Specific content for collaborative care: a systematic review of collaborative care interventions for patients with multimorbidity involving depression and/or anxiety in primary care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
In primary care (PC) many patients suffer from multimorbidity involving depression and/or anxiety. Collaborative care (CC) has shown promising results for patients with depression, anxiety, and multimorbidity involving depression. However, specific content in CC for patients with multimorbidity involving depression and/or anxiety is unknown.Objective
(i) To examine the effect of CC interventions in patients with multimorbidity involving depression and/or anxiety compared with usual care; (ii) to identify specific content of CC.Methods
We conducted a systematic literature review of randomized controlled trial studies evaluating CC models for adults with multimorbidity involving depression and/or anxiety in PC settings. PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsycInfo were searched in December 2019. We conducted a qualitative synthesis using an existing framework and developed a new framework to map the content for each studied intervention.Results
We identified 1,447 studies. Twelve publications were included. Eleven had medium-to-high quality of CC for patients with multimorbidity involving depression. Specific content of CC in these studies is: A stepped care model, involving medication and psychotherapy delivered by a nurse or psychologist Care Manager (CM) focusing on problem-solving techniques; follow-up including monitoring of symptoms and function, and relapse prevention strategies; scheduled CM supervision.Conclusions
Specific content for CC for patients with multimorbidity involving depression is identified from current research. Research gaps were found regarding CC for patients with multimorbidity and anxiety, depression and anxiety, and depression and/or anxiety and more than 2 diseases.
SUBMITTER: Kappelin C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9295603 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo design a bundled case rate for Collaborative Care for Depression (CCD) that aligns incentives with evidence-based depression care in primary care.Data sourcesA clinical information system used by all care managers in a randomized controlled trial of CCD for older primary care patients.Study designWe conducted an empirical investigation of factors accounting for variation in CCD resource use over time and across patients. CCD resource use at the patient-episode and patient-month levels was measured by number of care manager contacts and direct patient contact time and analyzed with count data (Poisson or negative binomial) models.Principal findingsEpisode-level resource use varies substantially with patient's time in the program. Monthly use declines sharply in the first 6 months regardless of treatment response or remission status, but it remains stable afterwards. An adjusted episode or monthly case rate design better matches payment with variation in resource use compared with a fixed design.ConclusionsOur findings lend support to an episode payment adjusted by number of months receiving CCD and a monthly payment adjusted by the ordinal month. Nonpayment tools including program certification and performance evaluation and reward systems are needed to fully align incentives.
| S-EPMC3168701 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCollaborative care (CC) could improve outcomes in primary care patients with common mental conditions. We assessed the effectiveness of a transdiagnostic model of telephone-based CC (tCC) delivered by lay providers to primary care patients with depression, anxiety, or at-risk drinking.MethodsPARTNERS was a pragmatic trial in 502 primary care adults presenting with depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, or at-risk drinking randomized to (1) usual care by primary care providers (PCPs) enhanced with the results of computer-assisted telephone-based assessments (at baseline and 4, 8, and 12 months later) (enhanced usual care [eUC]) or (2) tCC consisting of eUC plus frequent telephone coaching and psychoeducation provided by mental health technicians who also communicated to the PCP recommendations from a psychiatrist for evidence-based pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, or, when indicated, referrals to mental health services. The primary analysis compared the change on the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) in participants presenting with depression (n = 366) randomized to tCC versus eUC. Secondary analyses compared changes on the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scale (GAD-7) in those presenting with anxiety (n = 298); or change in the number of weekly drinks in those presenting with at-risk drinking (n = 176).ResultsThere were no treatment or time×treatment effects between tCC and eUC on PHQ-9 scores for patients with depression during the 12-month follow-up. However, there was a treatment effect (tCC > eUC) on GAD-7 scores in those with anxiety and a time×treatment interaction effect on the number of weekly drinks (tCC > eUC) in those with at-risk drinking.ConclusionImplementing transdiagnostic tCC for common mental disorders using lay providers appears feasible in Canadian primary care. While tCC was not better than eUC for depression, there were some benefits for those with anxiety or at-risk drinking. Future studies will need to confirm whether tCC differentially benefits patients with depression, anxiety, or at-risk drinking.
| S-EPMC10517649 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this exploratory subanalysis was to compare the effects of two depression quality improvement approaches on clinical outcomes and service utilization for individuals with comorbid depression/anxiety. This study used data from Community Partners in Care (CPIC), a cluster-randomized comparative effectiveness trial (N = 1,018; depression = 360; comorbid depression/anxiety = 658). Each intervention arm received the same quality improvement materials, plus either technical support (Resources for Services, RS) or support for collaborative implementation planning (Community Engagement and Planning, CEP). For the comorbid depression/anxiety subgroup, the collaborative planning arm was superior at improving mental health-related quality of life and mental wellness, as well as decreasing behavioral hospitalizations and homelessness risk at 6 months. The effects were not significant at 12 months. A collaborative planning process versus technical support for depression quality improvement can have short-term effects on mental wellness and social determinants of health among those with comorbid depression/anxiety.
| S-EPMC6422773 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesPrimary care pediatricians (PCP) are often called on to manage child and adolescent anxiety and depression. The objective of this study was to describe PCP care practices around prescription of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) for patients with anxiety and/or depression by using medical record review.MethodsWe identified 1685 patients who had at least 1 visit with a diagnosis of anxiety and/or depression in a large primary care network and were prescribed an SSRI by a network PCP. We randomly selected 110 for chart review. We reviewed the visit when the SSRI was first prescribed (medication visit), immediately previous visit, and immediately subsequent visit. We abstracted rationale for prescribing medication, subspecialist involvement, referral for psychotherapy, and medication monitoring practices.ResultsAt the medication visit, in 82% (n = 90) of cases, PCPs documented reasons for starting an SSRI, most commonly clinical change (57%, n = 63). Thirty percent (n = 33) of patients had documented involvement of developmental-behavioral pediatrics or psychiatry subspecialists at 1 of the 3 visits reviewed. Thirty-three percent (n = 37) were referred to unspecified psychotherapy; 4% (n = 4) were referred specifically for cognitive behavioral therapy. Of 69 patients with a subsequent visit, 48% (n = 33) had documentation of monitoring for side effects.ConclusionsWhen prescribing SSRIs for children with anxiety and/or depression, PCPs in this network documented appropriate indications for starting medication and prescribed without subspecialist involvement. Continuing medical education for PCPs who care for children with these conditions should include information about evidence-based psychotherapy and strategies for monitoring potential side effects.
| S-EPMC10691450 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of standard and patient-centered, culturally tailored collaborative care (CC) interventions for African American patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) over 12 months of follow-up.Data sources/study settingTwenty-seven primary care clinicians and 132 African American patients with MDD in urban community-based practices in Maryland and Delaware.Study designCluster randomized trial with patient-level, intent-to-treat analyses.Data collection/extraction methodsPatients completed screener and baseline, 6-, 12-, and 18-month interviews to assess depression severity, mental health functioning, health service utilization, and patient ratings of care.Principal findingsPatients in both interventions showed statistically significant improvements over 12 months. Compared with standard, patient-centered CC patients had similar reductions in depression symptom levels (-2.41 points; 95 percent confidence interval (CI), -7.7, 2.9), improvement in mental health functioning scores (+3.0 points; 95 percent CI, -2.2, 8.3), and odds of rating their clinician as participatory (OR, 1.48, 95 percent CI, 0.53, 4.17). Treatment rates increased among standard (OR = 1.8, 95 percent CI 1.0, 3.2), but not patient-centered (OR = 1.0, 95 percent CI 0.6, 1.8) CC patients. However, patient-centered CC patients rated their care manager as more helpful at identifying their concerns (OR, 3.00; 95 percent CI, 1.23, 7.30) and helping them adhere to treatment (OR, 2.60; 95 percent CI, 1.11, 6.08).ConclusionsPatient-centered and standard CC approaches to depression care showed similar improvements in clinical outcomes for African Americans with depression; standard CC resulted in higher rates of treatment, and patient-centered CC resulted in better ratings of care.
| S-EPMC3589960 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceUp to 20% of adolescents experience an episode of major depression by age 18 years yet few receive evidence-based treatments for their depression.ObjectiveTo determine whether a collaborative care intervention for adolescents with depression improves depressive outcomes compared with usual care.DesignRandomized trial with blinded outcome assessment conducted between April 2010 and April 2013.SettingNine primary care clinics in the Group Health system in Washington State.ParticipantsAdolescents (aged 13-17 years) who screened positive for depression (Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item [PHQ-9] score ≥10) on 2 occasions or who screened positive and met criteria for major depression, spoke English, and had telephone access were recruited. Exclusions included alcohol/drug misuse, suicidal plan or recent attempt, bipolar disorder, developmental delay, and seeing a psychiatrist.InterventionsTwelve-month collaborative care intervention including an initial in-person engagement session and regular follow-up by master's-level clinicians. Usual care control youth received depression screening results and could access mental health services through Group Health.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was change in depressive symptoms on a modified version of the Child Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R; score range, 14-94) from baseline to 12 months. Secondary outcomes included change in Columbia Impairment Scale score (CIS), depression response (≥50% decrease on the CDRS-R), and remission (PHQ-9 score <5).ResultsIntervention youth (n = 50), compared with those randomized to receive usual care (n = 51), had greater decreases in CDRS-R scores such that by 12 months intervention youth had a mean score of 27.5 (95% CI, 23.8-31.1) compared with 34.6 (95% CI, 30.6-38.6) in control youth (overall intervention effect: F2,747.3 = 7.24, P < .001). Both intervention and control youth experienced improvement on the CIS with no significant differences between groups. At 12 months, intervention youth were more likely than control youth to achieve depression response (67.6% vs 38.6%, OR = 3.3, 95% CI, 1.4-8.2; P = .009) and remission (50.4% vs 20.7%, OR = 3.9, 95% CI, 1.5-10.6; P = .007).Conclusions and relevanceAmong adolescents with depression seen in primary care, a collaborative care intervention resulted in greater improvement in depressive symptoms at 12 months than usual care. These findings suggest that mental health services for adolescents with depression can be integrated into primary care.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01140464.
| S-EPMC4492537 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite the growing prevalence of depression and anxiety among adolescents, fewer than half access appropriate mental health care. Single-session interventions (SSIs) for depression and anxiety offered in primary care are a promising approach to bridging the treatment gap.ObjectiveWe aimed to implement a clinical workflow for primary care and behavioral health providers to refer patients aged 13 to 17 years with mild to moderate depression and anxiety symptoms to Project YES (Youth Empowerment and Support), an open-access SSI platform, in a large group medical practice with an integrated behavioral health department.MethodsPediatric primary care and integrated behavioral health providers will be educated on the benefits of Project YES for adolescent anxiety and depression and trained in a workflow integrated within the electronic health record system, Epic, to refer patients during well-child visits and pediatric behavioral health visits. Patients with mild to moderate internalizing symptoms based on the 17-item Pediatric Symptom Checklist or youth Pediatric Symptom Checklist will be invited to try an SSI through Project YES. We will examine provider uptake and perceptions of acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness over time.ResultsThe rollout will take place between November 2022 and May 2023, when outcomes will be evaluated. Data analysis and manuscript writing are anticipated to be completed during the summer of 2023.ConclusionsSSIs such as those available through Project YES have the potential to provide low-cost, evidence-based mental health treatment to adolescents with mild to moderate depression and anxiety. If deemed feasible and acceptable, providing SSIs in primary care settings could significantly improve access to mental health care without taxing pediatric primary care and behavioral health providers.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/45666.
| S-EPMC10448284 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To test the effectiveness of an integrated collaborative care model for people with depression and long term physical conditions. DESIGN:Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING:36 general practices in the north west of England. PARTICIPANTS:387 patients with a record of diabetes or heart disease, or both, who had depressive symptoms (≥ 10 on patient health questionaire-9 (PHQ-9)) for at least two weeks. Mean age was 58.5 (SD 11.7). Participants reported a mean of 6.2 (SD 3.0) long term conditions other than diabetes or heart disease; 240 (62%) were men; 360 (90%) completed the trial. INTERVENTIONS:Collaborative care included patient preference for behavioural activation, cognitive restructuring, graded exposure, and/or lifestyle advice, management of drug treatment, and prevention of relapse. Up to eight sessions of psychological treatment were delivered by specially trained psychological wellbeing practitioners employed by Improving Access to Psychological Therapy services in the English National Health Service; integration of care was enhanced by two treatment sessions delivered jointly with the practice nurse. Usual care was standard clinical practice provided by general practitioners and practice nurses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was reduction in symptoms of depression on the self reported symptom checklist-13 depression scale (SCL-D13) at four months after baseline assessment. Secondary outcomes included anxiety symptoms (generalised anxiety disorder 7), self management (health education impact questionnaire), disability (Sheehan disability scale), and global quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF). RESULTS:19 general practices were randomised to collaborative care and 20 to usual care; three practices withdrew from the trial before patients were recruited. 191 patients were recruited from practices allocated to collaborative care, and 196 from practices allocated to usual care. After adjustment for baseline depression score, mean depressive scores were 0.23 SCL-D13 points lower (95% confidence interval -0.41 to -0.05) in the collaborative care arm, equal to an adjusted standardised effect size of 0.30. Patients in the intervention arm also reported being better self managers, rated their care as more patient centred, and were more satisfied with their care. There were no significant differences between groups in quality of life, disease specific quality of life, self efficacy, disability, and social support. CONCLUSIONS:Collaborative care that incorporates brief low intensity psychological therapy delivered in partnership with practice nurses in primary care can reduce depression and improve self management of chronic disease in people with mental and physical multimorbidity. The size of the treatment effects were modest and were less than the prespecified effect but were achieved in a trial run in routine settings with a deprived population with high levels of mental and physical multimorbidity. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ISRCTN80309252.
| S-EPMC4353275 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCollaborative care for depression is more effective in improving treatment outcomes than primary care physicians' (PCPs) usual care (UC). However, few trials of collaborative care have targeted anxiety.ObjectiveTo examine the impact and 12-month durability of a centralized, telephone-delivered, stepped collaborative care intervention (CC) for treating anxiety disorders across a network of primary care practices.DesignRandomized controlled trial with blinded outcome assessments.ParticipantsA total of 329 patients aged 18-64 referred by their PCPs in response to an electronic medical record (EMR) prompt. They include 250 highly anxious patients randomized to either CC or to UC, and 79 moderately anxious patients who were triaged to a watchful waiting (WW) cohort and later randomized if their conditions clinically deteriorated.InterventionTwelve months of telephone-delivered CC involving non-mental health professionals who provided patients with basic psycho-education, assessed preferences for guideline-based pharmacotherapy, monitored treatment responses, and informed PCPs of their patients' care preferences and progress via the EMR.Main measuresMental health-related quality of life ([HRQoL]; SF-36 MCS); secondary outcomes: anxiety (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale [SIGH-A], Panic Disorder Severity Scale) and mood (PHQ-9).Key resultsAt 12-month follow-up, highly anxious patients randomized to CC reported improved mental HRQoL (effect size [ES]: 0.38 [95 % CI: 0.13-0.63]; P = 0.003), anxiety (SIGH-A ES: 0.30 [0.05-0.55]; P = 0.02), and mood (ES: 0.45 [0.19-0.71] P = 0.001) versus UC. These improvements were sustained for 12 months among African-Americans (ES: 0.70-1.14) and men (ES: 0.43-0.93). Of the 79 WW patients, 29 % met severity criteria for randomization, and regardless of treatment assignment, WW patients reported fewer anxiety and mood symptoms and better mental HRQoL over the full 24-month follow-up period than highly anxious patients who were randomized at baseline.ConclusionsTelephone-delivered, centralized, stepped CC improves mental HRQoL, anxiety and mood symptoms. These improvements were durable and particularly evident among those most anxious at baseline, and among African-Americans and men.
| S-EPMC5330997 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:This study examined whether psychiatric case review was associated with depression medication modification in a large implementation program of collaborative care for depression in safety-net primary care clinics. METHODS:Registry data were examined from an implementation of the collaborative care model in Washington State. A total of 14,960 adults from 178 primary care clinics who initiated care between January 1, 2008, and September 30, 2014, and who had a baseline Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) score of 10 or higher were included. Rates of psychiatric case reviews and receipt of new depression medications were extracted from the registry for all patients and for a subset of patients who did not improve by eight weeks of treatment (did not achieve a PHQ-9 score of less than 10 or a reduction in PHQ-9 score of 50% or more, compared with baseline). RESULTS:One-half of patients received a new depression medication. Psychiatric case review in any given month was associated with a doubling of the probability of receiving a new medication in the following month. Among patients who did not improve by eight weeks of treatment, a psychiatric case review during weeks 8-12 was associated with a higher rate of receipt of new medications during weeks 8-16 or weeks 8-20. CONCLUSIONS:In a collaborative care program, psychiatric case review was associated with higher rates of subsequent receipt of a new depression medication. This finding supports the importance of psychiatric case review in reducing clinical inertia in collaborative care treatment of depression.
| S-EPMC6063310 | biostudies-literature