Intensive psychotherapy and case management for Karen refugees with major depression in primary care: A pragmatic randomized control trial

Andrea K. Northwood, Maria M. Vukovich, Alison Beckman, Jeffrey P. Walter, Novia Josiah, Leora Hudak, Kathleen O'Donnell Burrows, James P. Letts, Christine C. Danner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Despite an unparalleled global refugee crisis, there are almost no studies in primary care addressing real-world conditions and longer courses of treatment that are typical when resettled refugees present to their physician with critical psychosocial needs and complex symptoms. We studied the effects of a year of psychotherapy and case management in a primary care setting on common symptoms and functioning for Karen refugees (a newly arrived population in St Paul, Minnesota) with depression. Methods: A pragmatic parallel-group randomized control trial was conducted at two primary care clinics with large resettled Karen refugee patient populations, with simple random allocation to 1 year of either: (1) intensive psychotherapy and case management (IPCM), or (2) care-as-usual (CAU). Eligibility criteria included Major Depression diagnosis determined by structured diagnostic clinical interview, Karen refugee, ages 18-65. IPCM (n = 112) received a year of psychotherapy and case management coordinated onsite between the case manager, psychotherapist, and primary care providers; CAU (n = 102) received care-as-usual from their primary care clinic, including behavioral health referrals and/or brief onsite interventions. Blinded assessors collected outcomes of mean changes in depression and anxiety symptoms (measured by Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25), PTSD symptoms (Posttraumatic Diagnostic Scale), pain (internally developed 5-item Pain Scale), and social functioning (internally developed 37-item instrument standardized on refugees) at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. After propensity score matching, data were analyzed with the intention-to-treat principle using repeated measures ANOVA with partial eta-squared estimates of effect size. Results: Of 214 participants, 193 completed a baseline and follow up assessment (90.2%). IPCM patients showed significant improvements in depression, PTSD, anxiety, and pain symptoms and in social functioning at all time points, with magnitude of improvement increasing over time. CAU patients did not show significant improvements. The largest mean differences observed between groups were in depression (difference, 5.5, 95% CI, 3.9 to 7.1, P <.001) and basic needs/safety (difference, 5.4, 95% CI, 3.8 to 7.0, P <.001). Conclusions: Adult Karen refugees with depression benefited from intensive psychotherapy and case management coordinated and delivered under usual conditions in primary care. Intervention effects strengthened at each interval, suggesting robust recovery is possible.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number17
JournalBMC Family Practice
Volume21
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 28 2020

Keywords

  • Basic needs
  • Case management
  • Depression
  • Primary care
  • PTSD
  • Refugees

PubMed: MeSH publication types

  • Journal Article
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Intensive psychotherapy and case management for Karen refugees with major depression in primary care: A pragmatic randomized control trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Northwood, A. K., Vukovich, M. M., Beckman, A., Walter, J. P., Josiah, N., Hudak, L., O'Donnell Burrows, K., Letts, J. P., & Danner, C. C. (2020). Intensive psychotherapy and case management for Karen refugees with major depression in primary care: A pragmatic randomized control trial. BMC Family Practice, 21(1), [17]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-020-1090-9