Effectiveness and cost effectiveness of counselling in primary care

Variation in general practitioners' follow-up of depressed patients starting antidepressant medication: a register-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend follow-up within 2 weeks for patients starting medication for depression. Knowledge is lacking about how general practitioners' (GPs) follow-up varies with patients' sociodemographic characteristics.

OBJECTIVE

To describe follow-up by GP and specialist in mental healthcare provided to men and women with depression within 3 months of starting drug therapy. Furthermore, to examine whether follow-up varied according to patients' age and education.

METHODS

Registry-based cohort study comprising all patients aged ≥18 years in Norway with a new depression episode in 2014 who started on antidepressants within 12 months from diagnosis. Patients' age and educational level were the exposures. Outcomes were follow-up by GP and/or mental healthcare specialist, and talking therapy with GP, within 90 days of first prescription. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the likelihood of having follow-up contacts. Log binomial regression analysis was performed to explore the likelihood of having talking therapy with a GP. Time to first contact was illustrated by Kaplan-Meier survival curves.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 17 000 patients, mean age 45.7 years, 60.6% women. Only 27.8% of the patients were followed up by GP and/or specialist within 2 weeks of the first drug dispensing, 67.1% within 90 days. Older or less educated men and women received less and later contacts than the younger or more highly educated.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in age and educational level were associated with follow-up of depressed patients who started medication. This may indicate unwarranted variation in depression care that GPs should consider when prescribing antidepressants.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of single-session walk-in counselling. J Ment Health 2017;27:560-566. [PMID: 28675324 DOI: 10.1080/09638237.2017.1340619]

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of family service agencies and community-based mental health service providers are implementing a single-session walk-in counselling (SSWIC) as an alternative to traditional counselling. However, few economic evaluations have been undertaken.

AIMS

To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of two models of service delivery, SSWIC compared to being waitlisted for traditional counselling.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental design was employed. Data were collected from two community-based Family Service Agencies, one using SSWIC and one using traditional counselling. Participants were assessed at baseline and four weeks after the baseline. Cost-effectiveness was estimated from the societal and payer's perspective.

RESULTS

The societal and payer's costs for SSWIC were higher than for those waiting for traditional counselling, and health outcomes were better. SSWIC is not cost-effective compared to being on the waitlist for traditional counselling (or, for a few patients, having received counselling, but after a wait of several weeks).

CONCLUSIONS

SSWIC has the potential to reduce the pressure on the mental health care system by reducing emergency visits and wait lists for ongoing mental health services and eliminating costly-no shows at counselling appointments. Long-term studies involving multiple walk-in counselling services and comparison services are needed to support the findings of this study.

Increasing equity of access to high-quality mental health services in primary care: a mixed-methods study

Background

Evidence-based interventions exist for common mental health problems. However, many people are unable to access effective care because it is not available to them or because interactions with caregivers do not address their needs. Current policy initiatives focus on supply-side factors, with less consideration of demand.

Aim and objectives

Our aim was to increase equity of access to high-quality primary mental health care for underserved groups. Our objectives were to clarify the mental health needs of people from underserved groups; identify relevant evidence-based services and barriers to, and facilitators of, access to such services; develop and evaluate interventions that are acceptable to underserved groups; establish effective dissemination strategies; and begin to integrate effective and acceptable interventions into primary care.

Methods and results

Examination of evidence from seven sources brought forward a better understanding of dimensions of access, including how people from underserved groups formulate (mental) health problems and the factors limiting access to existing psychosocial interventions. This informed a multifaceted model with three elements to improve access: community engagement, primary care quality and tailored psychosocial interventions. Using a quasi-experimental design with a no-intervention comparator for each element, we tested the model in four disadvantaged localities, focusing on older people and minority ethnic populations. Community engagement involved information gathering, community champions and focus groups, and a community working group. There was strong engagement with third-sector organisations and variable engagement with health practitioners and commissioners. Outputs included innovative ways to improve health literacy. With regard to primary care, we offered an interactive training package to 8 of 16 practices, including knowledge transfer, systems review and active linking, and seven agreed to participate. Ethnographic observation identified complexity in the role of receptionists in negotiating access. Engagement was facilitated by prior knowledge, the presence of a practice champion and a sense of coproduction of the training. We developed a culturally sensitive well-being intervention with individual, group and signposting elements and tested its feasibility and acceptability for ethnic minority and older people in an exploratory randomised trial. We recruited 57 patients (57% of target) with high levels of unmet need, mainly through general practitioners (GPs). Although recruitment was problematic, qualitative data suggested that patients found the content and delivery of the intervention acceptable. Quantitative analysis suggested that patients in groups receiving the well-being intervention improved compared with the group receiving usual care. The combined effects of the model included enhanced awareness of the psychosocial intervention among community organisations and increased referral by GPs. Primary care practitioners valued community information gathering and access to the Improving Access to Mental Health in Primary Care (AMP) psychosocial intervention. We consequently initiated educational, policy and service developments, including a dedicated website.

Conclusions

Further research is needed to test the generalisability of our model. Mental health expertise exists in communities but needs to be nurtured. Primary care is one point of access to high-quality mental health care. Psychosocial interventions can be adapted to meet the needs of underserved groups. A multilevel intervention to increase access to high-quality mental health care in primary care can be greater than the sum of its parts.

Study registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN68572159.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

Health psychology in primary care: recent research and future directions

Over the last decade, research about health psychology in primary care has reiterated its contributions to mental and physical health promotion, and its role in addressing gaps in mental health service delivery. Recent meta-analyses have generated mixed results about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of health psychology interventions. There have been few studies of health psychology interventions in real-world treatment settings. Several key challenges exist: determining the degree of penetration of health psychology into primary care settings; clarifying the specific roles of health psychologists in integrated care; resolving reimbursement issues; and adapting to the increased prescription of psychotropic medications. Identifying and exploring these issues can help health psychologists and primary care providers to develop the most effective ways of applying psychological principles in primary care settings. In a changing health care landscape, health psychologists must continue to articulate the theories and techniques of health psychology and integrated care, to put their beliefs into practice, and to measure the outcomes of their work.

Knowledge transfer and improvement of primary and ambulatory care for patients with anxiety

OBJECTIVE

To summarize current evidence on the effectiveness of different knowledge transfer and change interventions for improving primary and ambulatory anxiety care to provide guidance to professionals and policy-makers in mental health care.

METHOD

We searched electronic medical and psychological databases, conducted correspondence with authors, and checked reference lists. Studies examining the effectiveness of knowledge transfer and interventions targeted at improvement of the recognition or management of anxiety in primary and ambulatory health care settings were included. Methodological details and outcomes were independently extracted and checked by 2 reviewers. Where appropriate, data concerning the impact of interventions on symptoms of anxiety were pooled using metaanalytical procedures.

RESULTS

We identified 24 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Seven professional-directed interventions and 17 organizational interventions (including patient-oriented interventions) were identified. The methodological quality of studies was variable. Professional-directed interventions only impact the process and outcome of care when embedded in some sort of organizational intervention. Metaanalysis (n = 8 studies) showed no effect of diverse organizational interventions on patients' anxiety symptoms (effect size, -0.08; 95% confidence interval, -0.31 to 0.15; P = 0.50). Collaborative care interventions proved to be the most effective organizational intervention strategies. Six studies reported economic results: 4 studies showed that intervention had a high probability of being cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaborative care seems to be very promising for improving primary and ambulatory care for anxiety. At the level of management and policy, the results of this review mandate the need to offer fair and reasonable reimbursement for collaborative care programs.

Psychosocial interventions by general practitioners

BACKGROUND

Many patients visit their general practitioner (GP) because of problems that are psychosocial in origin. However, for many of these problems there is no evidence-based treatment available in primary care, and these patients place time-consuming demands on their GP. Therefore, GPs could benefit from tools to help these patients more effectively and efficiently. In this light, it is important to assess whether structured psychosocial interventions might be an appropriate tool for GPs. Previous reviews have shown that psychosocial interventions in primary care seem more effective than usual care. However, these interventions were mostly performed by health professionals other than the GP.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions by general practitioners by assessing the clinical outcomes and the methodological quality of selected studies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The search was conducted using the CCDANCTR-Studies and CCDANCTR-References on 20/10/2005, The Cochrane Library, reference lists of relevant studies for citation tracking and personal communication with experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and controlled patient preference trials addressing the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions by GPs for any problem or disorder. Studies published before November 2005 were eligible for entry.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Methodological quality was independently assessed by two review authors using the Maastricht-Amsterdam Criteria List. The qualitative and quantitative characteristics of selected trials were independently extracted by two review authors using a standardised data extraction form. Levels of evidence were used to determine the strength of the evidence available. Results from studies that reported similar interventions and outcome measures were meta-analysed.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies were included in the review. Selected studies addressed different psychosocial interventions for five distinct disorders or health complaints. There is good evidence that problem-solving treatment by general practitioners is effective for major depression. The evidence concerning the remaining interventions for other health complaints (reattribution or cognitive behavioural group therapy for somatisation, cognitive behavioural therapy for unexplained fatigue, counselling for smoking cessation, behavioural interventions to reduce alcohol reduction) is either limited or conflicting.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In general, there is little available evidence on the use of psychosocial interventions by general practitioners. Of the psychosocial interventions reviewed, problem-solving treatment for depression may offer promise, although a stronger evidence-base is required and the effectiveness in routine practice remains to be demonstrated. More research is required to improve the evidence-base on this subject.

A Comparison of Narrative Exposure Therapy, Supportive Counseling, and Psychoeducation for Treating Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in an African Refugee Settlement

Little is known about the usefulness of psychotherapeutic approaches for traumatized refugees who continue to live in dangerous conditions. Narrative exposure therapy (NET) is a short-term approach based on cognitive-behavioral therapy and testimony therapy. The efficacy of narrative exposure therapy was evaluated in a randomized controlled trial. Sudanese refugees living in a Ugandan refugee settlement (N = 43) who were diagnosed as suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) either received 4 sessions of NET, 4 sessions of supportive counseling (SC), or psychoeducation (PE) completed in 1 session. One year after treatment, only 29% of the NET participants but 79% of the SC group and 80% of the PE group still fulfilled PTSD criteria. These results indicate that NET is a promising approach for the treatment of PTSD for refugees living in unsafe conditions.

The effectiveness of psychosocial interventions delivered by general practitioners

BACKGROUND

Many patients visit their general practitioner (GP) because of problems that are psychosocial in origin. However, for many of these problems there is no evidence-based treatment available in primary care, and these patients place time-consuming demands on their GP. Therefore, GPs could benefit from tools to help these patients more effectively and efficiently. In this light, it is important to assess whether structured psychosocial interventions might be an appropriate tool for GPs. Previous reviews have shown that psychosocial interventions in primary care seem more effective that usual care. However, these interventions were mostly performed by health professionals other than the GP.

OBJECTIVES

To present a systematic review of the literature addressing the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions by general practitioners by assessing the clinical outcomes and the methodological quality of selected studies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The literature search was conducted using the CCDAN Trials Register, the Cochrane Library and reference lists of relevant studies for citation tracking. Also, personal communication with experts took place.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and controlled patient preference trials addressing the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions by GPs for any problem or disorder. Studies published before January 2002 were eligible for entry.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Methodological quality was independently be assessed by two reviewers using the Maastricht-Amsterdam Criteria List and the CCDAN Quality Rating Scale. The qualitative and quantitative characteristics of selected trials were independently extracted by two reviewers using a standardised data extraction form. Levels of evidence were used to determine the strength of the evidence available. Results from studies that reported similar interventions and outcome measures were meta-analysed.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight studies were included in the review. Selected studies addressed different psychosocial interventions for four distinct disorders or health complaints. There is good evidence that problem-solving treatment by general practitioners is effective for major depression. The evidence concerning the remaining interventions for other health complaints (reattribution or cognitive behavioural group therapy for somatisation, counselling for smoking cessation, behavioural interventions to reduce alcohol reduction) is either limited or conflicting.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

In general, there is little available evidence on the use of psychosocial interventions by general practitioners. Of the psychosocial interventions reviewed, problem-solving treatment for depression seems the most promising tool for GPs, although a stronger evidence-base is required and the effectiveness in routine practice remains to be demonstrated. More research is required to improve the evidence-base on this subject.