Dataset Information

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a guideline-based stepped care model for patients with depression: study protocol of a cluster-randomized controlled trial in routine care.

ABSTRACT: Depression is a widespread and serious disease often accompanied by a high degree of suffering and burden of disease. The lack of integration between different care providers impedes guideline-based treatment. This constitutes substantial challenges for the health care system and also causes considerable direct and indirect costs. To face these challenges, the aim of this project is the implementation and evaluation of a guideline-based stepped care model for depressed patients with six treatment options of varying intensity and setting, including low-intensity treatments using innovative technologies.The study is a randomized controlled intervention trial of a consecutive sample of depressive patients from primary care assessed with a prospective survey at four time-standardized measurement points within one year. A cluster randomization at the level of participating primary care units divides the general practitioners into two groups. In the intervention group patients (n = 660) are treated within the stepped care approach in a multiprofessional network consisting of general practitioners, psychotherapists, psychiatrists and inpatient care facilities, whereas patients in the control condition (n = 200) receive routine care. The main research question concerns the effectiveness of the stepped-care model from baseline to t3 (12 months). Primary outcome is the change in depressive symptoms measured by the PHQ-9; secondary outcomes include response, remission and relapse, functional quality of life (SF-12 and EQ-5D-3 L), other clinical and psychosocial variables, direct and indirect costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Furthermore feasibility and acceptance of the overall model as well as of the separate treatment components are assessed.This stepped care model integrates all primary and secondary health care providers involved in the treatment of depression; it elaborates innovative and evidence-based treatment elements, follows a stratified approach and is implemented in routine care as opposed to standardized conditions. In case of positive results, its sustainable implementation as a collaborative care model may significantly improve the health care situation of depressive patients as well as the interaction and care delivery of different care providers on various levels.This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01731717 (date of registration: 24 June 2013).

SUBMITTER: Watzke B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4243822 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a guideline-based stepped care model for patients with depression: study protocol of a cluster-randomized controlled trial in routine care.

Watzke Birgit B Heddaeus Daniela D Steinmann Maya M König Hans-Helmut HH Wegscheider Karl K Schulz Holger H Härter Martin M

BMC psychiatry 20140820

<h4>Background</h4>Depression is a widespread and serious disease often accompanied by a high degree of suffering and burden of disease. The lack of integration between different care providers impedes guideline-based treatment. This constitutes substantial challenges for the health care system and also causes considerable direct and indirect costs. To face these challenges, the aim of this project is the implementation and evaluation of a guideline-based stepped care model for depressed patient ...[more]

PMID: 25182269

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDepression is associated with major patient burden. Its treatment requires complex and collaborative approaches. A stepped care model based on the German National Clinical Practice Guideline "Unipolar Depression" has been shown to be effective. In this study we assess the cost-effectiveness of this guideline based stepped care model versus treatment as usual in depression.MethodsThis prospective cluster-randomized controlled trial included 737 depressive adult patients. Primary care practices were randomized to an intervention (IG) or a control group (CG). The intervention consisted of a four-level stepped care model. The CG received treatment as usual. A cost-utility analysis from the societal perspective with a time horizon of 12?months was performed. We used quality-adjusted life years (QALY) based on the EQ-5D-3L as effect measure. Resource utilization was assessed by patient questionnaires. Missing values were imputed by 'multiple imputation using chained equations' based on predictive mean matching. We calculated adjusted group differences in costs and effects as well as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. To describe the statistical and decision uncertainty cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were constructed based on net-benefit regressions with bootstrapped standard errors (1000 replications). The complete sample and subgroups based on depression severity were considered.ResultsWe found no statically significant differences in costs and effects between IG and CG. The incremental total societal costs (+€5016; 95%-CI: [-€259;€10,290) and effects (+?0.008 QALY; 95%-CI: [-?0.030; 0.046]) were higher in the IG in comparison to the CG. Significantly higher costs were found in the IG for outpatient physician services and psychiatrist services in comparison to the CG. Significantly higher total costs and productivity losses in the IG in comparison to the CG were found in the group with severe depression. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the IG in comparison to the CG were unfavourable (complete sample: €627.000/QALY gained; mild depression: dominated; moderately severe depression: €645.154/QALY gained; severe depression: €2082,714/QALY gained) and the probability of cost-effectiveness of the intervention was low, except for the group with moderate depression (ICER: dominance; 70% for willingness-to-pay threshold of €50,000/QALY gained).ConclusionsWe found no evidence for cost-effectiveness of the intervention in comparison to treatment as usual.Trial registrationNCT, NCT01731717 . Registered 22 November 2012 - Retrospectively registered.

Project description:BackgroundMalawi is a low-income country in sub-Saharan Africa that has limited resources to address a significant burden of disease-including HIV/AIDS. Additionally, depression is a leading cause of disability in the country but largely remains undiagnosed and untreated. The lack of cost-effective, scalable solutions is a fundamental barrier to expanding depression treatment. Against this backdrop, one major success has been the scale-up of a network of more than 700 HIV clinics, with over half a million patients enrolled in antiretroviral therapy (ART). As a chronic care system with dedicated human resources and infrastructure, this presents a strategic platform for integrating depression care and responds to a robust evidence base outlining the bi-directionality of depression and HIV outcomes.MethodsWe will evaluate a stepped model of depression care that combines group-based Problem Management Plus (group PM+) with antidepressant therapy (ADT) for 420 adults with moderate/severe depression in Neno District, Malawi, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Roll-out will follow a stepped-wedge cluster randomized design in which 14 health facilities are randomized to implement the model in five steps over a 15-month period. Primary outcomes (depression symptoms, functional impairment, and overall health) and secondary outcomes (e.g., HIV: viral load, ART adherence; diabetes: A1C levels, treatment adherence; hypertension: systolic blood pressure, treatment adherence) will be measured every 3 months through 12-month follow-up. We will also evaluate the model's cost-effectiveness, quantified as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) compared to baseline chronic care services in the absence of the intervention model.DiscussionThis study will conduct a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial to compare the effects of an evidence-based depression care model versus usual care on depression symptom remediation as well as physical health outcomes for chronic care conditions. If determined to be cost-effective, this study will provide a model for integrating depression care into HIV clinics in additional districts of Malawi and other low-resource settings with high HIV prevalence.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04777006 . Registered on 1 March, 2021.

Project description:BackgroundAn estimated 8-30 % of people living with HIV (PLWH) have depressive disorders (DD) in sub-Saharan Africa. Of these, the majority are untreated in most of HIV care services. There is evidence from low- and middle- income countries of the effectiveness of both psychological treatments and antidepressant medication for the treatment of DD among PLWH, but no evidence on how these can be integrated into routine HIV care. This protocol describes a cluster-randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the HIV + D model for the integration of a collaborative stepped care intervention for DD into routine HIV care, which we have developed and piloted in Uganda.MethodsForty public health care facilities that provide HIV care in Kalungu, Masaka and Wakiso Districts will be randomly selected to participate in the trial. Each facility will recruit 10-30 eligible PLWH with DD and the total sample size will be 1200. The clusters will be randomised 1:1 to receive Enhanced Usual Care alone (EUC, i.e. HIV clinicians trained in Mental Health Gap Action Programme including guidelines on when and where to refer patients for psychiatric care) or EUC plus HIV + D (psychoeducation, Behavioural Activation, antidepressant medication and referral to a supervising mental health worker, delivered in a collaborative care stepwise approach). Eligibility criteria are PLWH attending the clinic, aged ≥ 18 years who screen positive on a depression screening questionnaire (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-9 ≥ 10). The primary outcome is the mean depressive disorder symptom severity scores (assessed using the PHQ-9) at 3 months' post-randomisation, with secondary mental health, disability, HIV and economic outcomes measured at 3 and 12 months. The cost-effectiveness of EUC with HIV + D will be assessed from both the health system and the societal perspectives by collecting health system, patient and productivity costs and mean DD severity scores at 3 months, additional to health and non-health related quality of life measures (EQ-5D-5 L and OxCAP-MH).DiscussionThe study findings will inform policy makers and practitioners on the cost-effectiveness of a stepped care approach to integrate depression management in routine care for PLWH in low-resource settings.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN86760765. Registered 07 September 2017, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN86760765 .

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:BACKGROUND:Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a heterogeneous autoimmune disease with significant potential morbidity and mortality. Substantial gaps have been documented between the development and dissemination of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) and their implementation in practice. The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a multi-component knowledge transfer intervention to implement a CPG for the management of SLE (CPG-SLE). METHODS:The study is an open, multicentre, controlled trial with random allocation by clusters to intervention or control. Clusters are four public university hospitals of the Canary Islands Health Service where rheumatologists are invited to participate. Patients diagnosed with SLE at least one year prior to recruitment are selected. Rheumatologists in intervention group receive a short educational group programme to both update their knowledge about SLE management according to CPG-SLE recommendations and to acquire knowledge and training on use of the patient-centred approach, a decision support tool embedded in the electronic clinical record and a quarterly feedback report containing information on management of SLE patients. Primary endpoint is change in self-perceived disease activity. Secondary endpoints are adherence of professionals to CPG-SLE recommendations, health-related quality of life, patient perception of their participation in decision making, attitudes of professionals towards shared decision making, knowledge of professionals about SLE and use of healthcare resources. Calculated sample size is 412 patients. Data will be collected from questionnaires and clinical records. Length of follow-up will be 18?months. Multilevel mixed models with repeated time measurements will be used to analyze changes in outcomes over time. Cost-effectiveness, from both social and healthcare services perspectives, will be analyzed by measuring effectiveness in terms of quality-adjusted life years gained. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses are planned. DISCUSSION:Impact of CPGs in clinical practice could be improved by applying proven value interventions to implement them. The results of this ongoing trial are expected to generate important scientifically valid and reproducible information not only on clinical effectiveness but also on cost-effectiveness of a multi-component intervention for implementation of a CPG based on communication technologies for chronic patients in the hospital setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrial.gov NCT03537638 . Registered on 25 May 2018.

Project description:BackgroundMore than half of the unaccompanied young refugees (UYRs) resettled in Europe report elevated levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and comorbid symptoms. Earlier studies have highlighted the effectiveness of the trauma-focused preventive group intervention "Mein Weg" (English "My Way"), and the feasibility of trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT) for UYRs. Both interventions are deemed to be empirically supported treatments (ESTs). However, UYRs seldom receive ESTs or, in fact, any treatment at all. In view of the high need and the limited treatment resources available, a stepped-care approach is indicated but has not been evaluated so far. The purpose of this trial is to compare the stepped-care approach BETTER CARE with usual care enhanced with screening and indication (usual care+).MethodsIn a cluster randomized controlled trial involving N = 540 UYRs living in up to N = 54 child and youth welfare service (CYWS) facilities, BETTER CARE will be compared with usual care+. We will randomize clusters comprising a CYWS facility with at least one eligible psychotherapist. BETTER CARE consists of step (1) screening and indication and either step (2) preventive trauma-focused group intervention "Mein Weg" delivered by trained CYWS staff or step (3) TF-CBT delivered by trained community therapists and supported by trained translators if necessary. Participants will be assessed 6 and 12 months after randomization. The primary outcome is the severity of PTSS after 12 months. Secondary outcomes are depressive and anxiety symptoms, quality of life, and proxy reported PTSS. Furthermore, drug use, health costs, benefits, and long-term effects on integration/acculturation will be assessed.DiscussionThe trial will directly integrate a stepped-care approach into existing structures of the German child welfare and (mental) health system. It could, therefore, serve as a blueprint for how to implement ESTs for UYRs. If successful, screening, prevention, and intervention will be sustainably implemented in CYWS in southern Germany.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00017453 . Registered on 11 December 2019.

Project description:IntroductionIn the Greater Mekong Subregion, community health workers, known as malaria volunteers, have played a key role in reducing malaria in the control phase, providing essential malaria services in areas with limited formal healthcare. However, the motivation and social role of malaria volunteers, and testing rates, have declined with decreasing malaria burden and reorientation of malaria programmes from control to elimination. Provision of additional interventions for common health concerns could help sustain the effectiveness of volunteers and maintain malaria testing rates required for malaria elimination accreditation by the WHO.Methods and analysisThe Community-delivered Integrated Malaria Elimination (CIME) volunteer model, integrating interventions for malaria, dengue, tuberculosis, childhood diarrhoea and malaria Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT)-negative fever, was developed based on global evidence and extensive stakeholder consultations. An open stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial, randomised at the volunteer level, will be conducted over 6 months to evaluate the effectiveness of the CIME model in Myanmar. One hundred and forty Integrated Community Malaria Volunteers (ICMVs, current model of care) providing malaria services in 140 villages will be retrained as CIME volunteers (intervention). These 140 ICMVs/villages will be grouped into 10 blocks of 14 villages, with blocks transitioned from control (ICMV) to intervention states (CIME), fortnightly, in random order, following a 1-week training and transition period. The primary outcome of the trial is blood examination rate determined by the number of malaria RDTs performed weekly. Difference in rates will be estimated across village intervention and control states using a generalised linear mixed modelling analytical approach with maximum likelihood estimation.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by Institutional Review Board, Myanmar Department of Medical Research (Ethics/DMR/2020/111) and Alfred Hospital Ethics Review Committee, Australia (241/20). Findings will be disseminated in peer-review journals, conferences and regional, national and local stakeholder meetings.Trial registration numberNCT04695886.

Project description:World-wide healthcare systems are faced with an epidemic of type 2 diabetes. In the United Kingdom, clinical care is primarily provided by general practitioners (GPs) rather than hospital specialists. Intermediate care clinics for diabetes (ICCD) potentially provide a model for supporting GPs in their care of people with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes and in their management of cardiovascular risk factors. This study aims to (1) compare patients with type 2 diabetes registered with practices that have access to an ICCD service with those that have access only to usual hospital care; (2) assess the cost-effectiveness of the intervention; and (3) explore the views and experiences of patients, health professionals and other stakeholders.This two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial (with integral economic evaluation and qualitative study) is set in general practices in three UK Primary Care Trusts. Practices are randomized to one of two groups with patients referred to either an ICCD (intervention) or to hospital care (control). Intervention group: GP practices in the intervention arm have the opportunity to refer patients to an ICCD - a multidisciplinary team led by a specialist nurse and a diabetologist. Patients are reviewed and managed in the ICCD for a short period with a goal of improving diabetes and cardiovascular risk factor control and are then referred back to practice. orStandard GP care, with referral to secondary care as required, but no access to ICCD. Participants are adults aged 18 years or older who have type 2 diabetes that is difficult for their GPs to control. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants reaching three risk factor targets: HbA1c (?7.0%); blood pressure (<140/80); and cholesterol (<4 mmol/l), at the end of the 18-month intervention period. The main secondary outcomes are the proportion of participants reaching individual risk factor targets and the overall 10-year risks for coronary heart disease(CHD) and stroke assessed by the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) risk engine. Other secondary outcomes include body mass index and waist circumference, use of medication, reported smoking, emotional adjustment, patient satisfaction and views on continuity, costs and health related quality of life. We aimed to randomize 50 practices and recruit 2,555 patients.Forty-nine practices have been randomized, 1,997 patients have been recruited to the trial, and 20 patients have been recruited to the qualitative study. Results will be available late 2012.[ClinicalTrials.gov: Identifier NCT00945204].

Dataset Information

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a guideline-based stepped care model for patients with depression: study protocol of a cluster-randomized controlled trial in routine care.

Publications

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a guideline-based stepped care model for patients with depression: study protocol of a cluster-randomized controlled trial in routine care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets