Dataset Information

Randomized controlled trial of a health plan-level mood disorders psychosocial intervention for solo or small practices.

ABSTRACT: Mood disorders represent the most expensive mental disorders for employer-based commercial health plans. Collaborative care models are effective in treating chronic physical and mental illnesses at little to no net healthcare cost, but to date have primarily been implemented by larger healthcare organizations in facility-based models. The majority of practices providing commercially insured care are far too small to implement such models. Health plan-level collaborative care treatment can address this unmet need. The goal of this study is to implement at the national commercial health plan level a collaborative care model to improve outcomes for persons with mood disorders.A randomized controlled trial of a collaborative care model versus usual care will be conducted among beneficiaries of a large national health plan from across the country seen by primary care or behavioral health practices. At discharge 344 patients identified by health plan claims as hospitalized for unipolar depression or bipolar disorder will be randomized to receive collaborative care (patient phone-based self-management support, care management, and guideline dissemination to practices delivered by a plan-level care manager) or usual care from their provider. Primary outcomes are changes in mood symptoms and mental health-related quality of life at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include rehospitalization, receipt of guideline-concordant care, and work productivity.This study will determine whether a collaborative care model for mood disorders delivered at the national health plan level improves outcomes compared to usual care, and will inform a business case for collaborative care models for these settings that can reach patients wherever they receive treatment.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02041962; registered January 3, 2014.

SUBMITTER: Kilbourne AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4266981 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomized controlled trial of a health plan-level mood disorders psychosocial intervention for solo or small practices.

Kilbourne Amy M AM Nord Kristina M KM Kyle Julia J Van Poppelen Celeste C Goodrich David E DE Kim Hyungjin Myra HM Eisenberg Daniel D Un Hyong H Bauer Mark S MS

BMC psychology 20141113 1

<h4>Background</h4>Mood disorders represent the most expensive mental disorders for employer-based commercial health plans. Collaborative care models are effective in treating chronic physical and mental illnesses at little to no net healthcare cost, but to date have primarily been implemented by larger healthcare organizations in facility-based models. The majority of practices providing commercially insured care are far too small to implement such models. Health plan-level collaborative care t ...[more]

PMID: 25520807

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundResearch increasingly supports a transdiagnostic conceptualization of emotional disorders (ie applying the same underlying treatment principles across mental disorders, without tailoring the protocol to specific diagnoses), and many international researchers are currently investigating this issue.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and acceptability of a Web-based transdiagnostic program using a sample of Romanian adults diagnosed with anxiety and/or depression.MethodsVolunteer participants registered for the study and completed a series of online self-report measures. Participants who fulfilled basic inclusion criteria on these measures were contacted for a telephone diagnostic interview using the Structural Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition Axis I Disorders (SCID-I). Enrolled participants were randomized to either the active treatment group (N=69) or the wait-list control group (N=36) using a 2:1 ratio. The transdiagnostic treatment was based on the Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders (UP; Barlow et al, 2011) that addresses common underlying mechanisms of anxiety and depression. Participants randomized to the active treatment condition received 10 weeks of Web-based treatment based on the UP. Throughout treatment, graduate students in clinical psychology provided guidance that consisted of asynchronous written communication on a secure Web platform. After the intervention, participants in both study conditions were invited to complete a set of self-report measures and a postintervention SCID-I interview conducted by a different team of graduate students blinded to participants' group and diagnostic status. Six months later, participants in the active treatment group were invited to complete an online follow-up assessment.ResultsDuring the intervention, active treatment participants completed on average 19 homework assignments (SD 12.10), and we collected data from 79.0% (83/105) at postintervention and 51% (35/69) at follow-up for self-report measures. Postintervention SCID-I interviews were collected from 77.1% (81/105) participants. Relative to the wait-list control group, the transdiagnostic intervention yielded overall medium to large effect sizes for the primary outcome measures (within-group Hedges g=0.52-1.34 and between-group g=0.39-0.86), and also for anxiety sensitivity (g=0.80), symptom interference (g=0.48), and quality of life (g=0.38). Significant within-groups effects only were reported for the active treatment group on Panic Disorder Severity Scale-Self Report (PDSS-SR, g=0.58-0.65) and Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS, g=0.52-0.58).ConclusionsInsignificant between-group differences for the Y-BOCS and PDSS-SR could be explained by the small number of participants with the associated primary diagnostic (eg, only 3 participants with obsessive compulsive disorder) by the choice of outcome measure (PDSS-SR was not rated among the evidence-based measures) and by the fact that these disorders may be more difficult to treat. However, the overall results suggest that the transdiagnostic intervention tested in this study represents an effective treatment option that may prove easier to disseminate through the use of Web-based delivery systems.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov CT02739607; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02739607 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6yY1VeYIZ).

Project description:BackgroundWhile effective lay-health worker models for mental health care have been demonstrated through efficacy trials, there is limited evidence of the effectiveness of these models implemented in rural LMIC settings.AimTo evaluate the impact of a volunteer community-led intervention on reduction in depression and anxiety symptoms and improvement in functioning, and social participation among people living in rural Gujarat, India.MethodsStepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial was used to assess the effectiveness of delivery of psychosocial intervention across 645 villages in Mehsana district of Gujarat, India between April 2017 and August 2019. The primary outcome was an improvement in depression and/or anxiety symptoms assessed using GHQ-12 at 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were improvement in (a) depression and anxiety (Patient Health Questionnaire, (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) & Self-Reporting Questionnaire-20 (SRQ-20); b) quality of life (EQ- 5D); c) functioning (WHO-DAS-12), and social participation (Social Participation Scale SPS). Generalized linear mixed-effects models were used to assess the independent effect of the intervention.ResultsOut of a total of 1191 trial participants (608- intervention & 583-control), 1014 (85%) completed 3-month follow-up. In an adjusted analysis, participants in the intervention condition showed significant recovery from symptoms of depression or anxiety (OR 2.2; 95% CI 1.2 to 4.6; p<0.05) at the end of 3-months, with effects sustained at 8-month follow-up (OR 3.0; 95% CI 1.6 to 5.9). Intervention participants had improved scores on the PHQ-9 (Adjusted mean difference (AMD) -1.8; 95%CI -3.0 to -0.6), and SRQ-20 (AMD -1.7; 95%CI -2.7 to -0.6), at 3-months and PHQ-9, GAD-7, SRQ-20, EQ-5D and WHO-DAS at 8 months follow-up.ConclusionFindings suggest that Atmiyata had a significant effect on recovery from symptoms of depression and anxiety with sustained effects at 8-month follow-up.Trial registrationTrial registration details. The trial was registered prospectively with the "Clinical Trial Registry in India" (registry number: CTRI/2017/03/008139).

Project description:Objectives Robust research of complex interventions designed to promote mental well-being in later life is required to inform service development. An essential component is ensuring that such interventions are delivered as intended. We present a detailed description of the design and implementation of a fidelity assessment within a trial of one such intervention (Lifestyle Matters). The findings help to explain the trial results and also inform the design of embedded fidelity assessments within future evaluations of complex interventions. Design We conducted a mixed-method fidelity assessment embedded as part of a multicentre pragmatic randomised controlled trial. A conceptual fidelity framework was developed from the Behaviour Change Consortium framework. From this the fidelity assessment was designed. The resulting instrument assessed the following parameters: intervention design, training, supervision; and delivery, receipt and enactment of the intervention. Intervention The Lifestyle Matters intervention was designed to assist older people to improve and sustain mental well-being through participation in meaningful activity. The aim is to enable participants to engage in both new and neglected activities through a mix of facilitated group meetings and individual sessions. Results The fidelity assessment demonstrated that the intervention was delivered as per protocol for the group component and was tailored to meet individual needs. There was substantial inter-rater agreement for training; and group member performance 0.72; and moderate agreement for facilitator performance 0.55. It was not possible to determine whether small declines seen in facilitator performance were due to facilitator drift or moderating factors such as group dynamics or participant characteristics. Conclusions The assessment methods adequately measured criteria identified as being significant indicators of fidelity. Adherence during training, delivery and supervision was good. The subjective nature of identification and rating observed behaviours was the main challenge. Future research should explore alternative methods of assessing fidelity in trials of complex interventions. Trial registration number ISRCTN67209155.

Project description:BackgroundDepression is the most prevalent mental health problem. The need for effective treatments for depression far outstrips the availability of trained mental health professionals. Smartphones and other widely available technologies are increasingly being leveraged to deliver treatments for depression. Whether there are patient characteristics that affect the potency of smartphone interventions for depression is not well understood.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate whether patient characteristics including clinical diagnosis, depression severity, psychosis status, and current use of antidepressant medications impact the effects of an evidence-based smartphone intervention on depressive symptoms.MethodsData were collected as part of a 2-arm randomized controlled trial comparing a multimodal smartphone intervention called FOCUS with a clinic-based intervention. Here, we report on 82 participants assigned to 12 weeks of FOCUS treatment. We conducted assessments of depressive symptoms using the Beck Depression Inventory-second edition (BDI-II) at baseline, postintervention (3 months), and follow-up (6 months). We tested for differences in the amount of improvement in BDI-II scores from baseline to posttreatment and 6-month follow-up between each of the following patient subgroups using 2 (group) × 2 (time) mixed effects models: diagnosis (ie, schizophrenia spectrum disorder vs bipolar disorder vs major depressive disorder), depression severity (ie, minimal-mild vs moderate-severe depression), psychosis status (ie, presence vs absence of psychotic symptoms), and antidepressant use (ie, taking antidepressants vs not taking antidepressants).ResultsThe majority of participants were male (60%, 49/82), African American (65%, 53/82), and middle-aged (mean age 49 years), with a high school education or lower (62%, 51/82). There were no differences in patient demographics across the variables that were used to stratify the analyses. There was a significant group × time interaction for baseline depression severity (F1,76.8=5.26, P=.02 [posttreatment] and F1,77.4=6.56, P=.01 [6-month follow-up]). Participants with moderate or severe depression had significant improvements (t42=3.20, P=.003 [posttreatment] and t42=4.20, P<.001 [6-month follow-up]), but participants with minimal or mild depression did not (t31=0.20, P=.84 [posttreatment] and t30=0.43, P=.67 [6-month follow-up]). There were no significant group × time interactions for diagnosis, psychosis status, or antidepressant medication use. Participants with minimal or mild depression had negligible nonsignificant improvements (<1 point on the BDI-II). Reduction in depression in all other groups was larger (range 1.7-6.5 points on the BDI-II).ConclusionsOur results suggest that FOCUS can be deployed to treat moderate to severe depressive symptoms among people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, and major depressive disorder, in concert with antidepressant medications or without them, in both people with and without active psychotic symptoms. The study results are consistent with research on transdiagnostic models in psychotherapy and extend our knowledge about the potential of transdiagnostic mobile health.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02421965; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02421965 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76pyDlvAS).

Dataset Information

Randomized controlled trial of a health plan-level mood disorders psychosocial intervention for solo or small practices.

Publications

Randomized controlled trial of a health plan-level mood disorders psychosocial intervention for solo or small practices.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets