Cited by 18Geriatric Care and Nursing HomesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesAging, Health, and Disability

Addressing depression in a long-term care setting: a Phase II pilot of problem-solving treatment

Open access
Reinhardt, Joann P., Horowitz, Amy, Cimarolli, Verena R., Eimicke, Joseph P., Teresi, Jeanne A.·2014·Clinical Therapeutics

Abstract

Purpose This was a Phase II pilot study of a problem-solving treatment (PST) to address subsyndromal depression in residents of long-term care facilities. Our goal was to demonstrate PST implementation feasibility and to identify PST's potential for reducing depressive symptoms in this geriatric health care setting.Methods Eligible participants were randomized to receive a PST treatment (six 1-hour sessions) or a social contact comparison (6 "friendly" visits) after an initial baseline assessment. Follow-up assessments occurred 7 weeks later (after treatment) and 2 months posttreatment. The basic analytic approach was based on an intention-to-treat analysis.Findings We enrolled 21 elderly subjects in the PST group and 16 elderly subjects in the social contact comparison group. The PST group experienced a decline in depression scores compared with the social contact group. Although not statistically significant (likely due to the small sample size), PST was associated with decreased depressive symptom scores for those who were able to complete the intervention. Implementation proved to be difficult in terms of study recruitment and intervention acceptance and adherence.Implications These study findings point to the potential benefits of an integrated mental health component in long-term care, involving rehabilitation professionals who are already working with the older adults in both postacute/short-stay and long-stay settings.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clinthera.2014.10.005

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Non-specific attentional control conditions provided attention or activities matched in duration and frequency to the intervention, while excluding therapeutic techniques; examples included friendly visits and social discussion or education groups.

    “Non-specific attentional control refers to conditions in which participants were provided with attention from researchers, facility staff, or volunteers, or were engaged to participate in activities.The duration and frequency of such activities matched those of the intervention condition.The control condition simulated the attention received by participants in the intervention condition, while”

    From Psychological therapies for depression in older adults residing in long-term care settings (2024) · cites this paper as Reinhardt 2014

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Four studies were at low risk of selection bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment.

    “Four studies were at low risk of selection bias (random sequence generation and allocation concealment; Dozeman 2011; Reinhardt 2014; Travers 2017; Tsai 2008)”

    From Psychological therapies for depression in older adults residing in long-term care settings (2024) · cites this paper as Reinhardt 2014

    The Measurement section says participants were randomized to problem-solving treatment or social contact. It does not describe how the random sequence was generated or whether allocation was concealed, so our copy does not establish the claimed low risk of selection bias for Reinhardt 2014. It cannot substantiate the assessment of the other three studies. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Interpretation of the treatment non-acceptability result requires caution because of inadequate reporting and potential unreliability, with very wide confidence intervals.

    “Interpretation of the result for treatment non-acceptability requires particular caution due to inadequate reporting of this outcome and potential unreliability of the estimate, with very wide CIs for ORs (e.g.0.47 to 202.37 for Hamzehzadeh 2018, and 0.30 to 130.07 for Reinhardt 2014).”

    From Psychological therapies for depression in older adults residing in long-term care settings (2024) · cites this paper as Reinhardt 2014

    The Results (page not available) report difficulties with treatment acceptance and adherence, including loss to follow-up of 10/21 participants in the treatment group versus 1/16 in the comparison group. The paper also notes its small sample, but it does not report an odds ratio, the stated confidence interval of 0.30 to 130.07, or an assessment of that estimate's reliability. Those parts of the caution appear to be the citing authors' analysis rather than results reported by Reinhardt et al. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Reinhardt 2014 was judged at unclear risk of reporting bias.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Judgement comment: no protocol or trial registration identified. 2 outcomes listed in the methods (HAM-D and PROMIS depression scale) were reported in the results.The SCID was listed in the methods, but diagnostic data were not reported in the results.However, it is unclear whether the SCID was intended as a screening measure only.”

    From Psychological therapies for depression in older adults residing in long-term care settings (2024) · cites this paper as Reinhardt 2014

    The Statistical Approach names HAM-D and PROMIS depression as primary outcomes, the Results report both, and Procedures and Measures says the SCID was used to confirm diagnoses. The paper does not itself judge its reporting-bias risk as unclear; that is the citing authors’ assessment. Our copy also does not establish whether a protocol or trial registration was identified. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In nine studies, psychological therapies were delivered by specialists; in five, by graduate or doctoral students; both were classified as professional therapists.

    “In nine studies, psychological therapies were delivered by specialists, including social workers (Dhooper 1993; Luo 2020; Reinhardt 2014; Travers 2017), a mental health consultant (Meeks 2008), a clinical nurse specialist (Abraham 1992), a Masters level therapist (Karimi 2010), a Masters-prepared mental health nurse (Tsai 2008), and unspecified 'therapist' (Hyer 2009).In five studies, treatments”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:606-613.
  2. Williams JB. A structured interview guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Arch Gen Psychiat. 1988;45: 742-747.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reinhardt, J. P., Horowitz, A., Cimarolli, V. R., Eimicke, J. P., & Teresi, J. A.
Affiliations
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • Fordham University (US)
  • Hebrew Home (US)
Corresponding author
Reinhardt, Joann P.
Venue
Clinical Therapeutics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-11
Volume
36
Issue
11
Pages
1531-1537
ISSN
0149-2918 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2126765939
Cited by
18
References
17
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2
FWCI
3.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Mount Sinai School of Medicine Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Center on “Promoting Independence through Pain and Symptom Management” (1P30AG028741-01A2)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
Keywords
problem-solving therapy, subthreshold depression, long-term care residents, older adults, depressive symptoms, implementation feasibility, integrated mental health services, rehabilitation professionals, geriatric mental health
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Depression, Female, Humans, Long-Term Care, Male, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Problem Solving, Social Support

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review