Williams, Mark D.

In 2008, the Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI) in Minnesota implemented a model of collaborative care management (CCM) for treatment of depression in primary care. This resulted in significant improvements on both clinical response and remission over usual care, although an increase in utilization metrics has been observed. Mental health comorbidities have previously been significantly associated with an increased likelihood of not responding to initial treatment. This retrospective study hypothesized that patients with mental health comorbidities are more likely to be associated with patients who were readmitted into CCM with recurrent depression. A total of 145 patients who had completed CCM were studied; of these, 32 were diagnosed with recurrent depression and were readmitted to CCM, and 113 were in remission for at least 4 months. There were no statistically significant demographic differences between the 2 groups. The initial screening GAD-7 score for anxiety was significantly increased in the readmission group (12.81 vs 9.20, P = .001) as was the average length of treatment from initial diagnosis to remission (168.09 vs 120.99 days, P = .002). All other initial screening tests were not different between the groups. When controlling for the independent variables by multiple logistic regression, the odds ratio for GAD-7 was 1.1156 (CI = 1.0.192 to 1.2212, P = .0177) and for days of treatment in CCM was 1.0123 (CI = 1.0041 to 1.0206, P = .0033). Patients who are readmitted to CCM for recurrent depression have a statistically increased risk of associated anxiety and a longer treatment course than those who have remained in remission for at least 4 months.

The collaborative care management (CCM) model has been demonstrated to be significantly more effective compared to usual care (UC) in depression management although an initial increase in cost measures was seen. In this paper, cost measures as well as clinical response were analyzed on patients with available follow-up data at six months. Records of 219 patients with follow-up data in CCM group and 119 in UC group were reviewed. At six months, there was a statistically significant clinical response rate among patients in CCM compared to UC group ( P < 0.0001). Likewise, 65% in CCM group was “symptom-free” at 6 months vs. 31.9% in UC group ( P < 0.0001). Among the responders in both groups, there was no statistical difference in cost measures. However, cost measures were significantly higher among non-responders compared to responders within CCM. Between the two models, the non-responders in UC had lower cost measures than the non-responders under CCM.

A collaborative care model (CCM) has been implemented for management of depression. This paper studies the impact that the CCM had on cost measures for the period of six months after initial diagnosis of depression compared to patients receiving usual care (UC). There was a significant increase in the CPT costs for the six months following diagnosis in the CCM group ($451.35 vs. $323.50, P < 0.001). The average CPT cost rank and CPT cost differential were also significantly increased in the CCM group. The adjusted means of the CPT costs were (when controlling for prior utilization) $452.11 for the CCM group and $322.09 for UC (P < 0.001). In the CCM group; there were 161 patients (73.5%) that achieved a clinical response for their depression compared to the UC group, which had a 15.1% (18/119) response rate (P < 0.001). There also was a significant difference between the groups in those who were symptoms free of their depression (PHQ-9 score < 5), with the CCM having 59.4% of the patients symptom-free compared to 10.9% of the UC group (P < 0.001). In this group of patients, CCM is associated with markedly improved clinical outcomes for depression, however with a modest short-term increase in CPT costs.

Many primary care physicians understand the challenges of taking care of patients with depression. Care management models for depression have been described as more effective than usual practice. The implementation of such a model requires a clinic manager to be able to predict how this new process might impact staffing and clinical demand. This study was designed to evaluate the initial impact of the implementation of a depression care manager (CM) model on the utilization of outpatient visits. The hypothesis is that the introduction of a CM model for depression in a primary care practice would be associated with an increased utilization of health care resources when compared to usual care (UC). There were 38 patients enrolled during the initial 2 months of implementation of the CM model. Using a retrospective medical record review, the CM population was compared to a similar group receiving UC (N = 49), and a significant increase in the percentage of patients who were seen for any reason in the CM population was found (65.8% vs. 36.7%, P = 0.01). The average CM patient had 1.24 outpatient visits for any reason vs. 0.69 for the UC group ( P = 0.01). When specifically focusing on outpatient visits for depression, the CM group averaged 0.95 visits per patient as compared to the UC patients having 0.55 visits per patient ( P = 0.04). This study suggests that the initial implementation of a CM model for treatment of depression will increase outpatient utilization. ( Population Health Management 2009;12:227–230)

To identify and explore cultural dynamics influencing the psychiatric care of immigrant Somalis in the USA, we reviewed demographic data from Minnesota Departments of Human Services, and interviewed health professionals, exploring community perceptions of medical/psychiatric needs, cultural characteristics, barriers to care, and potential solutions. An informal survey of 37 members of the Mayo Clinic Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, to determine caregiver perceptions of care of Somali patients, cited language barriers (74%), and cultural misperceptions (68%) as the most frequent obstacles. Difficulties working within the patriarchal family structure, limited community resources, poor compliance, and financial issues ranged between 18 and 8%. Additional barriers mentioned were problems working with interpreters from `warring clan factions,' patients' fears of being labeled `crazy,' difficulties viewing illness within an emotional framework, and the need to address mental health from a physical framework through a focus on somatic symptoms. Somalis rarely acknowledge psychiatric problems and common traditional treatments have become ineffective in the new context. Recommendations include alternative health care approaches utilizing family values, `bargaining,' and educational approaches to acculturation.