Table 3.
Baseline provider need for training to address depression.
| Measures, Standardized Cronbach’s α for Scales with Two or More Items | Total N = 43 M ± SD |
NL M ± SD |
Licensed M ± SD |
Statistic t (df) | p | Total N = 41 M ± SD |
Non-HC M ± SD |
Healthcare M ± SD |
Statistic t (df) | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Depression knowledge, α = 0.21 (3 items, 1 = strongly agree, 5 = strongly disagree) a |
1.5 ± 0.5 | 1.9 ± 0.3 | 1.4 ± 0.5 | t(37) = −2.8 | 0.008 | 1.5 ± 0.5 | 1.5 ± 0.4 | 1.6 ± 0.6 | t(35) = 0.2 | 0.817 |
|
Depression skill, α = 0.89 (7 items, 1 = not at all skilled, 4 = very skilled) b |
2.8 ± 0.9 | 1.8 ± 0.7 | 3.1 ± 0.6 | t(39) = 5.7 | <.001 | 2.8 ± 0.9 | 2.7 ± 1.0 | 2.8 ± 0.8 | t(37) = 0.3 | 0.757 |
|
Depression stigma, α = 0.56 (3 items, 1 = strongly agree, 5 = disagree) c |
3.8 ± 0.7 | 3.6 ± 0.7 | 3.9 ± 0.7 | t(41) = 1.4 | 0.175 | 3.8 ± 0.7 | 3.9 ± 0.8 | 3.8 ± 0.7 | t(39) = −0.1 | 0.885 |
|
Perception of systemic barriers, α = 0.60 (3 items, 1 = doesn’t limit, 3 = limits a great deal) d |
1.5 ± 0.5 | 1.7 ± 0.7 | 1.5 ± 0.4 | t(33) = −0.9 | 0.352 | 1.5 ± 0.5 | 1.6 ± 0.6 | 1.4 ± 0.4 | t(31) = −1 | 0.333 |
|
Depression care techniques, α = 0.95 (9 items, 1 = never, 5 = always) e |
2.6 ± 1.0 | 1.9 ± 1.1 | 2.8 ± 0.9 | t(34) = 2.4 | 0.023 | 2.7 ± 1.0 | 2.3 ± 1.0 | 2.9 ± 0.9 | t(32) = 1.7 | 0.091 |
|
Depression care management, α = 0.92 (5 items, 1 = never, 5 = always) f |
2.6 ± 0.9 | 1.7 ± 0.8 | 2.8 ± 0.8 | t(35) = 3.4 | 0.002 | 2.6 ± 0.9 | 2.3 ± 1.0 | 2.8 ± 0.8 | t(33) = 1.5 | 0.148 |
|
Resource Use in past 6 months, α = 0.59 (4 items, 1 = didn’t use, 3 = used a lot) g |
1.7 ± 0.5 | 1.3 ± 0.3 | 1.8 ± 0.5 | t(36) = 2.3 | 0.025 | 1.7 ± 0.5 | 1.5 ± 0.3 | 1.8 ± 0.6 | t(34) = 1.6 | 0.113 |
|
Clinical services provision, hours per week (0 = 0 hours, 5 = more than 40 hours) h |
1.5 ± 1.7 | 0.1 ± 0.3 | 1.9 ± 1.7 | t(38) = 3 | 0.005 | 1.5 ± 1.7 | 0.7 ± 1.4 | 1.9 ± 1.7 | t(36) = 2.2 | 0.036 |
|
Community services provision, hours per week (0 = 0 hours, 5 =more than 40 hours) h |
1.2 ± 1.6 | 1.3 ± 1.4 | 1.2 ± 1.6 | t(36) = −0.1 | 0.884 | 1.2 ± 1.6 | 1.4 ± 1.6 | 1.1 ± 1.6 | t(34) = −0.4 | 0.687 |
|
Community outreach (1 = 0%, 5 = 75–100 % of time) i |
1.9 ± 1.1 | 1.6 ± 1.0 | 1.9 ± 1.2 | t(40) = 0.8 | 0.42 | 1.8 ± 1.1 | 2.1 ± 1.1 | 1.7 ± 1.1 | t(38) = −1.1 | 0.291 |
|
Improving organization services, α = 0.97 (4 items, 1 = not import, 7 = extremely import) j |
6.0 ± 1.5 | 5.6 ± 1.9 | 6.2 ± 1.4 | t(39) = 1.0 | 0.345 | 6.2 ± 1.3 | 5.6 ± 1.7 | 6.5 ± 0.9 | t(37) = 1.9 | 0.06 |
|
Improving client services, α = 0.94 (3 items, 1 = not import, 7 = extremely import) j |
6.2 ± 1.2 | 6.1 ± 1.1 | 6.3 ± 1.3 | t(38) = 0.4 | 0.718 | 6.4 ± 0.9 | 6.1 ± 0.9 | 6.5 ± 0.8 | t(36) = 1.4 | 0.157 |
a Possible scores range from 1 to 5, with lower scores indicating greater depression knowledge [36]; b Possible scores range from 1 to 4, with higher scores indicating greater perception of skills [36]; c Possible scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating less depression stigma [36]; d Possible scores range from 1 to 3, with lower scores indicating less barriers; e Possible scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater use of depression care techniques [36]; f Possible scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater use of depression case management tasks [36]; g Possible scores range from 1 to 3, with higher scores indicating more frequent use of the resources for individuals who showed symptoms of depression and came to this organization for services; h Possible scores range from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating more hours providing services [36]; i Possible scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater percentage of working time spent on engaging in community outreach for depression; j Possible scores range from 1 to 7, with higher scores indicating more improtant for improving services.