Randomized controlled trial of collaborative care management of depression among low-income patients with cancer

School of Social Work and Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0411, USA.
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 17.88). 10/2008; 26(27):4488-96. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.6371
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To determine the effectiveness of the Alleviating Depression Among Patients With Cancer (ADAPt-C) collaborative care management for major depression or dysthymia.
Study patients included 472 low-income, predominantly female Hispanic patients with cancer age >or= 18 years with major depression (49%), dysthymia (5%), or both (46%). Patients were randomly assigned to intervention (n = 242) or enhanced usual care (EUC; n = 230). Intervention patients had access for up to 12 months to a depression clinical specialist (supervised by a psychiatrist) who offered education, structured psychotherapy, and maintenance/relapse prevention support. The psychiatrist prescribed antidepressant medications for patients preferring or assessed to require medication.
At 12 months, 63% of intervention patients had a 50% or greater reduction in depressive symptoms from baseline as assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) depression scale compared with 50% of EUC patients (odds ratio [OR] = 1.98; 95% CI, 1.16 to 3.38; P = .01). Improvement was also found for 5-point decrease in PHQ-9 score among 72.2% of intervention patients compared with 59.7% of EUC patients (OR = 1.99; 95% CI, 1.14 to 3.50; P = .02). Intervention patients also experienced greater rates of depression treatment (72.3% v 10.4% of EUC patients; P < .0001) and significantly better quality-of-life outcomes, including social/family (adjusted mean difference between groups, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.22 to 4.17; P < .001), emotional (adjusted mean difference, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.26 to 2.22; P = .01), functional (adjusted mean difference, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.08 to 2.59; P = .04), and physical well-being (adjusted mean difference, 2.79; 95% CI, 0.49 to 5.1; P = .02).
ADAPt-C collaborative care is feasible and results in significant reduction in depressive symptoms, improvement in quality of life, and lower pain levels compared with EUC for patients with depressive disorders in a low-income, predominantly Hispanic population in public sector oncology clinics.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The collaborative care model is a systematic approach to the treatment of depression and anxiety in primary care settings that involves the integration of care managers and consultant psychiatrists, with primary care physician oversight, to more proactively manage mental disorders as chronic diseases, rather than treating acute symptoms. While collaborative care has been shown to be more effective than usual primary care in improving depression outcomes in a number of studies, less is known about the factors that support the translation of this evidence-based intervention to real-world program implementation. The purpose of this case study was to examine the implementation of a collaborative care model in a community based primary care clinic that primarily serves a low-income, uninsured Latino population, in order to better understand the interdisciplinary relationships and the specific elements that might facilitate broader implementation.
    Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare 01/2014; 7:503-13. DOI:10.2147/JMDH.S69821
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND Young adult female cancer survivors have unmet reproductive concerns and informational needs that are associated with poorer quality of life. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between current reproductive concerns and moderate to severe depression among young survivors.METHODS This cross-sectional study included 200 female cancer survivors between the ages of 18 and 35 years who completed a Web-based survey measuring reproductive history, parenthood desires, reproductive concerns after cancer, and quality-of-life indicators.RESULTSThe mean age of the participants was 28 years (standard deviation, 4.4 years), and almost two-thirds were diagnosed within 5 years of survey completion. A multivariate logistic regression analysis controlling for education, duration of survivorship, and social support revealed an association between experiencing reproductive concerns and moderate to severe depression (odds ratio for each 5-unit increase in the Reproductive Concerns After Cancer [RCAC] score, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.60). Among those with moderate to severe depression, 23% had high RCAC scores, whereas 6% of those with minimal to mild depression did (P < .001).CONCLUSIONSA higher level of reproductive concerns was associated with greater odds of experiencing moderate to severe depression. Almost a quarter of survivors in this sample reported moderate to severe depression, and addressing reproductive concerns represents one potential area of intervention for improving the psychosocial health of young survivors. Cancer 2014. © 2014 American Cancer Society.
    Cancer 11/2014; DOI:10.1002/cncr.29133 · 5.20 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Major depression is an important complication of cancer. However, it is frequently inadequately treated. There are challenges both in identifying which cancer patients are depressed, and in ensuring that these patients receive effective treatment for their depression. Integration of depression management into cancer care has been advocated as a way to address these challenges. Such integrated approaches must include both the systematic identification of cases and the delivery of treatment. We describe here a system of depression care that includes both a screening programme to identify patients with depression and a linked treatment programme, based on the collaborative care model, called 'Depression Care for People with Cancer' (DCPC). The system of care was designed to be fully integrated with specialist cancer services and has been robustly evaluated in randomized trials. We describe how the system operates and explain why it is designed as it is. We also summarize the evidence for its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness and discuss its implementation in routine clinical practice.
    International Review of Psychiatry 12/2014; 26(6):657-68. DOI:10.3109/09540261.2014.981512 · 1.80 Impact Factor


Available from
May 28, 2014