 |
|
Stepped Collaborative Care for Primary Care Patients With Persistent Symptoms of Depression
A Randomized Trial
Wayne Katon, MD;
Michael Von Korff, ScD;
Elizabeth Lin, MD, MPH;
Greg Simon, MD, MPH;
Ed Walker, MD;
Jurgen Unützer, MD, MPH;
Terry Bush, PhD;
Joan Russo, PhD;
Evette Ludman, PhD
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1999;56:1109-1115.
ABSTRACT
| |
Background Despite improvements in the accuracy of diagnosing depression and use of medications with fewer side effects, many patients treated with antidepressant medications by primary care physicians have persistent symptoms.
Methods A group of 228 patients recognized as depressed by their primary care physicians and given antidepressant medication who had either 4 or more persistent major depressive symptoms or a score of 1.5 or more on the Hopkins Symptom Checklist depression items at 6 to 8 weeks were randomized to a collaborative care intervention (n = 114) or usual care (n = 114) by the primary care physician. Patients in the intervention group received enhanced education and increased frequency of visits by a psychiatrist working with the primary care physician to improve pharmacologic treatment. Follow-up assessments were completed at 1, 3, and 6 months by a telephone survey team blinded to randomization status.
Results Those in the intervention group had significantly greater adherence to adequate dosage of medication for 90 days or more and were more likely to rate the quality of care they received for depression as good to excellent compared with usual care controls. Intervention patients showed a significantly greater decrease compared with usual care controls in severity of depressive symptoms over time and were more likely to have fully recovered at 3 and 6 months.
Conclusions A multifaceted program targeted to patients whose depressive symptoms persisted 6 to 8 weeks after initiation of antidepressant medication by their primary care physician was found to significantly improve adherence to antidepressants, satisfaction with care, and depressive outcomes compared with usual care.
INTRODUCTION
OVER THE LAST decade, multiple studies have shown that there is a high prevalence of major depression in primary care (6%-10%).1-2 There has been substantial evidence demonstrating that depression is associated with multiple unexplained medical symptoms,3 impairment in functioning and quality of life,2, 4 and high medical costs.5-6 There is also accumulating evidence that more intensive, organized treatment that integrates mental health practitioners into primary care improves outcomes of depressed patients.7-9 However, changes brought on by health system reform have tended to decrease the availability of specialty mental health care to primary care patients.10 These opposing trends make it imperative that scarce specialty resources are used when and where they are most needed. This study tests a population-based collaborative care model that attempts to use specialty resources in the most efficient way to reduce the burden of depression.
Collaborative care is a systematic approach that improves patient education and integrates mental health professionals or other care extenders, such as nurses, into the primary care clinic to help primary care physicians provide treatment in conformity with evidence-based guidelines.11-12 Collaborative care models have been shown to improve outcomes of patients with major but not minor depression.7-9 In the initial 2 randomized trials testing collaborative care, about 74% of intervention patients with major depression achieved a 50% reduction in depressive symptoms compared with 44% for patients receiving usual care.7-8
In a cost-effectiveness analysis of collaborative care for patients with major depression, the cost per case successfully treated was lower for collaborative care than for usual care because the success rate of treatment was increased more than the total costs of treatment per case.13 For patients with minor depression (2-4 DSM-IV major depressive symptoms), treatment by the primary care physician alone was more cost-effective, since direct collaborative care costs were higher than usual primary care depression treatment costs and the outcomes were similar.
The results suggested that targeting collaborative care for patients with major depression would increase its cost-effectiveness. In addition, since some patients with major depression achieve a favorable outcome with usual care, cost-effectiveness might be further increased by targeting those patients whose depressive illness had not resolved within a 2-month period of treatment by the primary care physician. In this study, we tested the hypotheses that patients with persistent depressive illness 6 to 8 weeks after initiation of routine primary care treatment (step 1) who were stepped up to collaborative care (step 2) would receive more adequate pharmacotherapy based on Agency for Health Care Policy and Research guidelines for dose and duration of antidepressant therapy, be more satisfied with their care, and achieve more favorable depression outcomes over 6 months.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
PATIENTS
The settings for this study were 4 large primary care clinics of Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, a health maintenance organization serving more than 400,000 persons in western Washington. These 4 clinics, with a population of 88,000 enrollees are staffed by 73 full-time and part-time board-certified family physicians.
The research team developed a program of population-based screening to examine short-term outcomes among all primary care patients beginning antidepressant treatment for depression. Potentially eligible patients were identified using Group Health Cooperative automated registration, pharmacy, and visit data. Patients between the ages of 18 and 80 years who received a new antidepressant prescription (no prior prescriptions within the last 120 days) from a primary care physician for the diagnosis of depression or anxiety were eligible for the study. Five weeks after the prescription, the patient received an approach letter from the primary care physician inviting participation in a study to improve the quality of care for various conditions and informing the patient that he or she would receive a telephone call from the study team.
At 6 to 8 weeks (mean, 48.7 days), the patient received a call from a member of the telephone survey team, who sought verbal informed consent for a 15-minute telephone screening interview. The goal was to identify patients at high risk for persistent depression (the target population of this study) as well as those who recovered but were at high risk for relapse (the target population for a separate study described elsewhere).11 The first-stage screen included the telephone Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R.14 Criteria for selection for the second-stage interview were having 4 or more residual major depressive symptoms, recurrent depression (2 or more prior episodes), or dysthymia.
Exclusion criteria included having a screening score of 2 or more on the CAGE alcohol screening questionnaire,15 being pregnant or currently nursing, planning to disenroll from the Group Health Cooperative insurance plan within the next 12 months, currently seeing a psychiatrist, having limited command of English, and recently using lithium or antipsychotic medication.
Eligible patients were informed that a research assistant would telephone them within the next week to arrange a second interview and explain the study in more detail. The research assistant called the patient, sought verbal informed consent, and arranged a convenient time for a face-to-face baseline interview. Inclusion criteria for the persistence study obtained during the baseline interview included having 4 or more major depressive symptoms on the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R and a score of 1.0 or greater on the 20 depression items of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-20),16 or having fewer than 4 DSM-IV major depressive symptoms but with a score of 1.5 or greater on the SCL-20.16 The recruitment procedure and the study protocol were approved by the institutional review boards of the University of Washington and the Group Health Cooperative.
RANDOMIZATION
Eligible patients were stratified into severe (>2.0) and moderate (1.0-2.0) depression groups based on their SCL-20 scores. Within each stratum, patients were randomized to the collaborative model of care provided by both a psychiatrist (W.K., E.W., G.S., or J.U.) and their primary care physician or to the usual care group in blocks of 8. Within each block, the randomization sequence was computer-generated.
STEPPED COLLABORATIVE CARE INTERVENTION
A multifaceted intervention was developed that targeted patient and process of care.
Patient
Prior to the first study visit, the intervention patients were provided a book and videotape developed by the study team.17-18 The book and videotape reviewed the biology of depression, the relationship to stress, physical and emotional symptoms, how medications and psychotherapy help depression, and how to become involved as active partners with their physician in care of their depressive illness. They were instructed to take the videotape home and watch it with their significant other(s). After the baseline interview and randomization, the research assistant scheduled 2 sessions with a psychiatrist for intervention patients within a 4-week period (one 50-minute initial session and one 25-minute follow-up session) in the primary care clinic. Additional visits with the study psychiatrist were provided based on clinical response to treatment.
Process of Care
Psychiatric visits were usually spaced 2 weeks apart, with a brief telephone call to review progress between the first and second visits and, if necessary, between the third and fourth visits. All patients were prescribed antidepressant medication approximately 8 to 9 weeks before the first intervention visit. The psychiatrist reviewed the course of the current depressive episode, prior individual and family history of psychiatric illness, current stressful life events, medical history, social history, and current medication adherence and side effects. When severe side effects or treatment resistance occurred, the psychiatrist helped the patient and primary care physician alter the dosage or choose an alternative medication. Patients with severe psychosocial stressors were encouraged to seek psychotherapy or were referred to support groups (eg, Al-Anon). Primary care physicians received immediate verbal consultation about their patient's progress and a typed psychiatric consultation note within 1 week. Both primary care physicians and the psychiatrist had previewed the videotape and book and were encouraged to discuss patient reactions to and questions about these educational materials.
The psychiatrist reviewed monthly automated pharmacy data on antidepressant refills to monitor the patient's adherence to the acute and continuation phases of treatment and alerted the primary care physician and/or telephoned the patient if premature discontinuation of medication occurred.
USUAL CARE
Patients randomized to the usual care arm received treatment for depression from their primary care physician in 1 of the 4 clinics. In most cases, usual care for depression, provided by Group Health Cooperative family physicians, involved prescription of an antidepressant medication, 2 or 3 visits over the first 3 months of treatment, and an option to refer to Group Health Cooperative mental health services. Both intervention and usual care patients could also self-refer to a Group Health Cooperative mental health provider. We tracked and reported these out-of-study mental health referrals and visits.
STUDY MEASURES
Patients' adherence to antidepressant medication, satisfaction with care, and level of distress was assessed at 1, 3, and 6 months after randomization by a telephone survey team blinded to the patients' randomization status. The baseline and follow-up telephone interviews included the 20 depression items in the SCL-90 measured by severity (range, 0-4)16; the telephone version of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV diagnosis current depression module and the section on the most severe depressive episode in the last 2 years14, 19; a measure of satisfaction with the treatment of depression that rated treatment as poor to excellent on a 5-point ordinal scale7-8; and the 7 items from the NEO neuroticism scale20 that can predict persistence of depressive symptoms in a primary care population.21
Patients were asked if they were still taking an antidepressant medication and were considered adherent if they reported having taken this medication for at least 25 of the last 30 days.8 Computerized pharmacy records were also used to examine antidepressant use (rates of refill and whether they received an adequate dosage of antidepressant medication for 90 days or more).22 The lowest doses in the ranges recommended in the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research guidelines and in guidelines developed for newer agents were used to define a minimum dosage standard.23-24 A second dose that was twice the lowest range was also used to better estimate clinical adequacy of dosage in specialty settings. The ranges of therapeutic dosages in Agency for Health Care Policy and Research guidelines were as follows: 75 to 300 mg of imipramine hydrochloride, amitriptyline hydrochloride, doxepin hydrochloride, or desipramine hydrochloride; 40 to 200 mg of nortriptyline hydrochloride; 10 to 40 mg of fluoxetine hydrochloride or paroxetine; 100 mg of amoxapine, maprotoline hydrochloride, trazodone hydrochloride, or venlafaxine hydrochloride; 50 mg of sertraline hydrochloride or fluvoxamine maleate; and 30 mg of mirtazapine.
Telephone and in-person baseline interviewers received 3 to 6 hours of training prior to the first interview, plus individual practice sessions with the supervisor (a clinician with a master's degree and extensive training in structured interviews) lasting 2 to 3 hours. Each interviewer was tested against either the supervisor or project director during a practice and study interview, with reliability exceeding 90% for each interview question.
Computerized pharmacy records were also used to compute the chronic disease score, a measure of chronic medical comorbidity based on prescription drug use.25
STATISTICAL ANALYSES
We performed a  2 analysis, with corrections for continuity to examine group differences on categorical variables (ie, intervention vs control, patients refusing interviews vs screened patients, patients completing all assessments vs patients missing at least 1 follow-up). Independent group t tests were used for continuous variables. Treatment group differences in medication adherence were assessed using mixed-effects ordinal regression analysis for longitudinal data.26 This procedure uses a logistic function to test whether there is a difference in medication adherence between intervention and control patients over time after adjusting for relevant covariates. Marginal maximum likelihood methods were used to generate maximum likelihood estimates for group, time, and group x time interaction effects. These effects were evaluated using a z statistic (maximum likelihood estimate divided by its SE). This procedure permits inclusion of patients with missing data and allows for individual varying slopes and intercepts over time.27 This approach allowed us to use the data from all 228 patients in an intent-to-treat analysis rather than the 167 patients who completed all follow-up assessments. We employed a model with uncorrelated errors (no autocorrelation terms). Age, sex, NEO score, and chronic disease score were used as fixed covariates for each analysis. For significant interaction or group effects, 2 analyses with corrections for continuity were examined to determine at which assessment the groups differed. To evaluate the continuous outcomes of SCL-20 depression, a mixed-effects regression analysis procedure was used.27-28 This procedure has all the advantages of the mixed-effects ordinal regression analysis26 described above. This model is used for normally distributed response data and can be used for analysis of longitudinal designs with missing data. The procedure also used maximum likelihood estimates to evaluate group, time, and group x time interaction effects. In the event of a significant interaction or group effect, univariate analysis of covariances were used to determine where the groups differed in their rate of change. Because of the nonnormality of the utilization data, nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to test group differences in the number of health care visits. A 2-tailed  level of .05 was used to determine significance.
RESULTS
A total of 2699 letters were mailed to eligible patients in the 4 Group Health Cooperative primary care clinics; rates of refusal, ineligibility, and lack of successful contact are described in Figure 1. Patients agreeing to be interviewed did not differ from patients refusing to be interviewed in age (mean ± SD, 47.8±14.9 years for patients agreeing to participate compared with 47.6±15.7 years for those refusing [t2385 = -0.20]) or sex (72.3% female in both groups; 21 = 0.0).
|
|
|
|
Figure 1. Recruitment for persistence study (228 patients were randomized). SCL indicates Hopkins Symptom Checklist.
|
|
|
Of the 2051 patients (76.1%) completing the screening interview, 272 (13.3%) were eligible for the persistence study and 694 (33.9%) were eligible for the relapse prevention study. Of the 272 patients eligible for the persistence study based on having 4 depressive symptoms on the screening interview, 176 (64.7%) received a baseline interview and 159 (90.3%) were successfully randomized to the persistence study. Patients refusing the baseline interview did not differ in age or sex from those agreeing to be interviewed.
Of the 694 patients eligible for the baseline interview for the relapse prevention study based on the screening interview, 472 (68.0%) completed the interview and 69 (14.6%) accepted randomization to the persistence study based on an SCL score of 1.5 or more. Patients refusing the baseline interview did not differ in age or sex from those agreeing to be interviewed.
Thus, 228 patients were randomized to the persistence study after baseline interviews. Of these, 149 were randomized within the block scoring 1.0 to 2.0 on the SCL-20 depression items and 79 were randomized in the block scoring more than 2.0 on the SCL-20 depression items.
Of the 228 patients randomized, 209 (91.7%) completed the 1-month follow-up, 193 (84.6%) completed the 3-month follow-up, and 192 (84.2%) completed the 6-month follow-up. Eighty-seven intervention patients (76.3%) vs 80 usual care patients (70.2%) completed all 3 follow-up interviews. There were no significant differences on any demographic or clinical variables listed in Table 1 between the 61 patients who missed completing at least 1 follow-up interview and the 167 patients who completed all 3 follow-up interviews.
|
|
|
|
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients With Depression*
|
|
|
PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS
The only significant difference between intervention and control patients on any demographic or clinical variable (Table 1) was that there was a higher percentage of female subjects in the control arm of the study (21 = 5.20; P = .02), which was one of the covariates controlled for when analyzing differences in outcomes between the 2 groups. High rates of dysthymia (50%-60%) and recurrent major depression (76%-83%) were seen, probably reflecting the selection of patients who had persistent symptoms 6 to 8 weeks after initiation of antidepressant treatment.
PARTICIPATION IN THE INTERVENTION PROGRAM
Of the 114 patients randomized to the intervention arm, 108 (94.8%) made at least 2 visits to the psychiatric consultant. Intervention patients were seen for 2.75 ± 1.47 visits (mean ± SD) by 1 of the 4 intervention psychiatrists (range, 0-7 visits), with 1.56 ± 1.61 follow-up telephone calls (mean ± SD). By 3 months, 96% of intervention patients had read at least part of the educational book and 90% had watched at least part of the videotape.
HEALTH CARE VISITS EXCLUDING PSYCHIATRY INTERVENTION VISITS
In the first 12 weeks of treatment, beginning with the date of randomization, usual care patients had 1.8 ± 1.8 visits (mean ± SD) with their primary care physician vs 1.6 ± 1.8 visits among intervention patients (21 = 1.46; P = .23). In the 6-month period beginning with the date of randomization, usual care patients received 3.3 ± 3.1 visits (mean ± SD) with their primary care physician compared with 3.4 ± 4.3 visits (mean ± SD) for intervention patients (21 = 0.35; P = .55).
In the first 12-week period, beginning with the date of randomization, 17.5% of intervention patients compared with 24.6% of usual care patients were seen at least once by a nonstudy mental health specialist reimbursed by Group Health Cooperative (21 = 1.29; P = .26). In the 6-month period beginning with the date of randomization, 24.6% of intervention patients vs 27.2% of usual care patients were seen by a nonstudy mental health specialist (21 = 0.09; P = .76). There were also no significant differences between intervention and usual care patients on their mean number of visits to a nonstudy mental health specialist in the first 12-week period (0.6±1.7 vs 0.8±1.9 visits; t226 = 0.95; P = .34) or in the 6-month period (1.3±2.9 vs 1.3±2.9 visits; t226 = 0.19; P = .85).
MEDICATION ADHERENCE
Based on the follow-up interviews, the mixed-effects ordinal regression analyses found a significant group x time interaction for medication adherence (z = 3.26; P<.001). Intervention patients were significantly more likely to adhere to antidepressant medication for 25 of 30 days in each of the 3 follow-up interviews over the 6-month period compared with usual care patients (Figure 2). Post hoc analyses found significant differences at 3 months (78.6% vs 62.1%; 21 = 5.52; P = .02) and 6 months (73.2% vs 50.5%; 21 = 9.53; P = .002) but not 1 month (77.4% vs 69.2%; 21 = 1.38; P = .24).
|
|
|
|
Figure 2. Adherence for 25 or more days of the last 30 at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months, based on an intent-to-treat analysis with 114 intervention patients and 114 usual care patients. Error bars indicate 95% confidence intervals.
|
|
|
Based on automated prescription data on refills, intervention patients were significantly more likely than controls to have received antidepressant medication for at least 90 days at or above the lowest dose level recommended by Agency for Health Care Policy and Research guidelines (68.8% in intervention group vs 43.8% in usual care group [21 = 12.60; P<.0001]) and at twice the dosage of the guideline lower range (intervention [46.8%] vs usual care [25.7%]; 21 = 9.36; P = .002). These differences remained significant after controlling for age, sex, NEO score, and chronic disease score using logistic regression analysis.
SATISFACTION WITH TREATMENT
At the 3- and 6-month follow-up interviews, significantly more intervention patients rated the quality of care they received for depression as good to excellent compared with usual care patients (3 months: 94.5% vs 63.9%, 21 = 23.51, P<.00001; 6 months: 79.5% vs 63.5%, 21 = 4.21, P = .04).
CHANGES IN DEPRESSION OUTCOMES
As shown in Figure 3, the mixed-effects regression procedure found a significant group x time interaction for the SCL-20 (z = -2.06; P = .04). This difference in change over time between the intervention and usual care groups was caused by significant differences in rate of change in severity from the baseline to 3-month follow-up interviews (F1,186 = 12.38; P = .001), with a nonsignificant similar trend seen from the baseline to 6-month follow-up interviews (F1,185 = 3.09; P = .08), after controlling for age, sex, NEO score, and chronic disease score.
|
|
|
|
Figure 3. The 20-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-20) depression scores for patients with persistent depression adjusted for age, sex, NEO neuroticism score, and chronic disease score, based on an intent-to-treat analysis with 114 intervention patients and 114 controls. Error bars indicate SEs.
|
|
|
Another test of treatment effectiveness is whether patients meet a predefined level of clinical recovery at a specified time. We described the percentage of patients who were asymptomatic as defined by a Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV finding of 0 or 1 of the DSM-IV 9 major depressive symptoms at 3 and 6 months. At each time, significantly more intervention patients than usual care patients had recovered (3 months: 40% vs 23%, 21 = 6.18, P = .01; 6 months: 44% vs 31%, 21 = 3.90, P = .05).
COMMENT
This multifaceted intervention, providing an on-site integrated role for a psychiatrist to improve care for patients with persistent depression symptoms, surveillance of patient outcomes and medication adherence, and enhanced patient education, significantly improved the process and outcomes of care for patients with persistent DSM-IV depressive symptoms. Patients in the intervention arm of the study showed better adherence to antidepressants, reported more satisfaction with care, and had improved clinical outcomes for depression compared with patients treated with usual care. We attribute these improvements relative to usual care to the enhanced organization of care, including targeted specialty visits, and to active monitoring and follow-up care.
The stepped-care strategy used in this study targeted collaborative care for patients whose depressive symptoms persisted 6 to 8 weeks after initiation of pharmacotherapy. A critical question was whether targeting these patients with more chronic illness would reduce the effectiveness of collaborative care. The results of this study show that targeting collaborative care in this stepped-care fashion improved patient outcomes among the more difficult-to-treat cases. It is significant that the usual care control group was also being treated. All usual care patients were prescribed antidepressant medication and 27% were seen by a Group Health Cooperative mental health provider, so the improvements in outcome are beyond what was achieved with existing depression services.
The patients with persistent depressive symptoms who were randomized to this trial had a much higher prevalence of dysthymia (approximately 55% vs 30%) and slightly higher levels of recurrent major depression (76%-83% vs approximately 68%-75%) than we have seen in our previous trials in which patients were randomized at initial prescription.7-8 Patients with dysthymia and major depression and those with 3 or more major depressive episodes have been found to be at high risk of relapse both in our prior primary care samples and in the studies reviewed in the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research guidelines.23, 29 Patients only received stepped-care visits with the psychiatrist during the acute phase of treatment (up to 12 weeks). After the acute phase of treatment, patients who do not improve or who relapse may need more long-term specialty treatment, since the data show optimum outcomes at 3 months but flattening of the recovery curve and a relative decrease in satisfaction with care of depression between 3 and 6 months. The recovery rate of 44% in intervention patients is also somewhat lower than that seen in specialty efficacy trials, probably reflecting both the lower intensity of the intervention (mean ± SD, 2.75 ± 1.5 visits) and the high rate of double depression. The need for prolonging specialty treatment into a continuation and maintenance phase of treatment in selected patients may be thought of as step 3 in the proposed stepped-care model.
The program that we implemented to improve the process and outcomes of depression in this study is an example of a population-based stepped-care approach.11 The essential elements of this program were as follows: assessing whether a favorable outcome had been achieved at a defined end point, stepping up the intensity of care for patients who had not improved, targeting use of specialty providers to ensure guideline-concordant care, and ensuring active follow-up and monitoring of the process and outcome of care. Other essential components of this population-based care approach included educating and activating patients to become collaborators in illness management and providing information systems that support proactive follow-up, adherence to treatment, and delivery of care.11-12,30
Limitations of the study include the following: (1) Our patient population was predominantly white and middle-class, and the success of the intervention may not be generalizable to other socioeconomic or ethnic groups. (2) The research was completed in 4 large health mantainence organization clinics staffed by family physicians; the intervention model used in the study may be more difficult to integrate into network models that do not integrate primary care and specialty services. (3) Since referral to the study was dependent on the accuracy of the primary care physician's diagnosis, the study may not be generalizable to the 40% to 50% of patients who do not receive accurate diagnosis in primary care or the patients identified by the physician as depressed who are not prescribed antidepressants. (4) The multifaceted intervention did not allow us to determine the specific active components of the program that were most helpful. (5) Approximately one quarter of patients in both the intervention and control groups had 1 or more visits with a nonstudy mental health specialist, probably reflecting the fact that Group Health Cooperative patients are well educated, have a small copayment for mental health visits, and can self-refer.
CONCLUSION
A multifaceted care program targeted for primary care patients whose depressive symptoms persisted for 6 to 8 weeks after initiation of usual primary care treatment was found to improve outcomes relative to usual care. This suggests that targeting collaborative care in a stepped-care fashion may be a viable option for efficient use of specialty services in the primary care setting.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Accepted for publication September 13, 1999.
This study was supported by grant MH41739 (Drs Katon, Von Korff, Lin, Simon, Walker, Unutzer, Bush, Russo, and Ludman), National Institute of Mental Health, Rockville, Md.
This study was made possible by the enthusiastic participation of the Group Health Northgate, Family Health, Lynwood, and Eastside clinic staffs and patients.
Corresponding author: Wayne Katon, MD, Department of Psychiatry, University of Washington School of Medicine, Box 35-6560, Seattle, WA 98195 (e-mail: wkaton{at}u.washington.edu).
From the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington Medical School (Drs Katon, Walker, and Russo); the Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative (Drs Von Korff, Lin, Simon, Bush, and Ludman), Seattle, Wash; and the Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles (Dr Unützer).
REFERENCES
1. Katon W, Schulberg H. Epidemiology of depression in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1992;14:237-247.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
2. Ormel J, Von Korff M, Usun TB, Pini S, Korten A, Oldehinkel T. Common mental disorders and disabilities across cultures: results from the WHO Collaborative Study on Psychological Problems in General Health Care. JAMA. 1994;272:1741-1748.
FREE FULL TEXT
3. Simon GE, Von Korff M. Somatization and psychiatric disorder in the NIMH Epidemiologic Catchment Area study. Am J Psychiatry. 1991;148:1494-1500.
FREE FULL TEXT
4. Wells KB, Stewart A, Hays RD, Burnam MA, Rogers W, Daniels W, Berry S, Greenfield S, Ware J. The functioning and well-being of depressed patients: results from the Medical Outcomes Study. JAMA. 1989;262:914-919.
FREE FULL TEXT
5. Simon G, Ormel J, Von Korff M, Barlow W. Health care costs associated with depressive and anxiety disorders in primary care. Am J Psychiatry. 1995;152:352-357.
FREE FULL TEXT
6. Unützer J, Patrick DL, Simon G, Grembowski D, Walker E, Rutter C, Katon W. Depressive symptoms and the cost of health services in HMO patients aged 65 years and older: a 4-year prospective study. JAMA. 1997;277:1618-1623.
FREE FULL TEXT
7. Katon W, Von Korff M, Lin E, Walker E, Simon G, Bush T, Robinson P, Russo J. Collaborative management to achieve treatment guidelines: impact on depression in primary care. JAMA. 1995;273:1026-1031.
FREE FULL TEXT
8. Katon W, Robinson P, Von Korff M, Lin E, Bush T, Ludman E, Simon G, Walker G. A multifaceted intervention to improve treatment of depression in primary care. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1996;53:924-932.
FREE FULL TEXT
9. Katzelnick DJ, Simon GE, Pearson SD, Manning WG, Helstad CP, Henk HJ, Kobak KA. Randomized trial of depression management program in high utilizers of medical care. Presented at: 12th International Conference on Mental Health Problems in the General Care Sector: Effectiveness of Intervention in Primary Care, National Institute of Mental Health; July 13, 1998; Baltimore, Md.
10. Wells KB. Cost-containment and mental health experiences from US studies. Br J Psychiatry Suppl. 1995;27:43-51.
11. Katon W, Von Korff M, Lin E, Unützer J, Simon G, Walker E, Ludman E, Bush T. Population-based care of depression: effective disease management strategies to decrease prevalence. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1997;19:169-178.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
12. Von Korff M, Gruman J, Schaefer J, Curry SJ, Wagner EH. Essential elements for collaborative management of chronic illness. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:1097-1102.
FREE FULL TEXT
13. Von Korff M, Katon W, Bush T, Lin EH, Simon GE, Saunders K, Ludman E, Walker E, Unützer J. Treatment costs, cost offset, and cost effectiveness of collaborative management of depression. Psychosom Med. 1998;60:143-149.
FREE FULL TEXT
14. Williams JB, Gibbon M, First MB, Spitzer RL, Davies M, Borus J, Howes MJ, Kane J, Poper HG Jr, Rousaville B, Wittchen HU. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID), II: multisite test-retest reliability. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1992;49:630-636.
FREE FULL TEXT
15. Mayfield D, McLeod G, Hall P. The CAGE questionnaire: validation of a new alcoholism screening instrument. Am J Psychiatry. 1974;131:1121-1123.
FREE FULL TEXT
16. Derogatis LR, Rickels K, Uhlenhuth EH, Covi L. The Hopkins Symptom Checklist: a measure of primary symptom dimensions. In: Pichot P, ed. Psychological Measurements in Psychopharmacology: Problems in Pharmacopsychiatry. Basel, Switzerland: S Karger AG; 1974.
17. Katon W, Ludman E, Simon G, Lin E, Sullivan M, Walker E, Busch T, Von Korff M, Carter L. Depression (Recurrent and Chronic): Self-care Companion for Better Living. New York, NY: Patient Educational Media; 1996.
18. Depression (Recurrent and Chronic) [videotape]. New York, NY: Time-Life Medical Patient Educational Media Inc; 1996.
19. Simon GE, Revicki D, Von Korff M. Telephone assessment of depression severity. J Psychiatr Res. 1993;27:247-252.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
20. Costa PT, McCrae RR. The NEO Personality Inventory Manual. Odessa, Fla: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1985.
21. Katon W, Lin E, von Korff M, Bush T, Walker E, Simon G, Robinson P. The predictors of persistence of depression in primary care. J Affect Disord. 1994;31:81-90.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
22. Clark D, Von Korff M, Saunders K, Baluch WM, Simon GE. A chronic disease score with empirically derived weight. Med Care. 1995;33:783-795.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
23. Depression in Primary Care: Treatment of Major Depression . Vol 2. Rockville, Md: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, US Dept of Health and Human Services, 1993. Publication AHCPR 93-0511.
24. Katzelnick DJ, Kobak KA, Jefferson JW, Greist JH, Henk HJ. Prescribing patterns of antidepressant medications for depression in an HMO. Formulary. 1996;31:374-388.
ISI
25. Von Korff M, Wagner EH, Saunders K. A chronic disease score from automated pharmacy data. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:197-203.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
26. Hedeker D, Gibbons RD. MIXOR: a computer program for mixed-effects ordinal regression analysis. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 1996;49:157-176.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
27. Gibbons RD, Hedeker D, Elkin I, Waternaux C, Kraemer HG, Greenhouse JB, Shea MT, Imber SD, Sotsky SM, Watkins JT. Some conceptual and statistical issues in analysis of longitudinal psychiatric data. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1993;50:739-750.
FREE FULL TEXT
28. Hedeker D, Gibbons RD. MIXREG: a computer program for mixed-effects regression analysis with autocorrelated errors. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 1996;49:229-252.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
29. Lin EH, Katon W, Von Korff M, Russo JE, Simon GE, Bush TM, Rutter CM, Walker EA, Ludman E. Relapse of depression in primary care: rate and clinical predictors. Arch Fam Med. 1998;7:443-449.
FREE FULL TEXT
30. Wagner EH, Austin BT, Von Korff M. Organizing care for patients with chronic illness. Milbank Q. 1996;74:511-543.
ISI
| PUBMED
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Health Care Assistants in Primary Care Depression Management: Role Perception, Burdening Factors, and Disease Conception
Gensichen et al.
Ann Fam Med 2009;7:513-519.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
County-Level Estimates of Mental Health Professional Shortage in the United States
Thomas et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2009;60:1323-1328.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Optimized Antidepressant Therapy and Pain Self-management in Primary Care Patients With Depression and Musculoskeletal Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Kroenke et al.
JAMA 2009;301:2099-2110.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Collaborative Care for Chronic Pain in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomized Trial
Dobscha et al.
JAMA 2009;301:1242-1252.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Depression Screening of Perinatal Women: An Evaluation of the Healthy Start Depression Initiative
Yonkers et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2009;60:322-328.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Psychiatrists for Medically Complex Patients: Bringing Value at the Physical Health and Mental Health/Substance-Use Disorder Interface
Kathol et al.
Psychosomatics 2009;50:93-107.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Bypassing the Blues Treatment Protocol: Stepped Collaborative Care for Treating Post-CABG Depression
Rollman et al.
Psychosom. Med. 2009;71:217-230.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Risk for Depression Comorbidity in Patients With COPD
van den Bemt et al.
Chest 2009;135:108-114.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Persistent Depression and Anxiety in the United States: Prevalence and Quality of Care
Young et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2008;59:1391-1398.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Care Management for Depression in Primary Care Practice: Findings From the RESPECT-Depression Trial
Nutting et al.
Ann Fam Med 2008;6:30-37.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Guidelines for Adolescent Depression in Primary Care (GLAD-PC): I. Identification, Assessment, and Initial Management
Zuckerbrot et al.
Pediatrics 2007;120:e1299-e1312.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Guidelines for Adolescent Depression in Primary Care (GLAD-PC): II. Treatment and Ongoing Management
Cheung et al.
Pediatrics 2007;120:e1313-e1326.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Telephone Screening, Outreach, and Care Management for Depressed Workers and Impact on Clinical and Work Productivity Outcomes: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Wang et al.
JAMA 2007;298:1401-1411.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Effect of Adherence to Practice Guidelines on Depression Outcomes
Hepner et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2007;147:320-329.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Pilot Study of Telephone Care Management and Structured Disease Self-Management Groups for Chronic Depression
Ludman et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2007;58:1065-1072.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Predictors of Premature Antidepressant Discontinuation in Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders
Sayuk et al.
Psychosom. Med. 2007;69:173-181.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cost-effectiveness of Systematic Depression Treatment Among People With Diabetes Mellitus
Simon et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2007;64:65-72.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Adolescent Depression Screening in Primary Care: Feasibility and Acceptability
Zuckerbrot et al.
Pediatrics 2007;119:101-108.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Costs and Benefits of Enhanced Depression Care to Employers
Wang et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2006;63:1345-1353.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Collaborative care for depression in primary care: Making sense of a complex intervention: systematic review and meta-regression
Bower et al.
Br. J. Psychiatry 2006;189:484-493.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Collaborative Care for Depression: A Cumulative Meta-analysis and Review of Longer-term Outcomes
Gilbody et al.
Arch Intern Med 2006;166:2314-2321.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Depression decision support in primary care: a cluster randomized trial.
Dobscha et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2006;145:477-487.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Improving care for depression: there's no free lunch.
Rubenstein
ANN INTERN MED 2006;145:544-546.
FULL TEXT
Enhancing Validity in Co-occurring Disorders Treatment Research
McHugo et al.
Schizophr Bull 2006;32:655-665.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Costs and consequences of enhanced primary care for depression: Systematic review of randomised economic evaluations
GILBODY et al.
Br. J. Psychiatry 2006;189:297-308.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Treatment and Adequacy of Treatment of Mental Disorders Among Respondents to the Mexico National Comorbidity Survey
Borges et al.
Am. J. Psychiatry 2006;163:1371-1378.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
PRISM-E: Comparison of Integrated Care and Enhanced Specialty Referral Models in Depression Outcomes
Krahn et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2006;57:946-953.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cost-effectiveness of referral for generic care or problem-solving treatment from community mental health nurses, compared with usual general practitioner care for common mental disorders: Randomised controlled trial
Kendrick et al.
Br. J. Psychiatry 2006;189:50-59.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Economic Grand Rounds: Improving the Quality of Depression Care in Medicaid
Barry and Thomas
Psychiatr. Serv. 2005;56:1193-1195.
FULL TEXT
Pediatric Behavioral Health in Primary Care: A Collaborative Approach
Campo et al.
J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc 2005;11:276-282.
ABSTRACT
Can Collaborative Care Address the Needs of Low-Income Latinas With Comorbid Depression and Cancer? Results From a Randomized Pilot Study
Dwight-Johnson et al.
Psychosomatics 2005;46:224-232.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Role of Services Researchers in Facilitating Intervention Research
Sullivan et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2005;56:537-542.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Connections to Primary Medical Care after Psychiatric Crisis
Griswold et al.
J Am Board Fam Med 2005;18:166-172.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Coordinating Care across Diseases, Settings, and Clinicians: A Key Role for the Generalist in Practice
Stille et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2005;142:700-708.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Remission in Depressed Geriatric Primary Care Patients: A Report From the PROSPECT Study
Alexopoulos et al.
Am. J. Psychiatry 2005;162:718-724.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Randomized Effectiveness Trial of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy and Medication for Primary Care Panic Disorder
Roy-Byrne et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2005;62:290-298.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
NICE, but will they help people with depression? The new National Institute for Clinical Excellence depression guidelines
Whitty and Gilbody
Br. J. Psychiatry 2005;186:177-178.
FULL TEXT
Cost-Effectiveness of Enhancing Primary Care Depression Management on an Ongoing Basis
Rost et al.
Ann Fam Med 2005;3:7-14.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Stepped care in psychological therapies: access, effectiveness and efficiency: Narrative literature review
Bower and Gilbody
Br. J. Psychiatry 2005;186:11-17.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Quality of Care for Primary Care Patients With Anxiety Disorders
Stein et al.
Am. J. Psychiatry 2004;161:2230-2237.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Depression and Comorbid Illness in Elderly Primary Care Patients: Impact on Multiple Domains of Health Status and Well-being
Noel et al.
Ann Fam Med 2004;2:555-562.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Re-engineering systems for the treatment of depression in primary care: cluster randomised controlled trial
Dietrich et al.
BMJ 2004;329:602.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Telephone Psychotherapy and Telephone Care Management for Primary Care Patients Starting Antidepressant Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Simon et al.
JAMA 2004;292:935-942.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Moving Treatment Research From Clinical Trials to the Real World
Roy-Byrne et al.
Focus 2004;2:410-415.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Quality of Care for Medicaid-Covered Youth Treated With Antidepressant Therapy
Richardson et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2004;61:475-480.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Randomized Effectiveness Trial of Stepped Collaborative Care for Acutely Injured Trauma Survivors
Zatzick et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2004;61:498-506.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Depression: international intervention for a global problem
Crawford
Br. J. Psychiatry 2004;184:379-380.
FULL TEXT
Pharmacological Treatment of Depression in Older Primary Care Patients: The PROSPECT Algorithm
Mulsant et al.
Focus 2004;2:253-259.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Design and Sample Characteristics of the PRISM-E Multisite Randomized Trial to Improve Behavioral Health Care for the Elderly
Levkoff et al.
J Aging Health 2004;16:3-27.
ABSTRACT
Effectiveness of Disease Management Programs in Depression: A Systematic Review
Badamgarav et al.
Am. J. Psychiatry 2003;160:2080-2090.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Evaluation of the Adequacy of Outpatient Antidepressant Treatment
Weilburg et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2003;54:1233-1239.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Treating Depression in Predominantly Low-Income Young Minority Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Miranda et al.
JAMA 2003;290:57-65.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Psychopharmacology Plus Psychotherapy for Depression Treatment
Unutzer et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2003;54:1042-1043.
FULL TEXT
Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance Consensus Statement on the Unmet Needs in Diagnosis and Treatment of Mood Disorders in Late Life
Charney et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2003;60:664-672.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Depression and Medical Comorbidity: Red Flags for Current Suicidal Ideation in Primary Care
Rollman and Shear
Psychosom. Med. 2003;65:506-507.
FULL TEXT
Educational and Organizational Interventions to Improve the Management of Depression in Primary Care: A Systematic Review
Gilbody et al.
JAMA 2003;289:3145-3151.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Aligning Incentives in the Treatment of Depression in Primary Care With Evidence-Based Practice
Frank et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2003;54:682-687.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cost-Effectiveness of Collaborative Care for Depression in a Primary Care Veteran Population
Liu et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2003;54:698-704.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Improving the detection and management of depression in primary care
Gilbody et al.
Qual Saf Health Care 2003;12:149-155.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
"Usual Care" for Major Depression in the 1990s: Characteristics and Expert-Estimated Outcomes
Horvitz-Lennon et al.
Am. J. Psychiatry 2003;160:720-726.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Moving Treatment Research From Clinical Trials to the Real World
Roy-Byrne et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2003;54:327-332.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Willingness to Pay for Depression Treatment in Primary Care
Unutzer et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2003;54:340-345.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Health Service Utilization by Alzheimer's Disease Patients: A 2-Year Follow-Up of Primary Versus Subspecialty Care
Aupperle et al.
J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 2003;16:15-17.
ABSTRACT
Application of a Depression Management Office System in Community Practice: A Demonstration
Dietrich et al.
J Am Board Fam Med 2003;16:107-114.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Chronic Illness Management: What Is the Role of Primary Care?
Rothman and Wagner
ANN INTERN MED 2003;138:256-261.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Collaborative Care Management of Late-Life Depression in the Primary Care Setting: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Unutzer et al.
JAMA 2002;288:2836-2845.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Interventions used in disease management programmes for patients with chronic illness---which ones work? Meta-analysis of published reports
Weingarten et al.
BMJ 2002;325:925-925.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Managing depression as a chronic disease: a randomised trial of ongoing treatment in primary care
Rost et al.
BMJ 2002;325:934-934.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Use, Quality, and Outcomes of Care for Mental Health: The Rural Perspective
Rost et al.
Med Care Res Rev 2002;59:231-265.
ABSTRACT
The pragmatic randomised controlled trial
Hotopf
Adv. Psychiatr. Treat. 2002;8:326-333.
FULL TEXT
Patient adherence with antidepressant treatment * Authors' reply
Vergouwen et al.
Br. J. Psychiatry 2002;181
:78-79.
FULL TEXT
A Randomised Controlled Trial of an Educational Intervention for Depression among Asian Women in Primary Care in the United Kingdom
Jacob et al.
Int J Soc Psychiatry 2002;48:139-148.
ABSTRACT
Dropping Out of Mental Health Treatment: Patterns and Predictors Among Epidemiological Survey Respondents in the United States and Ontario
Edlund et al.
Am. J. Psychiatry 2002;159:845-851.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A 75-Year-Old Man With Depression
Kroenke
JAMA 2002;287:1568-1576.
FULL TEXT
Patient adherence in the treatment of depression
PAMPALLONA et al.
Br. J. Psychiatry 2002;180:104-109.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Adequacy of Treatment for Serious Mental Illness in the United States
Wang et al.
AJPH 2002;92:92-98.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Program for Teaching Psychiatric Residents to Provide Integrated Psychiatric and Primary Medical Care
Dobscha and Ganzini
Psychiatr. Serv. 2001;52:1651-1653.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cost-Effectiveness of a Collaborative Care Program for Primary Care Patients With Persistent Depression
Simon et al.
Am. J. Psychiatry 2001;158:1638-1644.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Two-Year Effects of Quality Improvement Programs on Medication Management for Depression
Unutzer et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2001;58:935-942.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Integrated Medical Care for Patients With Serious Psychiatric Illness: A Randomized Trial
Druss et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2001;58:861-868.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Randomized Effectiveness Trial of Collaborative Care for Patients With Panic Disorder in Primary Care
Roy-Byrne et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2001;58:869-876.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Cost-Utility of Screening for Depression in Primary Care
Valenstein et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2001;134:345-360.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Randomized Trial of Relapse Prevention of Depression in Primary Care
Katon et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2001;58:241-247.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cost-effectiveness of Systematic Depression Treatment for High Utilizers of General Medical Care
Simon et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2001;58:181-187.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Managing Depression in Medical Outpatients
Whooley and Simon
NEJM 2000;343:1942-1950.
FULL TEXT
Can Depression Treatment in Primary Care Reduce Disability?: A Stepped Care Approach
Lin et al.
Arch Fam Med 2000;9:1052-1058.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Improvement of Outcomes in Chronic Illness
Katon
Arch Fam Med 2000;9:709-711.
FULL TEXT
Synchrony of Change in Depression and Disability: What Next?
Ormel and Von Korff
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2000;57:381-382.
FULL TEXT
A Collaborative Approach to Primary Care Patients with Persistent Depression
JWatch Psychiatry 2000;2000:18-18.
FULL TEXT
Persistent Depression Responds to Collaborative Care
JWatch Women's Health 2000;2000:13-13.
FULL TEXT
A Collaborative Approach to Primary Care Patients With Persistent Depression
JWatch General 2000;2000:4-4.
FULL TEXT
|
