Dataset Information

Collaborative care for comorbid depression and diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The collaborative care model is recommended for depression in adults with a chronic physical health problem like diabetes. We sought to systematically assess the effect of collaborative care on depression and glycaemia in adults with comorbid depression and diabetes to inform guidelines and practice.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Health Source Nursing, MEDLINE, PsychINFO and reference lists of retrieved articles published before August 2013.

Inclusion criteria

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on collaborative care (ie, coordinated multidisciplinary model of care) for depression that reported the effects on depression and glycaemic outcomes in adults with comorbid clinically relevant depression and diabetes were eligible.

Data extraction and analysis

Data on the mean difference in depression and glycaemic outcomes were extracted and pooled using random effects meta-analysis.

Results

Seven RCTs included for review reported effects on depression outcomes in 1895 participants, and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level in 1556 participants. Collaborative care significantly improved the depression score (standardised mean difference was -0.32 (95% CI -0.53 to -0.11); I(2)=79%) and HbA1c level (weighted mean difference was -0.33% (95% CI -0.66% to -0.00%); I(2)=72.9%) compared with control conditions. Depression remission did not predict better glycaemic control across studies.

Conclusions

Limited evidence from short-to-medium term RCTs predominantly conducted in the USA suggests that collaborative care for depression significantly improves both depression and glycaemia outcomes, independently, in people with comorbid depression and diabetes.

SUBMITTER: Atlantis E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3987739 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Collaborative care for comorbid depression and diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Atlantis Evan E Fahey Paul P Foster Jann J

BMJ open 20140412 4

<h4>Objective</h4>The collaborative care model is recommended for depression in adults with a chronic physical health problem like diabetes. We sought to systematically assess the effect of collaborative care on depression and glycaemia in adults with comorbid depression and diabetes to inform guidelines and practice.<h4>Design</h4>Systematic review and meta-analysis.<h4>Data sources</h4>We searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Health Source Nursing, MEDLINE, PsychINFO and reference ...[more]

PMID: 24727428

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Depression and coronary heart disease (CHD) are frequently comorbid and portend higher morbidity, mortality and poorer quality of life. Prior systematic reviews of depression treatment randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the population with CHD have not assessed the efficacy of collaborative care. This systematic review aims to bring together the contemporary research on the effectiveness of collaborative care interventions for depression in comorbid CHD populations. METHODS/DESIGN: Electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL) will be searched using a sensitive search strategy exploding the topics CHD, depression and RCT. Full text inspection and bibliography searching will be conducted, and authors of included studies will be contacted to identify unpublished studies. Eligibility criteria are: population, depression comorbid with CHD; intervention, RCT of collaborative care defined as a coordinated model of care involving multidisciplinary health care providers, including: (a) primary physician and at least one other health professional (e.g. nurse, psychiatrist, psychologist), (b) a structured patient management plan that delivers either pharmacological or non-pharmacological intervention, (c) scheduled patient follow-up and (d) enhanced inter-professional communication between the multiprofessional team; comparison, either usual care, enhanced usual care, wait-list control group or no further treatment; and outcome, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), standardized measure of depression, anxiety, quality of life, cost-effectiveness. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two reviewers with disagreements resolved through discussion. Meta-analytic methods will be used to synthesize the data collected relating to the outcomes. DISCUSSION: This review will evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in populations primarily with CHD. The results will facilitate integration of evidence-based practice for this precarious population. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014013653.

Project description:Background and aimThe collaborative care (CC) is emerging as an effective method in treating patients with multimorbidity, but evidence whether this model is effective for people with comorbid depression and diabetes is unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether CC could improve depression outcomes and HbA1c in patients with depressive symptoms and diabetes, and assess its effects on Quality of Life (QoL).MethodThe author searched Embase, Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane, PsycINFO and CINAHL to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs published up to October 21, 2020. Studies were required to assess CC in patients with depressive symptoms and diabetes. The primary outcomes were depression treatment response rate and HbA1c and secondary outcome was Quality of Life (QoL). Available individual patient data was collected from all eligible studies. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers and critically appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. This study conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, and the fixed effects and random effects model were used to pool Relative Risks (RRs) and Standard Mean Differences (SMDs).ResultsOur research identified 7906 articles, and finally 12 RCTs were included. Study sample sizes ranged from 58 to 417. The total follow-up period ranged from 12 weeks to 24 months. At follow-up, depression treatment response rate had a significant increase (RR = 1·31, 95% CI 1·23 to 1·39, I2 = 0%) in CC patients compared to controls. There was no statistically significant difference in HbA1c between CC group and the control group (SMD = 0·15, 95% CI -0·35 to 0·65, I2 = 97·6%). Overall QoL at follow-up was greater (SMD = 0·12, 95% CI 0·03 to 0·21, I2 = 54·2%) in CC patients compared to controls but the difference was minor.ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis supported the effectiveness of CC in reducing depression and improving QoL in people with comorbid depression and diabetes.

Project description:ObjectiveTo provide an estimate of the effect of interventions on comorbid depressive disorder (MDD) or subthreshold depression in type 1 and type 2 diabetes.MethodsSystematic review and meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials evaluating the outcome of depression treatments in diabetes and comorbid MDD or subthreshold symptoms published before August 2019 compared to care as usual (CAU), placebo, waiting list (WL), or active comparator treatment as in a comparative effectiveness trial (CET). Primary outcomes were depressive symptom severity and glycemic control. Cohen's d is reported.ResultsForty-three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected, and 32 RCTs comprising 3,543 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Our meta-analysis showed that, compared to CAU, placebo or WL, all interventions showed a significant effect on combined outcome 0,485 (95% CI 0.360; 0.609). All interventions showed a significant effect on depression. Pharmacological treatment, group therapy, psychotherapy, and collaborative care had a significant effect on glycemic control. High baseline depression score was associated with a greater reduction in HbA1 c and depressive outcome. High baseline HbA1 c was associated with a greater reduction in HbA1 c.ConclusionAll treatments are effective for comorbid depression in type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes. Over the last decade, new interventions with large effect sizes have been introduced, such as group-based therapy, online treatment, and exercise. Although all interventions were effective for depression, not all treatments were effective for glycemic control. Effective interventions in comorbid depressive disorder may not be as effective in comorbid subthreshold depression. Baseline depression and HbA1 c scores modify the treatment effect. Based on the findings, we provide guidance for treatment depending on patient profile and desired outcome, and discuss possible avenues for further research.

Dataset Information

Collaborative care for comorbid depression and diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective

Design

Data sources

Inclusion criteria

Data extraction and analysis

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Collaborative care for comorbid depression and diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets