Few longitudinal studies have explored to date whether minority status in disadvantaged neighborhoods conveys risk for negative mental health outcomes, and the mechanisms possibly leading to such risk. We investigated how minority status influences four developmental mental health outcomes in an ethnically homogeneous sample of Puerto Rican youth. We tested models of risk for major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), depressive and anxiety symptoms (DAS), and psychological distress, as Puerto Rican youth (aged 5‐13 years) transitioned to early adulthood (15‐29 years) in two sites, one where they grew up as a majority (the island of Puerto Rico), and another where they were part of a minority group (South Bronx, New York). At baseline, a stratified sample of 2,491 Puerto Rican youth participated from the two sites. After baseline assessment (Wave 1), each youth participant and one caregiver were assessed annually for two years, for a total of three time points (Waves 1‐3). From April 2013 to August 2017, participants were contacted for a Wave 4 interview, and a total of 2,004 young people aged 15 to 29 years participated in the assessment (response rate adjusted for eligibility = 82.8%). Using a quasi‐experimental design, we assessed impacts of minority status on MDD, GAD, DAS and psychological distress. Via mediation analyses, we explored potential mechanisms underlying the observed relationships. Data from 1,863 Puerto Rican youth (after exclusion of those with MDD or GAD during Waves 1‐3) indicated links between minority status and higher rates of lifetime and past‐year GAD, DAS and past 30‐day psychological distress at Wave 4, and a marginal trend for MDD, even after adjustments. Childhood social support and peer relationships partially explained the differences, as did intercultural conflict, neighborhood discrimination, and unfair treatment in young adulthood. The experience of growing up as a minority, as defined by context, seemingly elevates psychiatric risks, with differences in social relationships and increased social stress as mediators of this relationship. Our findings suggest that interventions at the neighborhood context rather than at the individual level might be important levers to reduce risks for the development of mood disorders in minority youth.

Context: Latino immigrants constitute a large portion of the Spanish and US immigrant populations, yet a dearth of research exists regarding barriers to retention in behavioral health care. Objectives: To identify and compare perceived barriers related to behavioral health care among first- and second-generation Latinos in Boston, Madrid, and Barcelona, and evaluate whether the frequency of behavioral health care use in the last year was related to these barriers. Design, Setting, and Participants: Data were obtained from the International Latino Research Partnership project. First- or second-generation self-identified Latino immigrants aged 18 years and more who resided more than 1 year in the host country were recruited from community agencies and primary care, mental health, substance abuse, and HIV clinics. Main Outcome Measures: Eleven barriers were assessed and compared across sites. The relationship between barriers and behavioral services visits within the last year was evaluated, adjusting for sociodemographics, clinical measures, degree of health literacy, cultural, and social factors. Results: Wanting to handle the problem on one's own, thinking that treatment would not work, and being unsure of where to go or who to see were the most frequently reported barriers for Latino immigrants. Previous treatment failure, difficulties in transportation or scheduling, and linguistic barriers were more likely to be reported in Boston; trying to deal with mental health problems on one's own was more commonly reported in Barcelona and Madrid. Two barriers associated with the number of visits were concerns about the cost of services and uncertainty about where to go or who to see. Conclusions: After adjusting for sociodemographics, clinical measures, degree of health literacy, cultural, and social factors, barriers still differed significantly across sites. Efforts to improve behavioral health services must be tailored to immigrants' context, with attention to changing attitudes of self-reliance and outreach to improve access to and retention in care.

Immigrants are at an increased risk for co-occurring mental health and substance misuse symptoms; however, effective treatments are lacking. To evaluate the effectiveness of the Integrated Intervention for Dual Problems and Early Action (IIDEA) program compared with enhanced usual care. This effectiveness randomized clinical trial was conducted from September 2, 2014, to February 2, 2017, in 17 clinics or emergency departments and 24 community sites in Boston, Massachusetts, as well as in Madrid and Barcelona, Spain. Equal randomization (1:1) in 2-person blocks was used, assigning participants to either the IIDEA treatment group (n = 172) or the enhanced usual care control group (n = 169). Intent-to-treat analyses assessed effectiveness, and post hoc analyses examined whether results varied by symptom severity or treatment dose. Eligible participants were between 18 and 70 years of age, self-identified as Latino, screened positive for co-occurring symptoms, and were not receiving specialty behavioral health services. Participants were randomized to a 10-session IIDEA treatment or to enhanced usual care. Primary outcomes were changes in alcohol and drug misuse and results of a urine test for drug metabolites but not for alcohol misuse. Secondary outcomes were symptoms of depression, generalized anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, and overall mental health. In total, 341 participants were randomized to either the IIDEA treatment group (n = 172; 94 [54.7%] female, mean [SD] age, 33.5 [11.6] years) or the enhanced usual care control group (n = 169; 80 [47.3%] female, mean [SD] age, 34.3 [11.8] years). No statistically significant effects of IIDEA were found for primary drug and alcohol outcomes (ASI Lite-drug score: β = -0.02 [SE, 0.69; P = .88; Cohen d, 0.00; 95% CI, -0.17 to 0.17]; ASI Lite-alcohol score: β = -0.01 [SE, 1.19; P = .66; Cohen d, 0.00; 95% CI, -0.12 to 0.12]; urine drug test result: β = -0.36 [SE, 0.43; P = .50; OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.30-1.61]), but statistically significant effects were observed for secondary mental health outcomes. The IIDEA treatment was effective in reducing depressive symptoms per the Public Health Questionnaire-9 score (β = -1.14; SE, 0.47; P = .02; Cohen d, 0.20 [95% CI, 0.04-0.36]), posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms per the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist-5 score (β = -3.23; SE, 1.59; P = .04; Cohen d, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.01-0.37]), and overall mental health symptoms per the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-20 (β = -0.20; SE, 0.07; P = .01; Cohen d, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.08-0.42]) and composite mental health (β = -3.70; SE, 1.75; P = .04; Cohen d, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.01-0.36]) scores at the 6-month follow-up. Exploratory analyses suggested that 6-month treatment effects occurred for patients whose drug misuse was moderate to severe at the baseline assessment. Among patients with moderate to severe substance misuse, IIDEA substantially reduced substance use per the urine test results (odds ratio, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.09-0.67]; P = .01). Treatment dose showed small to large effect sizes by outcome. The IIDEA treatment did not change drug misuse but did improve secondary mental health and substance misuse outcomes for a heterogeneous population with moderate to severe symptoms; this finding provides a path for treating Latino immigrants with co-occurring mental health and substance misuse symptoms. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02038855.

Click on the article title to read more.

A complex array of barriers to care influence patients' adherence to behavioral healthcare services. Understanding barriers to care is critical to ensure sufficient dosage of treatment. This study assessed the influence of perceived barriers on Latino migrants' prospective adherence to treatment for co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders as part of a clinical trial. Eligible participants (18–70 years-old) were recruited from community-based settings and classified according to their intervention session attendance. Baseline assessments included socio-demographic factors, clinical characteristics (i.e., depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, substance use), psychosocial and cultural factors (i.e., ethnic identity, health literacy, discrimination), and perceived attitudinal and structural barriers to care. Treatment involved 10-sessions of cognitive-behavioral therapy, psychoeducation, and mindfulness (Integrated Intervention for Dual problems and Early Action) and emphasized participant's engagement in treatment. We used multinomial logistic regression models to examine the association between barriers to care reported at baseline, sociodemographic characteristics, psychosocial and cultural factors, clinical factors, and treatment adherence. Mistrust in previous behavioral health treatment(s) was the reported barrier significantly associated with completion of the program after adjusting for clinical, psychosocial, and cultural factors, with those expressing mistrust in previous treatment(s) showing higher rates of completion compared to those who did not report this barrier. Evidence-based and culturally-tailored interventions provided by ethnically matched providers may overcome cultural mistrust and increase adherence to behavioral health care among Latino immigrants.