Comparative Effectiveness of Standard versus Patient‐Centered Collaborative Care Interventions for Depression among African Americans in Primary Care Settings: The BRIDGE Study

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of standard and patient-centered, culturally tailored collaborative care (CC) interventions for African American patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) over 12 months of follow-up. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Twenty-seven primary care clinicians and 132 African American patients with MDD in urban community-based practices in Maryland and Delaware. STUDY DESIGN: Cluster randomized trial with patient-level, intent-to-treat analyses. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Patients completed screener and baseline, 6-, 12-, and 18-month interviews to assess depression severity, mental health functioning, health service utilization, and patient ratings of care. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Patients in both interventions showed statistically significant improvements over 12 months. Compared with standard, patient-centered CC patients had similar reductions in depression symptom levels (-2.41 points; 95 percent confidence interval (CI), -7.7, 2.9), improvement in mental health functioning scores (+3.0 points; 95 percent CI, -2.2, 8.3), and odds of rating their clinician as participatory (OR, 1.48, 95 percent CI, 0.53, 4.17). Treatment rates increased among standard (OR = 1.8, 95 percent CI 1.0, 3.2), but not patient-centered (OR = 1.0, 95 percent CI 0.6, 1.8) CC patients. However, patient-centered CC patients rated their care manager as more helpful at identifying their concerns (OR, 3.00; 95 percent CI, 1.23, 7.30) and helping them adhere to treatment (OR, 2.60; 95 percent CI, 1.11, 6.08). CONCLUSIONS: Patient-centered and standard CC approaches to depression care showed similar improvements in clinical outcomes for African Americans with depression; standard CC resulted in higher rates of treatment, and patient-centered CC resulted in better ratings of care.