Dataset Information

Integrating depression and chronic disease care among patients with diabetes and/or coronary heart disease: the design of the TEAMcare study.

ABSTRACT: Diabetes and coronary heart disease (CHD) are two of the most prevalent medical illnesses in the US population and comorbid depression occurs in up to 20% of these patients. Guidelines for management of diabetes and CHD overlap for healthy lifestyle and disease-control recommendations. However, the majority of patients with these medical illnesses have been shown to have inadequate control of key risk factors such as blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, or blood sugar. Comorbid depression has been shown to adversely affect self-care of diabetes and CHD, and is associated with an increased risk of complications and mortality. Interventions that have improved quality and outcomes of depression care alone in patients with diabetes and CHD have not demonstrated benefits in self-care, improved disease control or morbidity and mortality. This paper describes the design and development of a new biopsychosocial intervention (TEAMcare) aimed at improving both medical disease control and depression in patients with poor control of diabetes and/or CHD who met the criteria for comorbid depression. A team approach is used with a nurse interventionist who receives weekly psychiatric and primary care physician caseload supervision in order to enhance treatment by the primary care physician. This intervention is being tested in an NIMH-funded randomized controlled trial in a large integrated health plan.

SUBMITTER: Katon W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3726010 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Integrating depression and chronic disease care among patients with diabetes and/or coronary heart disease: the design of the TEAMcare study.

Katon Wayne W Lin Elizabeth H B EH Von Korff Michael M Ciechanowski Paul P Ludman Evette E Young Bessie B Rutter Carolyn C Oliver Malia M McGregor Mary M

Contemporary clinical trials 20100327 4

Diabetes and coronary heart disease (CHD) are two of the most prevalent medical illnesses in the US population and comorbid depression occurs in up to 20% of these patients. Guidelines for management of diabetes and CHD overlap for healthy lifestyle and disease-control recommendations. However, the majority of patients with these medical illnesses have been shown to have inadequate control of key risk factors such as blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, or blood sugar. Comorbid depression has been s ...[more]

PMID: 20350619

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the process of case finding for depression in people with diabetes and coronary heart disease within the context of a pay-for-performance scheme.DesignEthnographic study drawing on observations of practice routines and consultations, debriefing interviews with staff and patients and review of patient records.SettingGeneral practices in Leeds, UK.Participants12 purposively sampled practices with a total of 119 staff; 63 consultation observations and 57 patient interviews.Main outcome measureAudio recorded consultations and interviews with patients and healthcare professionals along with observation field notes were thematically analysed. We assessed outcomes of case finding from patient records.ResultsCase finding exacerbated the discordance between patient and professional agendas, the latter already dominated by the tightly structured and time-limited nature of chronic illness reviews. Professional beliefs and abilities affected how case finding was undertaken; there was uncertainty about how to ask the questions, particularly among nursing staff. Professionals were often wary of opening an emotional 'can of worms'. Subsequently, patient responses potentially suggesting emotional problems could be prematurely shut down by professionals. Patients did not understand why they were asked questions about depression. This sometimes led to defensive or even defiant answers to case finding. Follow-up of patients highlighted inconsistent systems and lines of communication for dealing with positive results on case finding.ConclusionsCase finding does not fit naturally within consultations; both professional and patient reactions somewhat subverted the process recommended by national guidance. Quality improvement strategies will need to take account of our results in two ways. First, despite their apparent simplicity, the case finding questions are not consultation-friendly and acceptable alternative ways to raise the issue of depression need to be supported. Second, case finding needs to operate within structured pathways which can be accommodated within available systems and resources.

Project description:BackgroundCo-morbid major depression is a significant problem among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or coronary heart disease and this negatively impacts quality of life. Subthreshold depression is the most important risk factor for the development of major depression. Given the highly significant association between depression and adverse health outcomes and the limited capacity for depression treatment in primary care, there is an urgent need for interventions that successfully prevent the transition from subthreshold depression into a major depressive disorder. Nurse led stepped-care is a promising way to accomplish this. The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a nurse-led indicated stepped-care program to prevent major depression among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or coronary heart disease in primary care who also have subthreshold depressive symptoms.Methods/designAn economic evaluation will be conducted alongside a cluster-randomized controlled trial in approximately thirty general practices in the Netherlands. Randomization takes place at the level of participating practice nurses. We aim to include 236 participants who will either receive a nurse-led indicated stepped-care program for depressive symptoms or care as usual. The stepped-care program consists of four sequential but flexible treatment steps: 1) watchful waiting, 2) guided self-help treatment, 3) problem solving treatment and 4) referral to the general practitioner. The primary clinical outcome measure is the cumulative incidence of major depressive disorder as measured with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview. Secondary outcomes include severity of depressive symptoms, quality of life, anxiety and physical outcomes. Costs will be measured from a societal perspective and include health care utilization, medication and lost productivity costs. Measurements will be performed at baseline and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months.DiscussionThe intervention being investigated is expected to prevent new cases of depression among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or coronary heart disease and subthreshold depression, with subsequent beneficial effects on quality of life, clinical outcomes and health care costs. When proven cost-effective, the program provides a viable treatment option in the Dutch primary care system.Trial registrationDutch Trial Register NTR3715.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2) and/or coronary heart disease (CHD) are at high risk to develop major depression. Preventing incident major depression may be an important tool in reducing the personal and societal burden of depression. The aim of the current study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of a stepped care program to prevent major depression (Step-Dep) in diabetes mellitus type 2 and/or coronary heart disease patients with subthreshold depression in comparison with usual care.MethodsAn economic evaluation with 12 months follow-up was conducted alongside a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial from a societal perspective. Participants received care as usual (n = 140) or Step-Dep (n = 96) which consisted of four sequential treatment steps: watchful waiting, guided self-help, problem solving treatment and referral to a general practitioner. Primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cumulative incidence of major depression. Costs were measured every 3 months. Missing data was imputed using multiple imputation. Uncertainty around cost-effectiveness outcomes was estimated using bootstrapping and presented in cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves.ResultsThere were no significant differences in QALYs or depression incidence between treatment groups. Secondary care costs (mean difference €1644, 95% CI €344; €3370) and informal care costs (mean difference €1930, 95% CI €528; €4089) were significantly higher in the Step-Dep group than in the usual care group. The difference in total societal costs (€1001, 95% CI €-3975; €6409) was not statistically significant. The probability of the Step-Dep intervention being cost-effective was low, with a maximum of 0.41 at a ceiling ratio of €30,000 per QALY gained and 0.32 at a ceiling ratio of €0 per prevented case of major depression.ConclusionsThe Step-Dep intervention is not cost-effective compared to usual care in a population of patients with DM2/CHD and subthreshold depression. Therefore, widespread implementation cannot be recommended.Trial registrationThe trial was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register ( NTR3715 ).

Project description:BackgroundPrimary care for chronic illness varies across European healthcare systems. In patients suffering from coronary heart disease (CHD), factors associated with patients' experiences of receiving structured chronic care and counselling at the patient and practice level were investigated.MethodsIn an observational study comprising 140 general practices from five European countries (Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom), 30 patients with Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) per practice were chosen at random to partake in this research. Patients were provided with a questionnaire and the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC-5A) - instrument. Practice characteristics were assessed through a practice questionnaire and face to face interviews. Data were aggregated to obtain two practice scores representing quality management and CHD care, respectively. A hierarchical multilevel analysis was performed to examine the impact of patient and practice characteristics on PACIC scores.ResultsThe final sample included 1745 CHD-patients from 131 general practices with a mean age of 67.8 (SD 9.9) years. The overall PACIC score was 2.84 (95%CI: 2.79; 2.89) and the 5A score reflecting structured lifestyle counselling was 2.75 (95% CI: 2.69; 2.79). At the patient level, male gender, more frequent practice contact and fewer related or unrelated conditions were associated with higher PACIC scores. At the practice level, performance scores reflecting quality management (p = 0.013) and CHD care (p = 0.009) were associated with improved assessment of the structured chronic care and counselling received.ConclusionsPatients' perceived quality of care varies. However, good practice management and organisation of care were positively reflected in patients' assessments of receiving structured chronic illness care. This highlights the importance of integrating patient experiences into quality measurements to provide feedback to health care professionals.

Project description:PurposeGiven the public health significance of poorly treatable co-morbid major depressive disorders (MDD) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) and coronary heart disease (CHD), we need to investigate whether strategies to prevent the development of major depression could reduce its burden of disease. We therefore evaluated the effectiveness of a stepped-care program for subthreshold depression in comparison with usual care in patients with DM2 and/or CHD.MethodsA cluster randomized controlled trial, with 27 primary care centers serving as clusters. A total of 236 DM2 and/or CHD patients with subthreshold depression (nine item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) score ≥ 6, no current MDD according to DSM-IV criteria) were allocated to the intervention group (N = 96) or usual care group (n = 140). The stepped-care program was delivered by trained practice nurses during one year and consisted of four sequential treatment steps: watchful waiting, guided self-help, problem solving treatment and referral to the general practitioner. The primary outcome was the 12-month cumulative incidence of MDD as measured with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Secondary outcomes included severity of depression (measured by PHQ-9) at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months.ResultsOf 236 patients (mean age, 67,5 (SD 10) years; 54.7% men), 210 (89%) completed the MINI at 12 months. The cumulative incidence of MDD was 9 of 89 (10.1%) participants in the intervention group and 12 of 121 (9.9%) participants in the usual care group. We found no statistically significant overall effect of the intervention (OR = 1.21; 95% confidence interval (0.12 to 12.41)) and there were no statistically significant differences in the course or severity of depressive symptoms between the two groups.ConclusionsThis study suggest that Step-Dep was not more effective in preventing MDD than usual care in a primary care population with DM2 and/or CHD and subthreshold depression.

Dataset Information

Integrating depression and chronic disease care among patients with diabetes and/or coronary heart disease: the design of the TEAMcare study.

Publications

Integrating depression and chronic disease care among patients with diabetes and/or coronary heart disease: the design of the TEAMcare study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets