Table 1.
When full intervention protocols could not be found (e.g. for studies with sub-analyses based on data from larger studies), the original papers were referred to in assessing whether the intervention met AIMS criteria.
Author, Year | Setting, Longest Follow-Up Period | Demographics | Cultural and Linguistic Components | Measurement Tool(s) | Comparison Group | Outcome(s) at Longest Follow-up Period |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Randomized Controlled Trials | ||||||
Arean, 2005 | Washington, California, Texas, Indiana and North Carolina 12 months | 1801 older adults age >60 years who met DSM-IV criteria for major depression or dysthymia Ethnic breakdown: 77% Whites, 12% Blacks, 8% Latinos, 3% Other Women: 65% |
None (explicit observation made by authors) | HSCL-20 | Older minority patients in usual care were compared to those in Collaborative Care intervention | Older minorities in intervention group had significantly better depression outcomes than those in usual care (50% vs 18% for treatment response, p < 0.0001), with Blacks having largest improvement |
Yeung, 2010 | Boston 6 months | 100 Chinese American adults, age >18, with PHQ-9 ≥10 Ethnic breakdown: 100% Chinese American Women: 69% female |
|
HAM-D-17 CGI-S, CGI-I | Chinese Americans receiving Collaborative Care were compared to those receiving usual care | There were no statistically significant differences in treatment outcome between the care management group and physician-care only group; the groups’ respective response rates were 60% and 50%, their remission rates were 48% and 37%, their mean CGI-S scores were 2.7 and 2.5, and their mean CGI-I scores were 2.8 and 2.8 |
Bao, 2011 | NYC, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh 2 years | 396 adults age >60, English-speaking, had ≥18, and CES-D score >20 Ethnic breakdown: 83% Black, 13% Hispanic, 1% Asian, 3% other Women: 71.6% |
|
HDRS | Patients receiving Collaborative Care were compared to those receiving usual care; also analyzed depression outcomes for White versus minority adults both in Collaborative Care | Descriptive results showed depression improved for patients in both arms. Minority patients under usual care experienced a similar course of depression as White patients. Under intervention, minorities saw slower decline in HDRS in first 4 months. Collaborative Care provided comparable effects between minorities and Whites in the early phase. However, by month 18, it ceased to benefit minorities, whereas for Whites, the intervention effect amounted to a 2.3 reduction in HDRS at month 24 |
Davis, 2011 | Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi 6 months | 360 veteran adults, age ≥18, with PHQ-9 ≥12 Ethnic breakdown: 75% White, 18% Black, 3% Native American, 3.6% Other Women: 8% |
None reported | HSCL-20 | Patients in telemedicine-based Collaborative Care were compared to those in usual care | Minority individuals had significantly higher rate of response than Whites to collaborative care (42% versus 19%, X^2=8.1, p=0.004) |
Cooper, 2013 | Maryland, Delaware 18 months | 132 Black adults, age 18–75, with MDD as screened positive using Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), met DSM-IV criteria for MDD in past year, and had symptoms present for at least 1 week in past month Ethnic breakdown: 100% Black Women: 79.6% |
|
CES-D CIDI | Blacks receiving culturally sensitive Collaborative Care were compared to those receiving standard Collaborative Care without cultural adaptation | Both the standard collaborative care group (−9.1, CI 12.8, 5.4) and the culturally sensitive collaborative care intervention group (−12.0, CI 15.7, 8.2) experienced statistically significant reductions in CES-D at 18 months that were clinically meaningful. There were no statistically significant differences in CES-D between groups over the follow-up period. At 12 months, 33% of the culturally sensitive group and 42% of the standard group achieved remission from depression; this difference was not statistically significant (OR 0.97; CI, 0.34, 2.80) |
Yeung, 2016 | Boston 6 months | 190 Chinese American monolingual immigrant adults with PHQ-9 ≥10 and who met DSM-IV criteria for MDD as diagnosed by Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview Ethnic breakdown: 100% Chinese American Women: 63% |
|
HAM-D-17 CGI-S, CGI-I | Chinese American patients in Collaborative Care were compared to those in usual care | Odds of achieving response and remission significantly greater in intervention versus control group (OR=3.9, 95% CI, 1.9 to 7.8 and OR=4.4, 95% CI, 1.9 to 9.9 respectively) Patients in intervention showed significantly greater improvement over time in HAM-D-17 (p = 0.002), CGI-S (p = 0.003), CGI-I (p = 0.02) |
Jonassaint, 2017 | Southwestern Pennsylvania 12 months | 590 adults, age ≥18, with PHQ-9 ≥10 Ethnic breakdown: 15% Black, 85% White Women: 94% |
None reported | PHQ-9 | Black patients were compared to White patients, both of whom participated in Collaborative Care with computerized cognitive behavioral therapy “Beating the Blues” | Black participants trended toward a greater decrease in depressive symptoms than Whites (estimated 8-session change −6.6 vs −5.5, p=0.06) |
Lagomasino, 2017 | Los Angeles 16 weeks | 400 adults, age ≥18, who screened positive for MDD or dysthymia using PHQ-9 (cutoff unspecified) and 2 questions from PRIME-MD Ethnic breakdown: 85% Latino, 4% White, 10% Black, 2% Other Women: 83% |
|
PHQ-9 | Patients in Collaborative Care were compared to those in “enhanced usual care” (ie, received educational pamphlet about depression, letter they could bring to PCP stating they screened positive for depression, list of local mental health resources) | PHQ-9 significantly lower at 16 weeks in intervention group compared to usual care (8.6 vs 13.3, p<.001) |
Wu, 2018 | LA county 12 months | 1406 adults age ≥18, diagnosed with T2DM, who spoke English or Spanish, with a working phone number Ethnic breakdown: 89% Hispanic Women: 63% |
|
PHQ-9 | Patients receiving collaborative care with technology assistance or Collaborative Care only were compared to those receiving usual care | Compared to physician-supported care only (UC=6.35), care management (SC=5.05, p=0.02) and technology-facilitated care management (TC=5.16, p=0.02) were both significantly associated with decreased PHQ-9 scores. Only technology-facilitated care management was associated with improved depression remission compared to physician-supported care only. No significant differences in depression outcomes between care management and technology-facilitated care management |
Emery-Tiburcio, 2019 | Chicago 12 months | 250 adults, age ≥60 years, with PHQ-9 score ≥8 Ethnic breakdown: 50% Hispanic, 50% Black Women: 80.4% |
|
PHQ-9 | Patients receiving Collaborative Care plus membership in Generations, an older adult educational activity program, were compared to those receiving only Generations | Significantly more participants in the care management group (69.7%) than physician-care only group (52.1%) had achieved 50% or greater reduction in depressive symptoms (p=0.012) |
Observational Studies | ||||||
Alexopoulos, 2005 | New York City, NY; Philadelphia, PA; Pittsburgh, PA 2 years | 396 adults, age ≥60, English-speaking with MMSE >18 and CES-D score >20 Ethnic breakdown: 83% Black, 13% Hispanic, 1% Asian, 3% other Women: 71.6% |
None reported | HDRS | Patients receiving Collaborative Care were compared to those receiving usual care | When remission defined as HDRS<10, care management practices had higher likelihood of remission than practices offering usual care. By 8 months, 43% of patients receiving the care management intervention had achieved remission compared with 28% of patients receiving usual care |
Huang, 2011 | Western Washington State 1 month | 661 women, age ≥18, who are either pregnant or parenting a child with PHQ-9 score ≥10 Ethnic breakdown: 59.5% Latina, 19.1% White, 11.3% Black, 10.1% Asian Women: 100% |
None reported | PHQ-9 | Women receiving Collaborative Care who identify as non-Hispanic white, black, and Asian were compared to Latina patients | 66% of Latina patients had 50% or greater reduction in PHQ-9 score compared to 53% white, 40% black, and 51% Asian patients (p<0.001). |
Uebelacker, 2011 | Rhode Island 12 weeks | 38 Hispanic adults, age ≥18 who met DSM-IV criteria for major depression, minor depression, or dysthymia Ethnic breakdown: 100% Hispanic Women: 95% |
|
QIDS-Clinician version CES-D | Patients receiving telephone depression care management were compared to those receiving usual care | No significant difference in QIDS or CES-D scores between patients who received telephone depression care management and those who received usual care only |
Sanchez, 2012 | Austin, Texas 3 months | 269 adults age ≥18 who screened in for depression using PHQ-9 (cutoff not specified) Ethnic breakdown: 35% non-Hispanic Whites, 55% Hispanics, 10% other Women: 81% |
|
PHQ-9 | Minority groups were compared to non-Hispanic Whites in Collaborative Care intervention | Spanish-speaking Hispanic patients had significantly greater odds of achieving clinically meaningful improvement compared to non-Hispanic whites (odds ratio [OR] = 2.45, 95% CI = 1.214.95; p = .013) |
Kwong, 2013 | New York City, NY 12 weeks | 57 Asian American adults, age ≥18 with PHQ-9 ≥8 and confirmed with mini international neurop sychiatric interview Ethnic breakdown: 100% Asian American Women: 68% |
|
PHQ-9 | Asian American patients receiving Collaborative Care were compared to Asian American patients receiving physician-only care | No statistically significant difference in reduction in PHQ-9 scores between patients who received care management support and those who received physician only care. |
Ratzliff, 2013 | Washington state 16 weeks | 345 adults age >18 with PHQ-9 ≥10 Ethnic breakdown: 58% Asian Americans (suspected mostly Chinese and Vietnamese but could not further characterize) Women: 69% |
|
PHQ-9 | Asian American patients in culturally sensitive Collaborative Care clinics were compared to Asian American and White patients in general Collaborative Care clinics (i.e. without culturally sensitive components) | No statistically significant differences among groups for improvement of depressive symptoms |
Angstman, 2015 | Midwestern United States multisite practice 6 months | 7010 adults, age ≥18 with PHQ-9 ≥10 Ethnic breakdown: 91.8% non-Hispanic white, 2.1% Black, 1.0% Hispanic, 1.7% Asian, 3.4% Other Women: 71% |
|
PHQ-9 MDQ | Patients receiving Collaborative Care were compared to those receiving usual care | Minority patients who received collaborative care had significantly improved outcomes at 6 months with 50.3% reaching remission (vs. 10.2%, P< 0.001) and only 26.6% remaining in persistent depressive state (vs. 63.3%, P< 0.001) compared to those who received usual care. |
Eghaneyan, 2017 | Urban center in northern Texas 1 year | 45 adult Hispanic women, age >18 who screened positive for depression on PHQ-9 Ethnic breakdown: 100% Hispanic Women: 100% |
|
PHQ-9 | Baseline PHQ-9 scores of Hispanic women were compared to PHQ-9 scores at their last appointment | There was a statistically significant decrease in PHQ-9 score from baseline compared to the last appointment (18.98 vs 14.33, p<0.001). |
Bowen, 2020 | Rocky Mountain West, Upper Great Plains, Alaska 2 years | 1993 adults age ≥18 Ethnic breakdown: 345 AI/AN patients (17%), 1473 White patients (74%), and 175 Other (e.g. Asian, Black, etc.) patients (9%) Women (of AI/AN group): 71.4% |
|
PHQ-9 | Native American/Native Alaskan patients in Collaborative Care were compared to White patients in Collaborative Care and “Other” (Asian, Black etc.) patients in collaborative care | Native American/Native Alaskan patients were more likely to have depression response compared to White patients (OR = 1.4, CI = 1.1.−1.7) though statistically significant differences between these two groups disappeared after controlling for clinic |
Definition(s): Usual care defined as physician-supported care without case management and with standard referrals to specialist clinic Abbreviations: PHQ-9 = Patient Health Questionnaire-9; HDRS = 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; HAM-D-17 = 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; CES-D = Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale; CIDI = Composite International Diagnostic Interview; CGI-S = Clinical Global Impression, Severity; CGI-I = Clinical Global Impression, Improvement; HSCL-20 = Hopkins Symptoms Checklist-20; MDQ = Mood Disorders Questionnaire; QIDS = Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology