Rationale and design: telepsychology service delivery for depressed elderly veterans

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Older adults who live in rural areas experience significant disparities in health status and access to mental health care. "Telepsychology," (also referred to as "telepsychiatry," or "telemental health") represents a potential strategy towards addressing this longstanding problem. Older adults may benefit from telepsychology due to its: (1) utility to address existing problematic access to care for rural residents; (2) capacity to reduce stigma associated with traditional mental health care; and (3) utility to overcome significant age-related problems in ambulation and transportation. Moreover, preliminary evidence indicates that telepsychiatry programs are often less expensive for patients, and reduce travel time, travel costs, and time off from work. Thus, telepsychology may provide a cost-efficient solution to access-to-care problems in rural areas.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We describe an ongoing four-year prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of an empirically supported treatment for major depressive disorder, Behavioral Activation, delivered either via in-home videoconferencing technology ("Telepsychology") or traditional face-to-face services ("Same-Room"). Our hypothesis is that in-homeTelepsychology service delivery will be equally effective as the traditional mode (Same-Room). Two-hundred twenty-four (224) male and female elderly participants will be administered protocol-driven individual Behavioral Activation therapy for depression over an 8-week period; and subjects will be followed for 12-months to ascertain longer-term effects of the treatment on three outcomes domains: (1) clinical outcomes (symptom severity, social functioning); (2) process variables (patient satisfaction, treatment credibility, attendance, adherence, dropout); and (3) economic outcomes (cost and resource use).</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Results from the proposed study will provide important insight into whether telepsychology service delivery is as effective as the traditional mode of service delivery, defined in terms of clinical, process, and economic outcomes, for elderly patients with depression residing in rural areas without adequate access to mental health services.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier# NCT00324701).</p

Geography matters: state-level variation in children's oral health care access and oral health status

ObjectivesTo ascertain differences across states in children's oral health care access and oral health status and the factors that contribute to those differences.Study designObservational study using cross-sectional surveys.MethodsUsing the 2007 National Survey of Children's Health, we examined state variation in parents' report of children's oral health care access (absence of a preventive dental visit) and oral health status. We assessed the unadjusted prevalences of these outcomes, then adjusted with child-, family-, and neighbourhood-level variables using logistic regression; these results are presented directly and graphically. Using multilevel analysis, we then calculated the degree to which child-, family-, and community-level variables explained state variation. Finally, we quantified the influence of state-level variables on state variation.ResultsUnadjusted rates of no preventive dental care ranged 9.0-26.8% (mean 17.5%), with little impact of adjusting (10.3-26.7%). Almost 9% of the population had fair/poor oral health; unadjusted range 4.1-14.5%. Adjusting analyses affected fair/poor oral health more than access (5.7-10.7%). Child, family and community factors explained ∼¼ of the state variation in no preventive visit and ∼½ of fair/poor oral health. State-level factors further contributed to explaining up to a third of residual state variation.ConclusionGeography matters: where a child lives has a large impact on his or her access to oral health care and oral health status, even after adjusting for child, family, community, and state variables. As state-level variation persists, other factors and richer data are needed to clarify the variation and drive changes for more egalitarian and overall improved oral health

Prevalence of Basic Information Technology Use by U.S. Physicians

BACKGROUND: Information technology (IT) has been advocated as an important means to improve the practice of clinical medicine. OBJECTIVES: To determine current prevalence of non-electronic health record (EHR) IT use by a national sample of U.S. physicians, and to identify associated physician, practice, and patient panel characteristics. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Survey conducted in early 2004 of 1,662 U.S. physicians engaged in direct patient care selected from 3 primary care specialties (family practice, internal medicine, pediatrics) and 3 nonprimary care specialties (anesthesiology, general surgery, cardiology). MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported frequency of e-mail communication with patients or other clinicians, online access to continuing medical education or professional journals, and use of any computerized decision support (CDS) during clinical care. Survey results were weighted by specialty and linked via practice zip codes to measures of area income and urbanization. RESULTS: Response rate was 52.5%. Respondents spent 49 (±19) (mean [±standard deviation]) hours per week in direct patient care and graduated from medical school 23 (±11) years earlier. “Frequent” use was highest for CDS (40.8%) and online professional journal access (39.0%), and lowest for e-mail communication with patients (3.4%). Ten percent of physicians never used any of the 5 IT tools. In separate logistic regression analyses predicting usage of each of the 5 IT tools, the strongest associations with IT use were primary care practice (adjusted odds ratios [aORs] ranging from 1.34 to 2.26) and academic practice setting (aORs 2.17 to 5.41). Years since medical school graduation (aOR 0.85 to 0.87 for every 5 years after graduation) and solo/2-person practice setting (aORs 0.21 to 0.55) were negatively associated with IT use. Practice location and patient panel characteristics were not independently associated with IT use. CONCLUSIONS: In early 2004, the majority of physicians did not regularly use basic, inexpensive, and widely available IT tools in clinical practice. Efforts to increase the use of IT in medicine should focus on practice-level barriers to adoption