Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M Von Korff

Publications and source records attributed to M Von Korff.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Case management to improve major depression in primary health care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Deficits in the care of depression lead to poor medication adherence, which increases the risk of an unfavourable outcome for this care. This review evaluates effects on symptoms and medication adherence of case management in primary health care. METHOD: A systematic literature search was performed. The quality of the studies was rated according to the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group (EPOC) criteria. To conduct a subgroup analysis interventions were classified as either 'standard' or 'complex' case management. RESULTS: Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. In a meta-analysis we calculated a standard mean difference/effect size on symptom severity after 6-12 months of -0.40 (95% CI -0.60 to -0.20). Patients in the intervention groups were more likely to achieve remission after 6-12 months [relative risk (RR) 1.39, 95% CI 1.30-1.48]. The relative risk for clinical response was 1.82 (95% CI 1.68-2.05). Patients in intervention groups had better medication adherence than the control group (RR 1.5, 95% CI 1.28-1.86). We found heterogeneous results when assessing effects of different types of intervention. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that case management improves management of major depression in primary health-care settings.

Case Management↗
PubMed2004

The usual medical care for irritable bowel syndrome.

AIMS: To determine what constitutes usual medical care for irritable bowel syndrome, which patient characteristics influence choice of treatment and how satisfied patients are with care. METHODS: Patient encounters in a health maintenance organization were prospectively monitored to identify visits coded irritable bowel syndrome, abdominal pain, constipation or diarrhoea. Within 2 weeks these patients were sent postal questionnaires (n = 1770, 59% participation) to assess patient characteristics and treatment recommendations. Responders were sent follow-up questionnaires 6 months later (77% participation) to assess adherence and satisfaction with treatment. RESULTS: Treatments employed most frequently were dietary advice, explanation, exercise advice, reassurance, advice to reduce stress and antispasmodic medications. Primary care physicians and gastroenterologists provided similar treatments. Patient confidence was higher for lifestyle advice (63-67, 100-point scale) than for medications (46-59). However, adherence was greater for medications (62-79 vs. 59-69, 100-point scale). Satisfactory relief was reported by 57%, but only 22% reported that symptom severity was reduced by half. Usual medical treatment was less effective for irritable bowel syndrome than for constipation, diarrhoea, or abdominal pain. CONCLUSIONS: Usual medical care for irritable bowel syndrome emphasizes education and lifestyle modification more than drugs; patients have a greater expectation of benefit from lifestyle modification than drugs. Overall 57% of irritable bowel syndrome patients report satisfactory relief.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2003

Behavioural factors associated with symptom outcomes in a primary care-based depression prevention intervention trial.

BACKGROUND: A randomized trial of a primary care-based intervention to prevent depression relapse resulted in improved adherence to long-term antidepressant medication and depression outcomes. We evaluated the effects of this intervention on behavioural processes and identified process predictors of improved depressive symptoms. METHOD: Patients at high risk for depression recurrence or relapse following successful acute phase treatment (N=386) were randomly assigned to receive a low intensity 12-month intervention or continued usual care. The intervention combined education about depression, shared decision-making regarding use of maintenance pharmacotherapy and cognitive-behavioural strategies to promote self-management. Baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12-month interviews assessed patients' self-care practices, self-efficacy for managing depression and depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Intervention patients had significantly greater self-efficacy for managing depression (P<0.01) and were more likely to keep track of depressive symptoms (P<0.0001), monitor early warning signs (P<0.0001), and plan for coping with high risk situations (P<0.0001) at all time points compared to usual care control patients. Self-efficacy for managing depression (P<0.0001), keeping track of depressive symptoms (P=0.05), monitoring for early warning signs (P=0.01), engaging in pleasant activities (P<0.0001) and engaging in social activities (P<0.0001) positively predicted improvements in depression symptom scores. CONCLUSIONS: A brief intervention designed to target cognitive-behavioural factors and promote adherence to pharmacotherapy in order to prevent depression relapse was highly successful in changing several behaviours related to controlling depression. Improvements in self-efficacy and several self-management behaviours that were targets of the intervention were significantly related to improvements in depression outcome.

Antidepressive Agents↗
PubMed2002

Understanding cross-national differences in depression prevalence.

UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND. Previous epidemiological studies indicate large cross-national differences in prevalence of depression. METHODS: At 15 centres in 14 countries. 25,916 primary care patients were screened for common mental disorders. A stratified random sample of 5,447 primary care patients completed a baseline diagnostic assessment and 3,197 completed a 12-month follow-up assessment. Psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses were assessed using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Interviewer-rated disability was assessed using the Social Disability Schedule (SDS). RESULTS: Prevalence of current major depression varied 15-fold across centres. When centres were divided into three groups according to prevalence rates, the symptom pattern or latent structure of depressive illness was generally similar at low-, medium-, and high-prevalence centres. Depression was universally associated with disability, but this association varied significantly (t = 3.51, P = 0.0005) across centres. At higher-prevalence centres, depression was associated with lower levels of impairment. At 1 year follow-up, higher prevalence centres had both significantly higher rates of depression onset (t = 3.11, P = 0.002) and higher rates of persistence among those depressed at baseline (t = 2 49, P = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Large cross-national variations in depression prevalence cannot be attributed to 'category fallacy' (cross-national differences in the nature or validity of depressive disorder). Use of identical measures and diagnostic criteria may actually identify different levels of depression severity in different countries or cultures. Cross-national differences in the onset and outcome of depression may reflect either true prevalence differences or differences in diagnostic threshold.

Cross-Cultural Comparison↗
PubMed2001

Stepped care for back pain: activating approaches for primary care.

Interventions that encourage return to normal function and reduce fear of physical activity have been shown to improve outcomes for patients with back pain, but routine medical care for back pain often does not provide such interventions. This paper proposes a stepped-care approach that addresses the functional outcomes of back pain. Step 1, which is relevant to most patients, addresses the common fears of patients with back pain and encourages patients to resume normal activities. Step 2, which targets the substantial minority of patients who require more than simple advice to resume activities, provides brief, structured interventions that support physical exercise and return to normal activities. Step 3 targets patients who require more intensive interventions, including treatment of psychological illness when present, before they can return to normal activities in work and family life. Patient needs relevant to these three levels of care are delineated. This stepped-care approach provides a framework for sequencing progressively more intensive interventions and coordinating the efforts of primary care physicians, allied health professionals, behavioral health clinicians, and patients to improve functional outcomes in patients with back pain.

Absenteeism↗
PubMed2001

A randomized trial of relapse prevention of depression in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Despite high rates of relapse and recurrence, few primary care patients with recurrent or chronic depression are receiving continuation and maintenance-phase treatment. We hypothesized that a relapse prevention intervention would improve adherence to antidepressant medication and improve depression outcomes in high-risk patients compared with usual primary care. METHODS: Three hundred eighty-six patients with recurrent major depression or dysthymia who had largely recovered after 8 weeks of antidepressant treatment by their primary care physicians were randomized to a relapse prevention program (n = 194) or usual primary care (n = 192). Patients in the intervention group received 2 primary care visits with a depression specialist and 3 telephone visits over a 1-year period aimed at enhancing adherence to antidepressant medication, recognition of prodromal symptoms, monitoring of symptoms, and development of a written relapse prevention plan. Follow-up assessments were completed at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months by a telephone survey team blinded to randomization status. RESULTS: Those in the intervention group had significantly greater adherence to adequate dosage of antidepressant medication for 90 days or more within the first and second 6-month periods and were significantly more likely to refill medication prescriptions during the 12-month follow-up compared with usual care controls. Intervention patients had significantly fewer depressive symptoms, but not fewer episodes of relapse/recurrence over the 12-month follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: A relapse prevention program targeted to primary care patients with a high risk of relapse/recurrence who had largely recovered after antidepressant treatment significantly improved antidepressant adherence and depressive symptom outcomes.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Treatment process and outcomes for managed care patients receiving new antidepressant prescriptions from psychiatrists and primary care physicians.

BACKGROUND: While many studies describe deficiencies in primary care antidepressant treatment, little research has applied similar standards to psychiatric practice. This study compares baseline characteristics, process of care, and outcomes for managed care patients who received new antidepressant prescriptions from psychiatrists and primary care physicians. METHODS: At a prepaid health plan in Washington State, patients receiving initial antidepressant prescriptions from psychiatrists (n = 165) and primary care physicians (n = 204) completed a baseline assessment, including the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV depression module, a 20-item depression assessment from the Symptom Checklist-90, and the Medical Outcomes Survey 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey functional status questionnaire. All measures were repeated after 2 and 6 months. Computerized data were used to assess antidepressant refills and follow-up visits over 6 months. RESULTS: At baseline, psychiatrists' patients reported slightly higher levels of functional impairment and greater prior use of specialty mental health care. During follow-up, psychiatrists' patients made more frequent follow-up visits, and the proportion making 3 or more visits in 90 days was 57% vs 26% for primary care physicians' patients. The proportion receiving antidepressant medication at an adequate dose for 90 days or more was similar (49% vs 48%). The 2 groups showed similar rates of improvement in all measures of symptom severity and functioning. CONCLUSIONS: In this sample, clinical differences between patients treated by psychiatrists and primary care physicians were modest. Shortcomings in depression treatment frequently noted in primary care (inadequate follow-up care and high rates of inadequate antidepressant treatment) were also common in specialty practice. Possible selection bias limits any conclusions about relative effectiveness or cost-effectiveness.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

A cross-national study of the course of persistent pain in primary care.

Data from the World Health Organization's study of psychological problems in general health care were used to examine the course of persistent pain syndromes among primary care patients. Across 15 sites in 14 countries, 3197 randomly selected primary care patients completed baseline and 12-month follow-up assessments of pain, other somatic symptoms, and anxiety and depressive disorders (the Composite International Diagnostic Interview), and an assessment of occupational role disability (the Social Disability Schedule). Of patients with a persistent pain condition at baseline, 49% had not recovered 12 months later. The probability of non-recovery varied significantly across study centers and was significantly associated with the number of pain sites at baseline. After adjustment for age, sex, and study center, baseline anxiety or depressive disorder did not predict non-recovery of persistent pain. Among those without a persistent pain disorder at baseline, the rate of onset was 8.8% with a significant variability in risk across centers. The baseline characteristics predicting the onset of persistent pain disorder were psychological disorder, poor self-rated health, and occupational role disability. A persistent pain disorder at baseline predicted the onset of a psychological disorder to the same degree that a baseline psychological disorder predicted the subsequent onset of persistent pain. Persistent pain conditions are common among primary care patients, and the probability of resolution over 12 months is approximately 50%. We found a strong and symmetrical relationship between persistent pain and psychological disorder. Impairment of daily activities appears to be a central component of that relationship.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Costs of care for irritable bowel syndrome patients in a health maintenance organization.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were: 1) to determine the total costs of care and costs related to lower GI-related problems for patients who received a diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and 2) to compare them to age- and sex-matched population controls and patients treated for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: Use and cost data were obtained through the computerized information systems of a large staff-model health maintenance organization on three groups of patients diagnosed in 1994 or 1995 with IBS, IBD, or GERD; and an age- and sex-matched control group of patients without any of these listed diagnoses. The IBS patient group was compared to the three comparison groups on components of total and IBS-related costs. RESULTS: Total costs of care for IBS patients were 49% higher than population controls during the year starting with the visit at which IBS patients were identified. In the index year, every component of total costs except inpatient care was significantly higher for IBS patients than for population controls. The costs of care for lower GI problems were significantly higher for patients with IBS than for population controls across a range of services. However, only 33% of the difference in total costs of care between IBS patients and population controls was due to lower GI-related services in the index year. In the subsequent years, lower GI-related services accounted for 18% and 20% of the total cost difference between IBS patients and population controls. The total costs of care as well as the components of costs of care were generally higher for IBD patients than for IBS patients, but were comparable for GERD and IBS patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IBS show sustained increases in health care costs relative to population controls for both lower GI services and care unrelated to lower GI problems. However, the majority of the excess in health care costs resulted from medical care not directly related to lower GI problems.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Formal education and back pain: a review.

OBJECTIVES: To summarise the scientific evidence on the relation between educational status and measures of the frequency and the consequences of back pain and of the outcomes of interventions among back pain patients, and to outline possible mechanisms that could explain such an association if found. DESIGN: Sixty four articles published between 1966 and 2000 that documented the association of formal education with back pain were reviewed. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, the current available evidence points indirectly to a stronger association of low education with longer duration and/or higher recurrence of back pain than to an association with onset. The many reports of an association of low education with adverse consequences of back pain also suggest that the course of a back pain episode is less favourable among persons with low educational attainment. Mechanisms that could explain these associations include variations in behavioural and environmental risk factors by educational status, differences in occupational factors, compromised "health stock" among people with low education, differences in access to and utilisation of health services, and adaptation to stress. Although lower education was not associated with the outcomes of interventions in major studies, it is difficult, in light of the current limited available evidence, to draw firm conclusions on this association. CONCLUSION: Scientific evidence supports the hypothesis that less well educated people are more likely to be affected by disabling back pain. Further study of this association may help advance our understanding of back pain as well as understanding of the relation between socioeconomic status and disease as a general phenomenon.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Improving depression care: barriers, solutions, and research needs.

Potential solutions for barriers to improved organization of care of depressive illness were identified. These included (1) aligning efforts to improve depression care with broader strategies for improving care of other chronic conditions; (2) increasing the availability of depression case management services in primary care; (3) developing registries and reminder systems to ensure active follow-up of depressed patients; (4) achieving agreement on how depression outcomes should be measured to provide outcomes-based performance standards; (5) providing greater support from mental health specialists for management of depressed patients by primary care providers; (6) campaigns to reduce the stigma associated with treatment of depressive illness; (7) increased dissemination of interventions that activate and empower patients managing a depressive illness; (8) redefining the lack of time of primary care providers for high-quality depression care as issues in organization of care and provider training; and (9) development of incentives (organizational or financial) for high-quality depression care. Research needs were identified according to what has been learned to date. Identified research needs included: studies of approaches to organization of case management, research in new populations (e.g., new diagnostic groups, rural populations, the disadvantaged, the elderly, and those with chronic medical illnesses), research on stepped care and relapse prevention strategies, evaluation of the societal benefits of improved depression care, and multisite trials and meta-analytic approaches that can provide adequate statistical power to assess societal benefits of improved care.

Case Management↗
PubMed2000

Predictors of outcome in a primary care depression trial.

OBJECTIVE: Previous treatment trials have found that approximately one third of depressed patients have persistent symptoms. We examined whether depression severity, comorbid psychiatric illness, and personality factors might play a role in this lack of response. DESIGN: Randomized trial of a stepped collaborative care intervention versus usual care. SETTING: HMO in Seattle, Wash. PATIENTS: Patients with major depression were stratified into severe (N = 149) and mild to moderate depression (N = 79) groups prior to randomization. INTERVENTIONS: A multifaceted intervention targeting patient, physician, and process of care, using collaborative management by a psychiatrist and primary care physician. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients with more severe depression had a higher risk for panic disorder (odds ratio [OR], 5.8), loneliness (OR, 2.6), and childhood emotional abuse (OR, 2.1). Among those with less severe depression, intervention patients showed significantly improved depression outcomes over time compared with those in usual care (z = -3.06, P<.002); however, this difference was not present in the more severely depressed groups (z = 0.61, NS). Although the group with severe depression showed differences between the intervention and control groups from baseline to 3 months that were similar to the group with less severe depression (during the acute phase of the intervention), these differences disappeared by 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Initial depression severity, comorbid panic disorder, and other psychosocial vulnerabilities were associated with a decreased response to the collaborative care intervention. Although the intervention was appropriate for patients with moderate depression, individuals with higher levels of depression may require a longer continuation phase of therapy in order to achieve optimal depression outcomes.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Are there detectable differences in quality of care or outcome of depression across primary care providers?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this work was to determine whether there are detectable differences among primary care physicians in measures of quality of care or clinical outcome for depressed patients during the first 2 months of treatment with antidepressant medication. METHODS: We studied 1,599 depressed primary care patients initiating antidepressant treatment from 63 family physicians in 4 primary care clinics of a staff-model health maintenance organization. Patients were interviewed 6 to 8 weeks after initiating antidepressant medication with a telephone structured interview that included the Structural Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Diagnoses (SCID). Automated databases of the HMO were used to examine 3 quality-of-care measures: (1) the percentage of patients who had a refill of their antidepressant by 6 weeks, (2) the percentage of patients who had a return visit by 3 weeks, and (3) the percentage of patients having a return visit by 6 weeks. The percentage of patients in each primary care physician panel who had > or =4 persistent DSM-IV depressive symptoms at 6 to 8 weeks was the main clinical outcome variable. To adjust for case-mix differences between physician panels, patient age, gender, and medical comorbidity were controlled for in the analyses. Two covariates were used to adjust for differences in patients' clinical severity: self-report of > or =2 prior depressive episodes and an SCID diagnosis of major depression during the patient's worst episode in the last 2 years. Physician age, gender, and part-time versus full-time practice were also used as covariates. RESULTS: The wide observed range of variability in quality-of-care and clinical outcome measures by physician practice decreased markedly in the statistical model that controlled for patient-level covariates and differences in the number of patients seen per provider. We did not detect differences in physician practice for the percentage of patients who had a return visit by 3 or 6 weeks, the percentage of patients who had a refill of their antidepressant prescription by 6 weeks, or the percentage of patients with an adverse clinical outcome of depression. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find important differences in measures of quality of care or patient outcomes by physician. These results may have implications for the use of physician profiling and other forms of physician report cards.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

The design, implementation, and acceptance of a primary care-based intervention to prevent depression relapse.

OBJECTIVE: This article describes the conceptual underpinnings, implementation, and participation rates of a twelve-month low-intensity primary care-based intervention to prevent depression relapse. The intervention was designed to address the inherent problems in delivery of effective maintenance treatment in a population based sample of primary care patients. METHODS: Patients at high risk of relapse based on psychiatric history who recovered from depression six to eight weeks after initiation of pharmacotherapy by their primary care physician were eligible; 194 were randomized to receive the intervention. The intervention combined education about depression, motivation-enhancing shared decision-making regarding the use of maintenance pharmacotherapy, and cognitive-behavioral strategies. The program included two visits with a Depression Prevention Specialist working in tandem with the primary care physician at the primary care clinic, with supervision and back up from a consulting psychiatrist, proactive follow-up telephone calls and mailed personalized feedback. RESULTS: Ninety-three percent of patients attended both in-person visits; 97 percent attended one visit. Eighty percent of patients completed all three follow-up telephone calls, and 85 percent returned at least one mailed feedback form; 48 percent returned all four forms. Offered a menu of options for self-management, most patients chose medication as well as a variety of behavioral strategies. At six months, 72 percent ofpatients and at twelve months 62 percent of patients remained on antidepressant medication. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that it is feasible to integrate a low intensity, twelve-month relapse prevention intervention for depression into a primary care clinic.

Antidepressive Agents↗