| 1. |
- Wikberg, Carl, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison Between the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale–Self and the Beck Depression Inventory II in Primary Care
- 2015
-
Ingår i: The Primary Care Companion for CNS Disorders. - 0160-6689 .- 1555-2101 .- 2155-7772. ; 17:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale–Self (MADRS-S) and the Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II) are commonly used self-assessment instruments for screening and diagnosis of depression. The BDI-II has 21 items and the MADRS-S has 9 items. These instruments have been tested with psychiatric inpatients but not in outpatient primary care, where most patients with symptoms of depression initially seek treatment. The purpose of this study was to compare these 2 instruments in the primary care setting. Method: Data were collected from 2 primary care randomized controlled trials that were performed from 2010 to 2013 in Sweden: the Primary Care Self-Assessment MADRS-S Study and Primary Care Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Study. There were 146 patients (73 patients each from both trials) who had newly diagnosed mild or moderate depression (per DSM-IV recommendations) and who had assessment with both the MADRS-S and BDI-II at primary care centers. Comparability and reliability of the instruments were estimated by Pearson product moment correlation and Cronbach α. Results: A good correlation was observed between the 2 instruments: 0.66 and 0.62 in the 2 study cohorts. The reliability within the 2 study cohorts was good for both MADRS-S (Cronbach α: 0.76 for both cohorts) and BDI-II items (Cronbach α: 0.88 and 0.85). Conclusions: The 2 instruments showed good comparability and reliability for low, middle, and high total depression scores. The MADRS-S may be used as a rapid, easily administered, and inexpensive tool in primary care and has results comparable to the BDI-II in all domains.
|
|
| 2. |
- Hange, Dominique, 1963, et al.
(författare)
-
Experiences of staff members participating in primary care research activities: a qualitative study
- 2015
-
Ingår i: International Journal of General Medicine. - 1178-7074. ; 8, s. 143-8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The aim of this paper was to study primary care staff members' experiences and perceptions of participating in a randomized controlled trial concerning Internet therapy. METHODS: Data were collected via five focus groups, each containing four to eight nurses or general practitioners. The systematic text condensation method described by Malterud was used for thematic analysis of meaning and content of data across cases. RESULTS: The informants believed it was important to conduct research within the primary care setting, but it was difficult to combine clinical work and research. They stressed also that there was a need for continuous information and communication between primary care centers and researchers as well as internally at each primary care center. CONCLUSION: Staff members' experiences of participating in a research study were positive, although associated with various difficulties. It is important to include staff members when designing clinical studies; information should be given continuously during the study and communication facilitated between different occupational groups working at the primary care center.
|
|
| 3. |
- Kivi, Marie, et al.
(författare)
-
Experiences and attitudes of primary care therapists in the implementation and use of internet-based treatment in Swedish primary care settings
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Internet Interventions. - : Elsevier BV. - 2214-7829. ; 2:3, s. 248-256
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Background: The current knowledge of internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (ICBT) implemented in primary care settings is sparse. Our objective was to explore primary care therapists' experiences and attitudes of ICBT, the opportunities and conditions for research in primary care, and to identify potential barriers to the implementation of ICBT treatment in primary care. Methods: Eleven therapists (of 14) participating in the research and implementation project PRIM-NET completed a survey. Four of them were selected also for a detailed semi-structured interview. Data from the interviews were analyzed qualitatively and according to methods used in implementation science. Results: Six general themes were identified in which the therapists considered ICBT as a good treatment that ought to be introduced in primary care. To optimize procedure in primary care settings, several adaptations of ICBT were suggested. Integrating and blending ICBT and face-to-face therapies, for example, would render primary care psychology more efficient. The PRIM-NET study and research within primary care was seen as rewarding and necessary, but challenging. To a large extent primary care still revolves around the general practitioner, with a focus on production, finances, and a somatic aspect of the patients. Five possible barriers to implementation of ICBT were identified which perhaps explains why psychological procedures are not fully integrated into primary care. Conclusions: Although the implementation of new methods and routines is typically accompanied by challenges, the overall experience of the therapists supports the implementation of ICBT as an additional treatment in primary care.
|
|
