scholarly journals Loneliness in Primary Care Patients: Relationships With Body Mass Index and Health Care Utilization

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 239-247
Author(s):  
Tamara K Oser ◽  
Siddhartha Roy ◽  
Jessica Parascando ◽  
Rebecca Mullen ◽  
Julie Radico ◽  
...  
2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa A. Polusny ◽  
Barry J. Ries ◽  
Jessica R. Schultz ◽  
Patrick Calhoun ◽  
Lisa Clemensen ◽  
...  

1997 ◽  
Vol 42 (9) ◽  
pp. 966-973 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S Klinkman ◽  
Thomas L Schwenk ◽  
James C Coyne

Objective: To explore the relationships between detection, treatment, and outcome of depression in the primary care setting, based upon results from the Michigan Depression Project (MDP). Methods: A weighted sample of 425 adult family practice patients completed a comprehensive battery of questionnaires exploring stress, social support, overall health, health care utilization, treatment attitudes, self-rated levels of stress and depression, along with the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D), and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III (SCID), which served as the criterion standard for diagnosis. A comparison sample of 123 depressed psychiatric outpatients received the same assessment battery. Family practice patients received repeated assessment of depressive symptoms, stress, social support, and health care utilization over a period of up to 60 months of longitudinal follow-up. Results: The central MDP findings confirm that significant differences in past history, severity, and impairment exist between depressed psychiatric and family practice patients, that detection rates are significantly higher for severely depressed primary care patients, and that clinicians use clinical cues such as past history, distress, and severity of symptoms to “detect” depression in patients at intermediate and mild levels of severity. As well, there is a lack of association between detection and improved outcome in primary care patients. Conclusion: These results call into question the assumption that “depression is depression” irrespective of the setting and physician, and they are consistent with a model of depressive disorder as a subacute or chronic condition characterized by clinical parameters of severity, staging, and comorbidity, similar to asthma. This new model can guide further investigation into the epidemiology and management of mood disorders in the primary care setting.


Author(s):  
Justin R. Abbatemarco ◽  
Jeffrey A. Cohen ◽  
Belinda L. Udeh ◽  
Sunakshi Bassi ◽  
Mary R. Rensel

Abstract Background: Shared medical appointments (SMAs) are group medical visits combining medical care and patient education. We examined the impact of a wellness-focused pilot SMA in a large multiple sclerosis (MS) clinic. Methods: We reviewed data on all patients who participated in the SMA from January 2016 through June 2019. Data were collected 12 months pre/post SMA; included demographics, body mass index, patient-reported outcomes, and health care utilization; and were compared using Wilcoxon rank sum test. Results: Fifty adult patients (mean ± SD age, 50.1 ± 12.3 years) attended at least one MS wellness SMA. Most patients had private insurance (50%), and 26% had Medicaid coverage. The most common comorbidity was depression/anxiety (44%). Pre/post SMA outcomes showed a small but significant reduction in body mass index (30.2 ± 7.3 vs 28.8 ± 7.1, P = .03), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores decreased from 7.3 ± 5.5 to 5.1 ± 5.6 (P = .001). The number of emergency department visits decreased from 13 to two (P = .0005), whereas follow-up visits increased with an attendees’ primary care provider from 19 to 41 (P < .001), physical therapist from 15 to 27 (P = .004), and psychologist from six to 19 (P = .003). Conclusions: This pilot MS wellness SMA was associated with improved physical and psychological outcomes. There was increased, lower-cost health care utilization with reduced acute, high-cost health care utilization, suggesting that SMAs may be a cost-effective and beneficial method in caring for patients with MS.


Medical Care ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (5) ◽  
pp. 409-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Jerant ◽  
Klea D. Bertakis ◽  
Peter Franks

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 644-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian A. Lynch ◽  
Lila J. Finney Rutten ◽  
Robert M. Jacobson ◽  
Seema Kumar ◽  
Muhamad Y. Elrashidi ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 431-436
Author(s):  
Emily M. Stephan ◽  
Christopher J. Nemastil ◽  
Ann Salvator ◽  
Susan Gemma ◽  
Clarissa J. Dilaveris ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVE Previous trials evaluated the efficacy of lumacaftor/ivacaftor in Phe508del homozygotes. These trials are limited by manufacturer sponsorship and were conducted under strict protocol. Additionally, this therapy is costly and does not allow for reduction in daily cystic fibrosis therapies. This study assessed the efficacy of lumacaftor/ivacaftor therapy and its effect on health care utilization in a real-world setting. METHODS Retrospective chart review comparing the first 12 months of therapy to the 24 months prior was conducted to evaluate the impact of lumacaftor/ivacaftor on pulmonary function following a streamlined process for therapy introduction. The impact on body mass index and healthcare utilization were also evaluated. The following measurements were assessed: percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, body mass index and z-scores, number of admissions, length of stay, number of emergency department visits. RESULTS Mean ppFEV1 was improved for the first 12 months on lumacaftor/ivacaftor treatment when compared with the 24 months prior: 78.8 (95% CI: 72.6, 84.9) vs 76.2 (95% CI: 70.1, 82.3) (p = 0.03). Body mass index significantly improved (patients ≥20 years), but improvement in BMI z-score (patients <20 years) was not significant. Number of admissions and LOS were significantly decreased, but ED visits were not. CONCLUSIONS Lumacaftor/ivacaftor is effective for improving ppFEV1 and BMI and for reducing health care utilization. However, this small reduction does not overcome the financial cost of treatment. Long-term outcomes and use must be studied to determine the overall effect of this therapy on cystic fibrosis interventions and their costs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document