Objective

Rural African Americans are disproportionately affected by social stressors that place them at risk of developing psychiatric disorders. This study aimed to understand mental health, mental health treatment, and barriers to treatment from the perspective of rural African-American residents and other stakeholders in order to devise culturally acceptable treatment approaches.

Methods

Seven focus groups (N=50) were conducted with four stakeholder groups: primary care providers, faith community representatives, college students and administrators, and individuals living with mental illness. A semistructured interview guide was used to elicit perspectives on mental health, mental health treatment, and ways to improve mental health in rural African-American communities. Inductive analysis was used to identify emergent themes and develop a conceptual model grounded in the textual data.

Results

Stressful living environments (for example, impoverished communities) and broader community-held beliefs (for example, religious beliefs and stigma) had an impact on perceptions of mental health and contributed to barriers to help seeking. Participants identified community-level strategies to improve emotional wellness in rural African-American communities, such as providing social support, improving mental health literacy, and promoting emotional wellness.

Conclusions

Rural African Americans experience several barriers that impede treatment use. Strategies that include conceptualizing mental illness as a normal reaction to stressful living environments, the use of community-based mental health services, and provision of mental health education to the general public may improve use of services in this population.

Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders (NHPI) rarely seek mental health treatment for reasons that are minimally understood. To assess the mental illness stigma context in NHPI communities that may be contributing to low help-seeking, this study collected novel stigma data from two large U.S. NHPI communities from October 2017 to January 2018, then compared this data to national stigma data from the U.S. public. Survey data were collected from 222 community-dwelling NHPI participants recruited by research-trained NHPI staff. Surveys incorporated well-established vignettes describing persons with major depression and schizophrenia. Study data were compared to U.S. general public data from the 2006 General Social Survey: the largest U.S. stigma study. Compared to the U.S. public, NHPI participants reported greater stigma toward mental illness in ways likely to impede help-seeking including: (1) more frequently endorsing stigmatizing causal attributions of depression and schizophrenia, (2) less frequently perceiving disorders as serious, and (3) more commonly desiring social distance from persons with depression. Study data are the first to reveal the presence of a strongly stigmatizing context in NHPI communities likely to hinder NHPI help-seeking. Thus, culturally tailoring anti-stigma interventions to appropriately target NHPI mental health attitudes and beliefs may prove effective in promoting NHPI help-seeking.

Integrating two distinct and complementary paradigms, science and engineering, may produce more effective outcomes for the implementation of evidence-based practices in health care settings. Science formalizes and tests innovations, whereas engineering customizes and optimizes how the innovation is applied tailoring to accommodate local conditions. Together they may accelerate the creation of an evidence-based healthcare system that works effectively in specific health care settings. We give examples of applying engineering methods for better quality, more efficient, and safer implementation of clinical practices, medical devices, and health services systems. A specific example was applying systems engineering design that orchestrated people, process, data, decision-making, and communication through a technology application to implement evidence-based depression care among low-income patients with diabetes. We recommend that leading journals recognize the fundamental role of engineering in implementation research, to improve understanding of design elements that create a better fit between program elements and local context.

Objective

The aim of this study was to test whether gender moderates intervention effects in the Coordinated Anxiety Learning and Management (CALM) intervention, a 12-month, randomized controlled trial of a collaborative care intervention for anxiety disorders (panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and social anxiety disorder) in 17 primary care clinics in California, Washington, and Arkansas.

Methods

Participants (N=1,004) completed measures of symptoms (Brief Symptom Inventory [BSI]) and functioning (mental and physical health components of the 12-Item Short Form [MCS and PCS] and Healthy Days, Restricted Activity Days Scale) at baseline, six, 12, and 18 months. Data on dose, engagement, and beliefs about psychotherapy were collected for patients in the collaborative care group.

Results

Gender moderated the relationship between treatment and its outcome on the BSI, MCS, and Healthy Days measures but not on the PCS. Women who received collaborative care showed clinical improvements on the BSI, MHC, and Healthy Days that were significantly different from outcomes for women in usual care. There were no differences for men in collaborative care compared with usual care on any measures. In the intervention group, women compared with men attended more sessions of psychotherapy, completed more modules of therapy, expressed more commitment, and viewed psychotherapy as more helpful.

Conclusions

These findings contribute to the broader literature on treatment heterogeneity, in particular the influence of gender, and may inform personalized care for people seeking anxiety treatment in primary care settings.

Background

Encephalitis continues to result in substantial morbidity and mortality worldwide. Advances in diagnosis and management have been limited, in part, by a lack of consensus on case definitions, standardized diagnostic approaches, and priorities for research.

Methods

In March 2012, the International Encephalitis Consortium, a committee begun in 2010 with members worldwide, held a meeting in Atlanta to discuss recent advances in encephalitis and to set priorities for future study.

Results

We present a consensus document that proposes a standardized case definition and diagnostic guidelines for evaluation of adults and children with suspected encephalitis. In addition, areas of research priority, including host genetics and selected emerging infections, are discussed.

Conclusions

We anticipate that this document, representing a synthesis of our discussions and supported by literature, will serve as a practical aid to clinicians evaluating patients with suspected encephalitis and will identify key areas and approaches to advance our knowledge of encephalitis.