RESUMEN

With a renewed focus on health equity in the United States driven by national crises and legislation to improve digital healthcare innovation, there is a need for the designers of digital health tools to take deliberate steps to design for equity in their work. A concrete toolkit of methods to design for health equity is needed to support digital health practitioners in this aim. This narrative review summarizes several health equity frameworks to help digital health practitioners conceptualize the equity dimensions of importance for their work, and then provides design approaches that accommodate an equity focus. Specifically, the Double Diamond Model, the IDEAS framework and toolkit, and community collaboration techniques such as participatory design are explored as mechanisms for practitioners to solicit input from members of underserved groups and better design digital health tools that serve their needs. Each of these design methods requires a deliberate effort by practitioners to infuse health equity into the approach. A series of case studies that use different methods to build in equity considerations are offered to provide examples of how this can be accomplished and demonstrate the range of applications available depending on resources, budget, product maturity, and other factors. We conclude with a call for shared rigor around designing digital health tools that deliver equitable outcomes for members of underserved populations.

RESUMEN

Background: Rising rates of adolescent depression in the wake of COVID-19 and a youth mental health crisis highlight the urgent need for accessible mental healthcare and prevention within primary care. Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) may increase access for underserved populations. However, these interventions are not well studied in adolescents, nor healthcare settings. The purpose of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators to screening and recruitment activities for PATH 2 Purpose (P2P): Primary Care and Community-Based Prevention of Mental Disorders in Adolescents, a multi-site adolescent depression prevention trial comparing two digital prevention programs within four diverse health systems in two U.S. states. Method: This qualitative study is a component of a larger Hybrid Type I trial. We conducted semi-structured key informant interviews with clinical and non-clinical implementers involved with screening and recruitment for the P2P trial. Informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), interviews were conducted at the midpoint of the trial to identify barriers, facilitators, and needed adaptations, and to gather information on determinants that may affect future implementation. Findings: Respondents perceived the P2P trial as valuable, well aligned with the mission of their health systems. However, several barriers were identified, many of which stemmed from influences outside of the healthcare settings. Universal and site-specific outer setting influences (COVID-19 pandemic, youth mental health crisis, local community conditions) interacted with Inner Setting and Innovation domains to create numerous challenges to the implementation of screening and recruitment. Conclusion: Our findings emphasize the need for ongoing, comprehensive assessment of dynamic inner and outer setting contexts prior to and during implementation of clinical trials, as well as flexibility for adaptation to unique clinical contexts. The CFIR is useful for assessing determinants during times of rapid inner and outer setting change, such as those brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, youth mental health crisis, and the corresponding exacerbation of resource strain within healthcare settings. Clinical trial registration: PATH 2 Purpose: Primary Care and Community-Based Prevention of Mental Disorders in Adolescents https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04290754.

Adolescent mental health problems such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal behavior are prevalent, and have been increasing in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2021, the Surgeon General declared a "youth mental health crisis," and the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a joint statement declaring a national youth mental health emergency. Accessible, affordable, evidence-based interventions are needed to prevent the development of depressive symptoms into major depressive disorder. The integration of digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) into primary care may reduce access barriers. Primary care clinical settings are well suited to identify individuals at-risk for developing depression, and facilitate preventive treatment planning. While preventive DMHIs for adolescents exist, more evidence is needed on their effectiveness, and how to best integrate them into healthcare. Our study team interviewed primary care-based staff, administrators, and clinical providers involved with implementing screening and recruitment activities for the P2P trial, a randomized controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of two digital depression prevention programs. Respondents shared experiences with trial recruitment in their settings, including perceived challenges. Our findings suggest that multiple factors influenced recruitment, including influences situated outside of the clinical settings, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and worsening adolescent mental health. These influences interacted with factors affecting recruitment inside of health clinics, such as demands on staff and provider time, and perceived importance of prevention programming versus other initiatives. Identifying these influencing factors during the trial helps to inform considerations for planning future integration of similar programs into primary care settings.

RESUMEN

Depression is more common in youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D) compared to youth without diabetes. This study aims to assess the efficacy of Competent Adulthood Transition with Cognitive Humanistic and Interpersonal Teaching (CATCH-IT), an internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) intervention, in adolescents with T1D and depressive symptoms. Adolescents (13 to 17 years old) with T1D and mild (score 5-9) or moderate (score 10-14) depressive symptoms on Patient Health Questionnaire-Adolescent (PHQ-A) screening assessment were recruited to participate and received online access to the CATCH-IT modules for 6 months (requested to complete in 12 weeks). Statistical analyses included paired t-test for changes in Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), PHQ-A, Problem Areas in Diabetes-Teen version (PAID-T), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). Nineteen patients were consented, 15 met inclusion criteria and received the intervention. In the seven participants that completed the modules, there was a trend towards improvements in PHQ-A, CES-D and HbA1c. Participants provided robust qualitative feedback on the modules and areas for improvement in subsequent iterations, such as inclusion of diabetes-related content. Given the prevalence of depression in diabetes, feasible, low resource interventions are needed. Internet programs such as CATCH-IT can serve as an effective first line intervention in this high-risk population. A modified version of CATCH-IT tailored for adolescents with T1D may be beneficial in this patient population.

RESUMEN

Youth with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities (IDD) often struggle with depression and anxiety, which adversely impacts transition to adulthood. Integrated behavioral health care coordination, wherein care coordinators and behavioral health specialists collaborate to provide systematic, cost-effective, patient-centered care, is a promising strategy to improve access to behavioral health services and address factors that impact transition to adulthood, including depression/anxiety symptoms. Current care coordination models (e.g., Title V Maternal and Child Health Bureau [MCHB]) do not include behavioral health services. The CHECK (Coordinated HealthCarE for Complex Kids) mental health model, hereby refined and renamed BEhavioral Health Stratified Treatment (B.E.S.T.), is a behavioral health intervention delivery program designed for integration into care coordination programs. This study aims to determine whether an integrated behavioral health care coordination strategy (i.e., MCHB care coordination plus B.E.S.T.) would be more acceptable and lead to better youth health and transition outcomes, relative to standard care coordination (i.e., MCHB care coordination alone). Results would guide future investment in improving outcomes for youth with IDD. This study is a two-arm randomized clinical trial of 780 transition-aged youth with IDD (13-20 years) to evaluate the comparable efficacy of MCHB Care Coordination alone vs. MCHB Care Coordination plus B.E.S.T. on the following outcomes: 1) decreased symptoms and episodes of depression and anxiety over time; 2) improved health behaviors, adaptive functioning and health related quality of life; 3) increased health care transition (HCT) readiness; and 4) improved engagement and satisfaction with care coordination among stakeholders.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

With as many as 13% of adolescents diagnosed with depressive disorders each year, prevention of depressive disorders has become a key priority for the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). Currently, we have no widely available interventions to prevent these disorders. To address this need, we developed a multi-health system collaboration to develop and evaluate the primary care based technology "behavioral vaccine," Competent Adulthood Transition with Cognitive-Behavioral Humanistic and Interpersonal Therapy (CATCH-IT). The full CATCH-IT program demonstrated evidence of efficacy in prevention of depressive episodes in clinical trials. However, CATCH-IT became larger and more complex across trials, creating issues with adherence and scalability. We will use a multiphase optimization strategy approach to optimize CATCH-IT. The theoretically grounded components of CATCH-IT include: behavioral activation, cognitive-behavioral therapy, interpersonal psychotherapy, and parent program. We will use a 4-factor (2x2x2x2) fully crossed factorial design with N = 16 cells (25 per cell, after allowing 15% dropout) to evaluate the contribution of each component. Eligible at-risk youth will be high school students 13 through 18 years old, with subsyndromal symptoms of depression. The study design will enable us to eliminate non-contributing components while preserving efficacy and to optimize CATCH-IT by strengthening tolerability and scalability by reducing resource use. By reducing resource use, we anticipate satisfaction and acceptability will also increase, preparing the way for an implementation trial.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The majority of mental, emotional, and behavioral (MEB) disorders have an initial onset before age 24, with 20% annual incidence, and with major depressive disorder (MDD) being the most common MEB. Health systems may be able to reduce costs by transitioning from the current treatment-focused model for MDD to a prevention model. However, evidence is needed for (1) the comparative effectiveness of a "scalable intervention" and (2) an implementation model for such a scalable intervention in the primary care setting. This paper describes a comparative effectiveness trial evaluating the efficacy of two evidence-based cognitive-behavioral prevention (CBP) programs: Teens Achieving Mastery over Stress (TEAMS), the "gold standard," group therapy model, and Competent Adulthood Transition with Cognitive Behavioral, Humanistic and Interpersonal Training (CATCH-IT), a scalable, self-directed, technology-based model. Eligible adolescents, age 13-19, are offered one of these two depression prevention programs across five health systems (30 clinics) in urban and suburban Chicago, IL, rural Western IL, and Louisville, KY. We are comprehensively evaluating patient-centered outcomes and stakeholder-valued moderators of effect versus baseline at two, six, 12, and 18-month assessment points. Using a hybrid clinical trial design that simultaneously examines the implementation process, the study is also assessing adolescents', parents', and providers' experiences (e.g., efficacy, time commitment, cultural acceptability) within each intervention approach.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Individuals with developmental disabilities (DD) experience significant health disparities. An overlooked risk factor for health disparities in the DD population is adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). The purpose of this study was to generate population prevalence data about level of adverse experiences among children with DD in comparison to children without DD and the extent to which potential confounders may influence observed associations between adversity and child DD status. METHODS: Data from the 2011-12 National Survey of Child Health (NSCH) were analyzed to estimate prevalence of adversity among families of children with and without DD, age 3-17 years (N = 62,428; DD = 2622). Level of adversity was assessed via parent response to the Adverse Family Experiences questionnaire. Bivariate and multinomial logistic regressions were utilized to investigate the relationship between adverse family experiences (AFEs) and child DD status, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Child DD status was significantly and independently associated with higher probability of reporting 1-2 AFEs (RRR = 1.28, 95% CI 1.06, 1.5) and 3+ AFEs (RRR = 1.60, 95% CI 1.16, 2.21). CONCLUSION: This study documents significant disparities in adversity among children with DD using a population-based sample. These adversities potentially compromise successful transition to adulthood and overall health outcomes.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To explore associations between level of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and unmet healthcare needs among children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) using a population-based sample. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional data from the 2011-2012 National Survey of Child Health were analyzed to estimate prevalence of unmet healthcare needs among children with ASD, aged 2-17 years (ASD = 1624; estimated population = 1 174 871). Multivariate Poisson and logistic regression models were used to estimate the relationship between reported ACEs and unmet healthcare needs among children with ASD. RESULTS: After we adjusted for all other variables, children with ASD who experienced 1-2 ACEs and 3+ ACEs were associated with 1.78 (P < .05) and 2.53 (P < .01) times the incidence rate of unmet healthcare needs in comparison with children without ACEs. Compared with children who experienced 0 ACEs, the adjusted odds of any unmet healthcare need were 2.34 (P < .01) and 2.66 (P < .01) for children with 1-2 ACEs and 3 + ACEs, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although limited to cross-sectional data, our study provides compelling evidence on the link between ACEs and unmet healthcare needs among children with ASD. It advances understanding of risk factors in the child and community context that contribute to health disparities and negatively impact healthcare access and use in this population.

Asunto(s)