RESUMEN
Rural populations rely on primary care services for depression care due to shortages and maldistributions of specialty mental health care favoring urban areas. Yet, it is unknown which primary care models are effective at reducing depressive symptoms and emergency department (ED) use for depression among rural populations. The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize the effectiveness of primary care models on depressive symptoms and ED utilization for depression in rural populations. PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and reference lists of included studies were searched. Eligible articles focused on the impact of primary care models on depressive symptoms or ED utilization for depression among rural populations in the United States. Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. Three care models were identified in the studies, including collaborative care (i.e., team-based integrated care that tracks patient populations with a registry; n = 7), tele-psychotherapy (i.e., identification of patients in primary care and referral to virtual psychotherapy; n = 6), or self-management support (i.e., identification of patients in primary care and referral to community support for depression self-management; n = 4). These care models were associated with improved patient-reported depressive symptoms such as Patient-Health Questionnaire reported remission of depression (score < 5). No studies assessed depression ED utilization as an outcome. Collaborative care, tele-psychotherapy, and self-management support may be effective at reducing depressive symptoms, specifically in rural populations and should be implemented at the practice level. Research focused on primary care models and ED utilization for depression among rural populations is needed.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple chronic conditions often have many care plans, polypharmacy, and unrelieved symptoms that contribute to high emergency department and hospital use. High-quality primary care delivered in practices that employ nurse practitioners can help prevent the need for such acute care services. However, such practices located in primary care health professional shortage areas face challenges caring for these patients because of higher workloads and fewer resources. OBJECTIVE: We examined differences in hospitalization and emergency department use among patients with multiple chronic conditions who receive care from practices that employ nurse practitioners in health professional shortage areas compared to practices that employ nurse practitioners in non-health professional shortage areas. METHODS: We performed an analysis of Medicare claims, merged with Health Resources and Services Administration data on health professional shortage area status in five states. Our sample included 394,424 community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years, with at least two of 15 common chronic conditions who received care in 779 practices that employ nurse practitioners. We used logistic regression to assess the relationship between health professional shortage area status and emergency department visits or hospitalizations. RESULTS: We found a higher likelihood of emergency department visits among patients in health professional shortage areas compared to those in non-health professional shortage areas and no difference in the likelihood of hospitalization. DISCUSSION: Emergency department use differences exist among older adults with multiple chronic conditions receiving care in practices that employ nurse practitioners in health professional shortage areas, compared to those in non-health professional shortage areas. To address this disparity, the health professional shortage area program should invest in recruiting and retaining nurse practitioners to health professional shortage areas to ease workforce shortages.