Professional Service Utilisation among Patients with Severe Mental Disorders

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Generally, patients with serious mental disorders (SMD) are frequent users of services who generate high care-related costs. Current reforms aim to increase service integration and primary care for improved patient care and health-care efficiency. This article identifies and compares variables associated with the use by patients with SMD of services offered by psychiatrists, case managers, and general practitioners (GPs). It also compares frequent and infrequent service use.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>One hundred forty patients with SMD from five regions in Quebec, Canada, were interviewed on their use of services in the previous year. Patients were also required to complete a questionnaire on needs-assessment. In addition, data were collected from clinical records. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses were conducted.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Most patients used services from psychiatrists and case managers, but no more than half consulted GPs. Most patients were followed at least by two professionals, chiefly psychiatrists and case managers. Care access, continuity of care, and total help received were the most important variables associated with the different types of professional consultation. These variables were also associated with frequent use of professional service, as compared with infrequent service use. In all, enabling factors rather than need factors were the core predictors of frequency of service utilisation by patients with SMD.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study reveals that health care system organisation and professional practice - rather than patient need profiles - are the core predictors of professional consultation by patients with SMD. The homogeneity of our study population, i.e. mainly users with schizophrenia, recently discharged from hospital, may partly account for these results. Our findings also underscored the limited involvement of GPs in this patient population's care. As comorbidity is often associated with serious mental disorders, closer follow-up by GPs is needed. Globally, more effort should be directed at increasing shared-care initiatives, which would enhance coordination among psychiatrists, GPs, and psychosocial teams (including case managers). Finally, there is a need to increase awareness among health care providers, especially GPs, of the level of care required by patients with disabling and serious mental disorders.</p

Reconciling disparate prevalence rates of PTSD in large samples of US male Vietnam veterans and their controls

BACKGROUND: Two large independent studies funded by the US government have assessed the impact of the Vietnam War on the prevalence of PTSD in US veterans. The National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Study (NVVRS) estimated the current PTSD prevalence to be 15.2% while the Vietnam Experience Study (VES) estimated the prevalence to be 2.2%. We compared alternative criteria for estimating the prevalence of PTSD using the NVVRS and VES public use data sets collected more than 10 years after the United States withdrew troops from Vietnam. METHODS: We applied uniform diagnostic procedures to the male veterans from the NVVRS and VES to estimate PTSD prevalences based on varying criteria including one-month and lifetime prevalence estimates, combat and non-combat prevalence estimates, and prevalence estimates using both single and multiple indicator models. RESULTS: Using a narrow and specific set of criteria, we derived current prevalence estimates for combat-related PTSD of 2.5% and 2.9% for the VES and the NVVRS, respectively. Using a more broad and sensitive set of criteria, we derived current prevalence estimates for combat-related PTSD of 12.2% and 15.8% for the VES and NVVRS, respectively. CONCLUSION: When comparable methods were applied to available data we reconciled disparate results and estimated similar current prevalences for both narrow and broad definitions of combat-related diagnoses of PTSD

Assessing Depression in Primary Care with the PHQ-9: Can It Be Carried Out over the Telephone?

BACKGROUND: Telephone assessment of depression for research purposes is increasingly being used. The Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item depression module (PHQ-9) is a well-validated, brief, self-reported, diagnostic, and severity measure of depression designed for use in primary care (PC). To our knowledge, there are no available data regarding its validity when administered over the telephone. OBJECTIVE: The aims of the present study were to evaluate agreement between self-administered and telephone-administered PHQ-9, to investigate possible systematic bias, and to evaluate the internal consistency of the telephone-administered PHQ-9. METHODS: Three hundred and forty-six participants from two PC centers were assessed twice with the PHQ-9. Participants were divided into 4 groups according to administration procedure order and administration procedure of the PHQ-9: Self-administered/Telephone-administered; Telephone-administered/Self-administered; Telephone-administered/Telephone-administered; and Self-administered/Self-administered. The first 2 groups served for analyzing the procedural validity of telephone-administered PHQ-9. The last 2 allowed a test–retest reliability analysis of both self- and telephone-administered PHQ-9. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and weighted κ (for each item) were calculated as measures of concordance. Additionally, Pearson's correlation coefficient, Student's t-test, and Cronbach's α were analyzed. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficient and weighted κ between both administration procedures were excellent, revealing a strong concordance between telephone- and self-administered PHQ-9. A small and clinically nonsignificant tendency was observed toward lower scores for the telephone-administered PHQ-9. The internal consistency of the telephone-administered PHQ-9 was high and close to the self-administered one. CONCLUSIONS: Telephone and in-person assessments by means of the PHQ-9 yield similar results. Thus, telephone administration of the PHQ-9 seems to be a reliable procedure for assessing depression in PC

The prevalence and significance of substance use disorders in bipolar type I and II disorder

<p>Abstract</p> <p>The aim of this paper is to provide a systematic review of the literature examining the epidemiology, outcome, and treatment of patients with bipolar disorder and co-occurring substance use disorders (SUDs). Articles for this review were initially selected via a comprehensive Medline search and further studies were obtained from the references in these articles. Given the lack of research in this field, all relevant studies except case reports were included.</p> <p>Prior epidemiological research has consistently shown that substance use disorders (SUDs) are extremely common in bipolar I and II disorders. The lifetime prevalence of SUDs is at least 40% in bipolar I patients. Alcohol and cannabis are the substances most often abused, followed by cocaine and then opioids. Research has consistently shown that co-occurring SUDs are correlated with negative effects on illness outcome including more frequent and prolonged affective episodes, decreased compliance with treatment, a lower quality of life, and increased suicidal behavior. Recent research on the causal relationship between the two disorders suggests that a subgroup of bipolar patients may develop a relatively milder form of affective illness that is expressed only after extended exposure to alcohol abuse.</p> <p>There has been very little treatment research specifically targeting this population. Three open label medication trials provide limited evidence that quetiapine, aripiprazole, and lamotrigine may be effective in treating affective and substance use symptoms in bipolar patients with cocaine dependence and that aripiprazole may also be helpful in patients with alcohol use disorders. The two placebo controlled trials to date suggest that valproate given as an adjunct to lithium in bipolar patients with co-occurring alcohol dependence improves both mood and alcohol use symptoms and that lithium treatment in bipolar adolescents improves mood and SUD symptoms.</p> <p>Given the high rate of SUD co-occurrence, more research investigating treatments in this population is needed. Specifically, double blind placebo controlled trials are needed to establish the effectiveness of medications found to be efficacious in open label treatments. New research also needs to be conducted on medications found to treat either bipolar disorder or a SUD in isolation. In addition, it may be advisable to consider including patients with prior SUDs in clinical trials for new medications in bipolar disorder.</p