Rural clinics implementing collaborative care for low-income patients can achieve comparable or better depression outcomes.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 242-254
Author(s):  
Diane M. Powers ◽  
Deborah J. Bowen ◽  
Robert F. Arao ◽  
Melinda Vredevoogd ◽  
Joan Russo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Collaborative Care ◽  
Rural Clinics

scholarly journals Randomized Controlled Trial of Collaborative Care Management of Depression Among Low-Income Patients With Cancer

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (27) ◽  
pp. 4488-4496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen Ell ◽  
Bin Xie ◽  
Brenda Quon ◽  
David I. Quinn ◽  
Megan Dwight-Johnson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Major Depression ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Collaborative Care ◽  
Care Management ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Patients With Cancer

PurposeTo determine the effectiveness of the Alleviating Depression Among Patients With Cancer (ADAPt-C) collaborative care management for major depression or dysthymia.Patients and MethodsStudy patients included 472 low-income, predominantly female Hispanic patients with cancer age ≥ 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.ResultsAt 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).ConclusionADAPt-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.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Collaborative Care in Addressing Depression Treatment Preferences Among Low-Income Latinos

2010 ◽  
Vol 61 (11) ◽  
pp. 1112-1118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Dwight-Johnson ◽  
Isabel T. Lagomasino ◽  
Joel Hay ◽  
Lily Zhang ◽  
Lingqi Tang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Collaborative Care ◽  
Treatment Preferences ◽  
Depression Treatment

A View of the Lexical–Grammatical Link in Young Latinos With Specific Language Impairment Using Language-Specific and Conceptual Measures

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 1775-1786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucía I. Méndez ◽  
Gabriela Simon-Cereijido
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Vocabulary Skills ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
Study Participants ◽  
L1 And L2

Purpose This study investigated the nature of the association of lexical–grammatical abilities within and across languages in Latino dual language learners (DLLs) with specific language impairment (SLI) using language-specific and bilingual measures. Method Seventy-four Spanish/English–speaking preschoolers with SLI from preschools serving low-income households participated in the study. Participants had stronger skills in Spanish (first language [L1]) and were in the initial stages of learning English (second language [L2]). The children's lexical, semantic, and grammar abilities were assessed using normative and researcher-developed tools in English and Spanish. Hierarchical linear regressions of cross-sectional data were conducted using measures of sentence repetition tasks, language-specific vocabulary, and conceptual bilingual lexical and semantic abilities in Spanish and English. Results Results indicate that language-specific vocabulary abilities support the development of grammar in L1 and L2 in this population. L1 vocabulary also contributes to L2 grammar above and beyond the contribution of L2 vocabulary skills. However, the cross-linguistic association between vocabulary in L2 and grammar skills in the stronger or more proficient language (L1) is not observed. In addition, conceptual vocabulary significantly supported grammar in L2, whereas bilingual semantic skills supported L1 grammar. Conclusions Our findings reveal that the same language-specific vocabulary abilities drive grammar development in L1 and L2 in DLLs with SLI. In the early stages of L2 acquisition, vocabulary skills in L1 also seem to contribute to grammar skills in L2 in this population. Thus, it is critical to support vocabulary development in both L1 and L2 in DLLs with SLI, particularly in the beginning stages of L2 acquisition. Clinical and educational implications are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document