Literature Collection

INTRODUCTION: While bipolar disorder is not uncommon in primary care, collaborative care models for bipolar depression treatment are underdeveloped. Our aim was to compare initial pharmacological treatment patterns for an episode of bipolar depression in different care models, namely primary care (PC), integrated behavioral health (IBH), and mood specialty clinic (SC). METHODS: A retrospective study of adults diagnosed with bipolar disorder who received outpatient care in 2020 was completed. Depressive episodes were captured based on DSM-5 criteria, ICD codes, or de novo emergent symptom burden (PHQ-9 ≥ 10). Pharmacological strategies were classified as 1) continuation of current regimen, 2) dose increase or 3) augmentation 4) switch to monotherapy or 5) a combination of more than two different strategies. Logistic regression was applied. RESULTS: A total of 217 encounters (PC = 32, IBH = 53, SC = 132) representing 186 unique patients were identified. PC was significantly more likely to continue the current regimen, while combination strategies were significantly more likely recommended in IBH and SC. Mood stabilizers were significantly more utilized in IBH and SC. There were no significant group differences in antidepressant use. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study design at a single site. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence of delays in depression care in bipolar disorder. This is the first study to compare treatment recommendations for bipolar depression in different clinical settings. Future studies are encouraged to better understand this gap and to guide future clinical practice, regardless of care model, emphasizing the potential benefits of decision support tools and collaborative care models tailored for bipolar depression.

OBJECTIVES: Universal screening for depression during pregnancy and postpartum is recommended, yet mental health treatment and follow-up rates among screen-positive women in rural settings are low. We studied the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of perinatal depression treatment integrated into a rural obstetric setting. METHODS: We conducted an open treatment study of a screening and intervention program modified from the Depression Attention for Women Now (DAWN) Collaborative Care model in a rural obstetric clinic. Depression screen-positive pregnant and postpartum women received problem-solving therapy (PST) with or without antidepressants. A care manager coordinated communication between patient, obstetrician and psychiatric consultant. We measured change in the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) score. We used surveys and focus groups to measure patient and provider satisfaction and analyzed focus groups using qualitative analysis. RESULTS: The intervention was well accepted by providers and patients, based on survey and focus group data. Feasibility was also evidenced by recruitment (87.1%) and retention (92.6%) rates and depression outcomes (64% with >50% improvement in PHQ 9) which were comparable to clinical trials in similar urban populations. Conclusions for practice: DAWN Collaborative Care modified for treatment of perinatal depression in a rural obstetric setting is feasible and acceptable. Behavioral health services integrated into rural obstetric settings could improve care for perinatal depression.