The Journal of clinical psychiatry · 2018
An Examination of Screening Tools for Collaborative Care of Adolescent Depression.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание 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.
Ginsburg Alexander D, Stadem Paul S, Takala Christopher R, Croarkin Paul E, Mattson Angela B, Billings Marcie L, Brennan RoxAnne M, Huxsahl John E
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Collaborative care models for treatment of adolescent depression are rapidly evolving. However, a dearth of information exists regarding patient characteristics associated with positive outcomes. We explored the association between baseline scores on routine screening tools for substance abuse, mood disorders, and anxiety with depression remission and graduation from a collaborative care program in an outpatient pediatric practice.
METHODS: Adolescents (aged 12-17 years) with Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Modified for Adolescents (PHQ-9A) score ≥ 10 and a diagnosis of depressive disorder based on DSM-IV criteria between July 2011 and August 2015 were eligible for enrollment in a collaborative care model and inclusion in this study. Remission was defined as a single PHQ-9A score < 5; the criterion for graduation was 3 consecutive months with PHQ-9A score < 5. Analyses compared baseline assessment scores with those at remission and graduation.
RESULTS: Of the 182 patients included in the analysis, the overall remission rate was 55%; program graduation rate was 27%. There was no association between scores on baseline screening tools and remission. Graduation was associated with lower scores on a screening tool for substance abuse (unit odds ratio [OR] = 1.62; P = .01) and anxiety (unit OR = 1.03; P = .02). When the scores were examined as categorical variables, graduation was associated with negative assessments on screening tools for substance abuse (OR = 3.21; P = .003) and anxiety (OR = 2.35; P = .02).
CONCLUSIONS: Baseline substance abuse and anxiety assessments may have utility in identifying depressed adolescents who are less likely to maintain remission and graduate from a collaborative care program, suggesting that these patients may need additional intervention to achieve sustained remission.
METHODS: Adolescents (aged 12-17 years) with Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Modified for Adolescents (PHQ-9A) score ≥ 10 and a diagnosis of depressive disorder based on DSM-IV criteria between July 2011 and August 2015 were eligible for enrollment in a collaborative care model and inclusion in this study. Remission was defined as a single PHQ-9A score < 5; the criterion for graduation was 3 consecutive months with PHQ-9A score < 5. Analyses compared baseline assessment scores with those at remission and graduation.
RESULTS: Of the 182 patients included in the analysis, the overall remission rate was 55%; program graduation rate was 27%. There was no association between scores on baseline screening tools and remission. Graduation was associated with lower scores on a screening tool for substance abuse (unit odds ratio [OR] = 1.62; P = .01) and anxiety (unit OR = 1.03; P = .02). When the scores were examined as categorical variables, graduation was associated with negative assessments on screening tools for substance abuse (OR = 3.21; P = .003) and anxiety (OR = 2.35; P = .02).
CONCLUSIONS: Baseline substance abuse and anxiety assessments may have utility in identifying depressed adolescents who are less likely to maintain remission and graduate from a collaborative care program, suggesting that these patients may need additional intervention to achieve sustained remission.