-depressant treatment within and below the recommended dosing range. SETTING: Primary care clinics of a staff-model health maintenance organization. PATIENTS: Primary care patients initiating antidepressant treatment for depression. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 88 patients beginning antidepressant treatment, 49 (56%) used "adequate" doses for 30 days or more. Likelihood of "adequate" pharmacotherapy was not related to patient age, gender, medical comorbidity, or baseline depression severity. All the patients showed substantial clinical improvement after four months. Compared with those using "adequate" pharmacotherapy, the patients receiving low-intensity treatment had lower likelihood of clinical response (64% vs 84%; chi-square = 4.44; df = 1; p = 0.035). At four months, however, those receiving low-intensity and those receiving higher-intensity treatment did not differ significantly in either the score on the 20-item Symptom Checklist depression scale (18.91 and 15.72, respectively; F = 1.45; df = 1.86; p = 0.23) or the proportion with persistence of major depression (10% and 4%, respectively; chi-square = 1.30; df = 1; p = 0.25). A replication sample of 157 patients (assessed only at baseline and four months) yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: While the patients receiving recommended levels of pharmacotherapy showed somewhat higher improvement rates, many of the patients receiving "inadequate" treatment experienced good short-term outcomes. Efforts to increase the intensity of depression treatment in primary care should focus on the subgroup of patients who fail to respond to initial treatment.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Is the lifetime risk of depression actually increasing?

Data from an international study of psychological problems in primary care were examined for evidence of increasing depression risk. At 15 sites, patients aged 15-65 (n = 26,421) were screened with the GHQ-12 and a stratified random sample (n = 5603) selected for psychiatric assessment (Composite International Diagnostic Interview). Initial analyses agreed with earlier cross-sectional studies, finding higher depression risk and earlier onset in recent birth cohorts. Additional analyses suggested that methods effects may explain these findings. First, apparent prevalence increases were nonspecific with similar trends seen across all study sites and for all disorders examined. Second, reporting patterns suggested significant under-counting of past depressive episodes. Respondents of all ages typically reported first onset of depression during the last 5 years. Reported lifetime prevalence was only 2.02 times current prevalence. These findings suggest that depression risk is not rapidly increasing and that true lifetime prevalence is much higher than estimated by cross-sectional surveys.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1995

Recall of psychiatric history in cross-sectional surveys: implications for epidemiologic research.

Data from a variety of sources suggest the possibility of significant errors in lifetime recall of psychiatric illness. Remote episodes of illness may often be forgotten, especially among patients with milder or less recurrent illness or those who received no treatment. These errors in recall may lead to significant underestimation of true lifetime prevalence and may produce the appearance of large temporal increases in risk in the absence of any true change. When assessing lifetime history, cross-sectional surveys may differentially underestimate prevalence in the elderly and in those with less severe or recurrent illness. While lifetime risk of depression and other psychiatric disorders may not be increasing as rapidly as suggested by cross-sectional surveys, the overall impact of such disorders over the life span may be significantly greater than previous community surveys have indicated.

Bias↗
PubMed1995

The role of the primary care physician in patients' adherence to antidepressant therapy.

In this study, the authors attempted to determine predictors of adherence to antidepressant therapy and to identify specific educational messages, side effects, and features of doctor-patient collaboration that influence adherence. Patients newly prescribed antidepressants for depression at a health maintenance organization were identified by using automated pharmacy data and medical records review. Patients (n = 155) were interviewed 1 and 4 months after starting antidepressant medication. Approximately 28% of patients stopped taking antidepressants during the first month of therapy, and 44% had stopped taking them by the third month of therapy. Patients who received the following five specific educational messages--1) take the medication daily; 2) antidepressants must be taken for 2 to 4 weeks for a noticeable effect; 3) continue to take medicine even if feeling better; 4) do not stop taking antidepressant without checking with the physician; and 5) specific instructions regarding what to do to resolve questions regarding antidepressants--were more likely to comply during the first month of antidepressant therapy. Asking about prior experience with antidepressants and discussions about scheduling pleasant activities also were related to early adherence. Side effects, only at severe levels, were associated with early noncompliance. Neuroticism, depression severity, and other patient characteristics did not predict adherence. Primary care physicians may be able to enhance adherence to antidepressant therapy by simple and specific educational messages easily integrated into primary care visits.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

A chronic disease score with empirically derived weights.

Different types of medication prescribed during a 6-month period for the treatment and management of chronic conditions were utilized in the refinement and validation of a chronic disease score. Prescription data, in addition to age and sex, were utilized to develop a chronic disease score based on empirically derived weights for each of three outcomes: total cost, outpatient cost, and primary care visits. The ability of the revised chronic disease score to predict health care utilization, costs, hospitalization, and mortality was compared to an earlier version of the chronic disease score (original) that was derived through clinical judgments of disease severity. The predictive validity of the chronic disease score is also compared to ambulatory care groups, which utilize outpatient diagnoses to form mutually exclusive diagnostic categories. Models based on a concurrent 6-month period and a 6-month prospective period (ie, the 6-month period after the chronic disease score or ambulatory care group derivation period) were estimated using a random one half sample of 250,000 managed-care enrollees aged 18 and older. The remaining one half of the enrollee population was used as a validation sample. The revised chronic disease score showed improved estimation and prediction over the original chronic disease score. The difference in variance explained prospectively by the revised chronic disease score versus the ambulatory care groups, conversely, was small. The revised chronic disease score was a better predictor of mortality than the ambulatory care groups. The combination of revised chronic disease score and ambulatory care groups showed only marginally greater predictive power than either one alone. These results suggest that the revised chronic disease score and ambulatory care groups with empirically derived weights provide improved prediction of health care utilization and costs, as well as hospitalization and mortality, over age and sex alone. We recommend the revised chronic disease score with total cost weights for general use as a severity measure because of its relative advantage in predicting mortality compared to the outpatient cost and primary care visit weights.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

New classification for mental disorders with management guidelines for use in primary care: ICD-10 PHC chapter five.

A primary care version of the International classification of diseases (10th revision) chapter five for mental and behavioural disorders (ICD-10 PHC chapter five) has been developed. This provisional version focuses on 24 conditions which are frequently seen in primary care and which can be managed effectively by general practitioners. The classification is accompanied by a flipcard for each of the conditions. The cards have diagnostic guidelines on one side and management guidelines on the other. The latter provide information which should be given to the patient, advice on the content of counselling, the available treatment methods, and indications for specialist referral. This classification system is also supported by diagnostic decision making aids, medication cards, and patient leaflets to facilitate the recognition and management of patients with mental disorders in primary care settings. The draft version of ICD-10 PHC chapter five will be finalized after field trials which will test the applicability and usefulness of the system in different primary care settings in various countries.

Depression↗
PubMed1995

Primary care physician use of cognitive behavioral techniques with depressed patients.

BACKGROUND: Although researchers are paying more attention to the treatment of depression in the primary care setting, little is known about the nature of psychotherapeutic interactions that occur between primary care physicians and their patients in the context of a visit for depression. In recent years, brief cognitive behavioral therapy has been demonstrated to be efficacious, and the public has become more familiar with these techniques through media exposure and self-help books. METHODS: Depressed primary care patients were surveyed regarding the extent to which cognitive behavioral (CB) techniques were suggested during the primary care visit in which antidepressant medication was initially prescribed. One hundred fifty-five patients completed responses to phone surveys 1 month and 4 months after the visit. Patients were also surveyed regarding the recommendation of counseling by the primary care physician. RESULTS: The majority of patients (61%) reported that their physician advised them to identify activities they were already doing that helped them feel better. Physician recommendations regarding planning pleasurable activities, problem solving, challenging depressive thoughts, and planning activities that boost confidence were reported by 22% to 40% of study patients. Older patients reported fewer interactions about CB strategies. Primary care physicians' suggestion of CB strategies was associated with both patient use of CB strategies in the months following the visit and better adherence to recommended medication therapy during the first month of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients seem to recognize the occurrence of psychotherapeutic interactions during visits to their primary care physician in which an antidepressant medication was prescribed, and patients' recognition of these interactions is associated with increased adherence to the recommended course of antidepressant prescriptions.

Adaptation, Psychological↗