Ethnicity & disease · 2018
Community Partners in Care: 6- and 12-month Outcomes of Community Engagement versus Technical Assistance to Implement Depression Collaborative Care among Depressed Older Adults.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Izquierdo Adriana, Ong Michael, Pulido Esmeralda, Wells Kenneth B, Berkman Marina, Linski Barbara, Sauer Vivian, Miranda Jeanne
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Community Partners in Care, a community-partnered, cluster-randomized trial with depressed clients from 95 Los Angeles health and community programs, examined the added value of a community coalition approach (Community Engagement and Planning [CEP]) versus individual program technical assistance (Resources for Services [RS]) to implement depression collaborative care in underserved communities. This exploratory subanalysis examines 6- and 12-month outcomes among CPIC participants aged >50 years.
DESIGN: Community-partnered, cluster-randomized trial conducted between April 2010 and March 2012.
SETTING: Hollywood-Metropolitan (HM) and South Los Angeles (SLA) Service Planning Areas (SPAs), Los Angeles, California.
PARTICIPANTS: 394 participants aged >50 years with depressive symptoms (8-item Patient Health Questionnaire score ≥ 10).
INTERVENTION: A community-partnered multi-sector coalition approach (Community Engagement and Planning [CEP]) vs individual program technical assistance (Resources for Services [RS]) to implement depression collaborative care.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Depressive symptoms (PHQ-8 score), mental health-related quality of life (MHRQL), community-prioritized outcomes including mental wellness, homelessness risk and physical activity, and services utilization.
RESULTS: At 6 months, CEP was more effective than RS at improving MHRQL and mental wellness among participants aged >50 years; no differences were found in the effects of CEP vs RS on other outcomes. No significant outcome differences between CEP and RS were found at 12 months.
CONCLUSIONS: A multisector community coalition approach may offer additional benefits over individual program technical assistance to improve outcomes among depressed adults aged >50 years living in underserved communities.
DESIGN: Community-partnered, cluster-randomized trial conducted between April 2010 and March 2012.
SETTING: Hollywood-Metropolitan (HM) and South Los Angeles (SLA) Service Planning Areas (SPAs), Los Angeles, California.
PARTICIPANTS: 394 participants aged >50 years with depressive symptoms (8-item Patient Health Questionnaire score ≥ 10).
INTERVENTION: A community-partnered multi-sector coalition approach (Community Engagement and Planning [CEP]) vs individual program technical assistance (Resources for Services [RS]) to implement depression collaborative care.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Depressive symptoms (PHQ-8 score), mental health-related quality of life (MHRQL), community-prioritized outcomes including mental wellness, homelessness risk and physical activity, and services utilization.
RESULTS: At 6 months, CEP was more effective than RS at improving MHRQL and mental wellness among participants aged >50 years; no differences were found in the effects of CEP vs RS on other outcomes. No significant outcome differences between CEP and RS were found at 12 months.
CONCLUSIONS: A multisector community coalition approach may offer additional benefits over individual program technical assistance to improve outcomes among depressed adults aged >50 years living in underserved communities.