What is the role of consultation-liaison psychiatry in the management of depression in primary care? A systematic review and meta-analysis

The effects of collaborative care versus consultation liaison for anxiety disorders and depression in Denmark: two randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Collaborative care (CC) and consultation liaison (CL) are two conceptual models aiming to improve mental healthcare in primary care. The effects of these models have not been compared in a Danish setting.

AIMS

To examine the effects of CC versus CL for persons with anxiety and depression in Danish general practices (trial registration: NCT03113175 and NCT03113201).

METHOD

Two randomised parallel superiority trials for anxiety disorders and depression were carried out in 2018-2019. In the CC-group, care managers collaborated with general practitioners (GPs) to provide evidence-based treatment according to structured treatment plans. They followed up and provided psychoeducation and/or cognitive-behavioural therapy. The GPs initiated pharmacological treatment if indicated, and a psychiatrist provided supervision. In the CL-group, the intervention consisted of the GP's usual treatment. However, the psychiatrist and care manager could be consulted. Primary outcomes were depression symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory-II, BDI-II) in the depression trial and anxiety symptoms (Beck Anxiety Inventory, BAI) in the anxiety trial at 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

In total, 302 participants with anxiety disorders and 389 participants with depression were included. A significant difference in BDI-II score was found in the depression trial, with larger symptom reductions in the CC-group (CC: 12.7, 95% CI 11.4-14.0; CL: 17.5, 95% CI 16.2-18.9; Cohen's d = -0.50, P ≤ 0.001). There was a significant difference in BAI in the anxiety trial (CC: 14.9, 95% CI 13.5-16.3; CL: 17.9, 95% CI 16.5-19.3; Cohen's d = -0.34, P ≤ 0.001), with larger symptom reductions in the CC-group.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaborative care was an effective model to improve outcomes for persons with depression and anxiety disorders.

Use of prescribed psychotropic drugs among medical students and associated factors: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The worldwide prevalences of anxiety and depressive disorders are 3.6% and 4.4%, respectively. Among medical students, many studies have indicated that the prevalences of these mental disorders vary between 19.7% and 47.1%, but there is a lack of information on psychotropic drug usage in this group of students.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prevalence of psychotropic drug use, adherence to therapy and main clinical and diagnostic indications relating to psychotropic drug use among medical students.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cross-sectional study at a Brazilian private university in the city of Sorocaba, state of São Paulo.

METHODS

Observational analytical cross-sectional study, conducted during the second semester of 2019, through a semi-structured online questionnaire, answered by first to sixth-year medical students.

RESULTS

Among the 263 participants (41.7% of the 630 enrolled students), the current prevalence of psychotropic drug usage was 30.4%. This prevalence increased over the course and 90.7% of the drugs were prescribed at regular medical consultations (85.5% by psychiatrists). The main indications for psychotropic drug usage were anxiety (30.0%), depression (22.8%), insomnia (7.2%), panic (5.3%) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (3.8%). Women were more likely to present diagnoses of depression and panic. Most of the participants used antidepressants and had good adherence to medications. Adequate sleep and regular physical activity were identified as protective factors against mental disorders.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of mental disorders among medical students is high, which justifies the use of psychotropic drugs. This study provides valuable information and recommendations for institutional educational actions to improve students' mental health.

Deployment of the consultation-liaison model in adult and child-adolescent psychiatry and its impact on improving mental health treatment

Background

Little information exists on the perceptions of psychiatrists regarding the implementation and various impacts of the consultation-liaison model. This model has been used in Quebec (Canada) through the function of specialist respondent-psychiatrists (SRP) since 2009. This study assessed the main activities, barriers or facilitators, and impact of SRP in adult and child-adolescent psychiatry on the capacity of service providers in primary care and youth centers to treat patients with mental health disorders (MHD).

Methods

Data included 126 self-administered questionnaires from SRP and semi-structured interviews from 48 SRP managers. Mixed methods were used, with qualitative findings from managers complementing the SRP survey. Comparative analyses of SRP responses in adult versus child-adolescent psychiatry were also conducted.

Results

Psychiatrists dedicated a median 24.12 h/month to the SRP function, mainly involving case discussions with primary care teams or youth centers. They were confident about the level of support they provided and satisfied with their influence in clinical decision-making, but less satisfied with the support provided by their organizations. SRP evaluated their impacts on clinical practice as moderate, particularly among general practitioners (GP). SRP working in child-adolescent psychiatry were more comfortable, motivated, and positive about their overall performance and impact than in adult psychiatry. Organizational barriers (e.g. team instability) were most prevalent, followed by system-level factors (e.g. network size and complexity, lack of resources, model inflexibility) and individual factors (e.g. GP reluctance to treat patients with MHD). Organizational facilitators included support from family medicine group directors, collaboration with university family medicine groups and coordination by liaison nurses; at the system level, pre-existing relationships and working in the same institution; while individual-level facilitators included SRP personality and strong organizational support.

Conclusion

Quebec SRP were implemented sparingly in family medicine groups and youth centers, while SRP viewed their overall impact as moderate. Results were more positive in child-adolescent psychiatry than in adult psychiatry. Increased support for the SRP function, adapting the model to GP in need of more direct support, and resolving key system issues may improve SRP effectiveness in terms of team stability, coordination among providers, access to MH services and readiness to implement innovations.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01437-5.

Psychiatric and Psychosomatic Consultation-Liaison Services in General Hospitals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Effects on Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety

BACKGROUND

Psychiatric and psychosomatic consultation-liaison services (CL) are important providers of diagnosis and treatment for hospital patients with mental comorbidities and psychological burdens.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the effects of CL on depression and anxiety.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search was conducted until 2017. Included were published randomized controlled trials using CL interventions with adults in general hospitals, treatment as usual as control groups, and depression and/or anxiety as outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Level of integration was assessed using the Standard Framework for Levels of Integrated Healthcare. Meta-analyses were performed using random effects models and meta-regression for moderator effects.

RESULTS

We included 38 studies (9,994 patients). Risk of bias was high in 17, unclear in 15, and low in 6 studies. Studies were grouped by type of intervention: brief interventions tailored to the patients (8), interventions based on specific treatment manuals (19), and integrated, collaborative care (11). Studies showed small to medium effects on depression and anxiety. Meta-analyses for depression yielded a small effect (d = -0.19, 95% CI: -0.30 to -0.09) in manual studies and a small effect (d = -0.33, 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.13) in integrated, collaborative care studies, the latter using mostly active control groups with the possibility of traditional consultation.

CONCLUSIONS

CL can provide a helpful first treatment for symptoms of depression and anxiety. Given that especially depressive symptoms in medically ill patients are long-lasting, the results underline the benefit of integrative approaches that respect the complexity of the illness.

Collaborative care vs consultation liaison for depression and anxiety disorders in general practice: study protocol for two randomized controlled trials (the Danish Collabri Flex trials)

Background

Models of collaborative care and consultation liaison propose organizational changes to improve the quality of care for people with common mental disorders, such as anxiety and depression. Some literature suggests only short-term positive effects of consultation liaison on patient-related outcomes, whereas collaborative care demonstrates both short-term and long-term positive effects. To our knowledge, only one randomized trial has compared the effects of these models. Collaborative care was superior to consultation liaison in reducing symptoms of depression for up to 3 months, but the authors found no difference at 9-months' follow-up. The Collabri Flex Trial for Depression and the Collabri Flex Trial for Anxiety aim to compare the effects of collaborative care with those of a form of consultation liaison that contains potential contaminating elements from collaborative care. The trials build on knowledge from the previous cluster-randomized Collabri trials.

Methods

Two randomized, investigator-initiated, parallel-group, superiority trials have been established: one investigating the effects of collaborative care vs consultation liaison for depression and one investigating the effects of collaborative care vs consultation liaison for generalized anxiety, panic disorder and social anxiety disorder at 6-months' follow-up. Participants are recruited from general practices in the Capital Region of Denmark: 240 in the depression trial and 284 in the anxiety trial. The primary outcome is self-reported depression symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II)) in the depression trial and self-reported anxiety symptoms (Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI)) in the anxiety trial. In both trials, the self-reported secondary outcomes are general psychological problems and symptoms (Symptom Checklist 90-Revised), functional impairment (Sheehan Disability Scale) and general well-being (World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index). In the depression trial, BAI is an additional secondary outcome, and BDI-II is an additional secondary outcome in the anxiety trial. Explorative outcomes will also be collected.

Discussion

The results will supplement those of the cluster-randomized Collabri trials and provide pivotal information about the effects of collaborative care in Denmark.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03113175 and NCT03113201. Registered on 13 April 2017.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3657-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Telepsychiatry and other technologies for integrated care: evidence base, best practice models and competencies

Telehealth facilitates integrated, patient-centred care. Synchronous video, telepsychiatry (TP), or telebehavioural health provide outcomes as good as in-person care. It also improves access to care, leverages expertise at a distance, and is effective for education and consultation to primary care. Other technologies on an e-behavioural health spectrum are also useful, like telephone, e-mail, text, and e-consults. This paper briefly organizes these technologies into low, mid and high intensity telehealth models and reviews the evidence base for interventions to primary care, and, specifically, for TP and integrated care (IC). Technology, mobile health, and IC competencies facilitate quality care. TP is a high intensity model and it is the best-studied option. Studies of IC are preliminary, but those with collaborative and consultative care show effectiveness. Low- and mid-intensity technology options like telephone, e-mail, text, and e-consults, may provide better access for patients and more timely provider communication and education. They are also probably more cost-effective and versatile for health system workflow. Research is needed upon all technology models related to IC for adult and paediatric primary care populations. Effective healthcare delivery matches the patients' needs with the model, emphasizes clinician competencies, standardizes interventions, and evaluates outcomes.

Better care through an optimized mental health services continuum (Eastern Townships, Québec, Canada): A systematic and multisource literature review

INTRODUCTION

In 2014, the health authorities of the Eastern Townships (Québec, Canada) commissioned an evaluation of the mental health admission system for adults (GASMA) to identify the best GASMA organizational or structural elements and optimize the mental health services continuum.

METHODS

To develop better services, seven indicators (ie, accessibility to services, integration of levels of services, user satisfaction, guidance and management time, evaluation tools, professional composition, and interprofessional collaboration) were examined through four evaluation questions. A three-step systematic and multisource evaluation was realized. A systematic review of the scientific and gray literature was performed. This evaluation also included key informant opinions to contextualize results from this review.

RESULTS

Results from 91 scientific articles, 40 gray literature documents, and 10 interviews highlighted determinants and barriers associated with the examined indicators. From these results, 24 preliminary recommendations were formulated and discussed in a steering committee. These recommendations were then weighted and validated. This served to formulate three final recommendations.

CONCLUSION

To optimize the regional mental health services continuum, stakeholders should (1) implement a single-window access for adults with mental health needs, (2) develop alternative services based on users' needs, and (3) test the effectiveness of new methods, initiatives, and tools.

A review of the benefits and limitations of a primary care-embedded psychiatric consultation service in a medically underserved setting

A significant percentage of patients with psychiatric disorders are exclusively seen for health-care services by primary care physicians. To address the mental health needs of such patients, collaborative models of care were developed including the embedded psychiatry consult model which places a consultant psychiatrist on-site to assist the primary care physician to recognize psychiatric disorders, prescribe psychiatric medication, and develop management strategies. Outcome studies have produced ambiguous and inconsistent findings regarding the impact of this model. This review examines a primary care-embedded psychiatric consultation service in place for nine years in a family medicine residency program. Psychiatric consultants, family physicians, and residents actively involved in the service participated in structured interviews designed to identify the clinical and educational value of the service. The benefits and limitations identified were then categorized into physician, consultant, patient, and systems factors. Among the challenges identified were inconsistent patient appointment-keeping, ambiguity about appropriate referrals, consultant scope-of-practice parameters, and delayed follow-up with consultation recommendations. Improved psychiatric education for primary care physicians also appeared to shift referrals toward more complex patients. The benefits identified included the availability of psychiatric services to underserved and disenfranchised patients, increased primary care physician comfort with medication management, and improved interprofessional communication and education. The integration of the service into the clinic fostered the development of a more psychologically minded practice. While highly valued by respondents, potential benefits of the service were limited by residency-specific factors including consultant availability and the high ratio of primary care physicians to consultants.

Comparing Perceived Adequacy of Help Received Among Different Classes of Individuals with Severe Mental Disorders at Five-Year Follow-Up: A Longitudinal Cluster Analysis

This study developed a typology describing change in the perceived adequacy of help received among 204 individuals with severe mental disorders, 5 years after transfer to the community following a major mental health reform in Quebec (Canada). Participant typologies were constructed using a two-step cluster analysis. There were significant differences between T0 and T2 for perceived adequacy of help received and other independent variables, including seriousness of needs, help from services or relatives, and care continuity. Five classes emerged from the analysis. Perceived adequacy of help received at T2 increased for Class 1, mainly comprised of older women with mood disorders. Overall, greater care continuity and levels of help from services and relatives related to higher perceived AHR. Changes in perceived adequacy of help received resulting from several combinations of associated variables indicate that MH service delivery should respond to specific profiles and determinants.

An Update on Telepsychiatry and How It Can Leverage Collaborative, Stepped, and Integrated Services to Primary Care

INTRODUCTION

In this era of patient-centered care, telepsychiatry (TP; video or synchronous) provides quality care with outcomes as good as in-person care, facilitates access to care, and leverages a wide range of treatments at a distance.

METHOD

This conceptual review article explores TP as applied to newer models of care (e.g., collaborative, stepped, and integrated care).

RESULTS

The field of psychosomatic medicine (PSM) has developed clinical care models, educates interdisciplinary team members, and provides leadership to clinical teams. PSM is uniquely positioned to steer TP and implement other telebehavioral health care options (e.g., e-mail/telephone, psych/mental health apps) in the future in primary care. Together, PSM and TP provide versatility to health systems by enabling more patient points-of-entry, matching patient needs with provider skills, and helping providers work at the top of their licenses. TP and other technologies make collaborative, stepped, and integrated care less costly and more accessible.

CONCLUSION

Effective health care delivery matches the intensity of the services to the needs of a patient population or clinic, standardizes interventions, and evaluates both process and clinical outcomes. More research is indicated on the application of TP and other technologies to these service delivery models.

Closing the False Divide: Sustainable Approaches to Integrating Mental Health Services into Primary Care

Mental disorders account for 25% of all health-related disability worldwide. More patients receive treatment for mental disorders in the primary care sector than in the mental health specialty setting. However, brief visits, inadequate reimbursement, deficits in primary care provider (PCP) training, and competing demands often limit the capacity of the PCP to produce optimal outcomes in patients with common mental disorders. More than 80 randomized trials have shown the benefits of collaborative care (CC) models for improving outcomes of patients with depression and anxiety. Six key components of CC include a population-based approach, measurement-based care, treatment to target strategy, care management, supervision by a mental health professional (MHP), and brief psychological therapies. Multiple trials have also shown that CC for depression is equally or more cost-effective than many of the current treatments for medical disorders. Factors that may facilitate the implementation of CC include a more favorable alignment of medical and mental health services in accountable care organizations and patient-centered medical homes; greater use of telecare as well as automated outcome monitoring; identification of patients who might benefit most from CC; and systematic training of both PCPs and MHPs in integrated team-based care.

Potential for substitution of mental health care towards family practices: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Substitution is the shift of care from specialized health care to less expensive and more accessible primary health care. It seems promising for restraining rising mental health care costs. The goal of this study was to investigate a potential for substitution of patients with psychological or social problems, but without severe psychiatric disorders, from Dutch specialized mental health care to primary care, especially family practices.

METHODS

We extracted anonymized data from two national databases representing primary and specialized care in 2012. We calculated the number of patients with and without psychiatric disorder per 1,000 citizens in three major settings: family practices, primary care psychologists, and specialized care. Family physicians recorded psychopathology using the International Classification of Primary Care, while psychologists and specialists used the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition.

RESULTS

Considerable numbers of patients without a diagnosed DSM-IV psychiatric disorder were treated by primary care psychologists (32.8%) or in specialized care (20.8%). Over half of the patients referred by family physicians to mental health care did not have a psychiatric disorder.

CONCLUSION

A recent reform of Dutch mental health care, including new referral criteria, will likely increase the number of patients with psychological or social problems that family physicians have to treat or support. Enabling and improving diagnostic assessment and treatment in family practices seems essential for substitution of mental health care.

Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of outpatient services: a scoping review of interventions at the primary-secondary care interface

Objectives Variation in patterns of referral from primary care can lead to inappropriate overuse or underuse of specialist resources. Our aim was to review the literature on strategies involving primary care that are designed to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of outpatient services. Methods A scoping review to update a review published in 2006. We conducted a systematic literature search and qualitative evidence synthesis of studies across five intervention domains: transfer of services from hospital to primary care; relocation of hospital services to primary care; joint working between primary care practitioners and specialists; interventions to change the referral behaviour of primary care practitioners and interventions to change patient behaviour. Results The 183 studies published since 2005, taken with the findings of the previous review, suggest that transfer of services from secondary to primary care and strategies aimed at changing referral behaviour of primary care clinicians can be effective in reducing outpatient referrals and in increasing the appropriateness of referrals. Availability of specialist advice to primary care practitioners by email or phone and use of store-and-forward telemedicine also show potential for reducing outpatient referrals and hence reducing costs. There was little evidence of a beneficial effect of relocation of specialists to primary care, or joint primary/secondary care management of patients on outpatient referrals. Across all intervention categories there was little evidence available on cost-effectiveness. Conclusions There are a number of promising interventions which may improve the effectiveness and efficiency of outpatient services, including making it easier for primary care clinicians and specialists to discuss patients by email or phone. There remain substantial gaps in the evidence, particularly on cost-effectiveness, and new interventions should continue to be evaluated as they are implemented more widely. A move for specialists to work in the community is unlikely to be cost-effective without enhancing primary care clinicians' skills through education or joint consultations with complex patients.

Telepsychiatry integration of mental health services into rural primary care settings

From a population health perspective, the mental health care system in the USA faces two fundamental challenges: (1) a lack of capacity and (2) an inequitable geographic distribution of services. Telepsychiatry can help address the equity problem, and if applied thoughtfully, can also help address the capacity problem. In this paper we describe how telepsychiatry can be used to address the capacity and equity challenges related to the delivery of mental health services in rural areas. Five models of telepsychiatry are described, including (1) the traditional telepsychiatry referral model, (2) The telepsychiatry collaborative care model, (3) the telepsychiatry behavioural health consultant model, (4) the telepsychiatry consultation-liaison model, and (5) the telepsychiatry curbside consultation model. The strong empirical evidence for the telepsychiatry collaborative care model is presented along with two case studies of telepsychiatry consultation in the context of the telepsychiatry collaborative care model. By placing telepsychiatrists and tele-therapists in consultation roles, telepsychiatry collaborative care has the potential to leverage scarce specialist mental health resources to reach more patients, thereby allowing these providers to have a greater population level impact compared to traditional referral models of care. Comparative effectiveness trials are needed to identify which models of telepsychiatry are the most appropriate for patients with complex psychiatric disorders.

Outpatient services and primary care: scoping review, substudies and international comparisons

Aim

This study updates a previous scoping review published by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) in 2006 (Roland M, McDonald R, Sibbald B.Outpatient Services and Primary Care: A Scoping Review of Research Into Strategies For Improving Outpatient Effectiveness and Efficiency. Southampton: NIHR Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre; 2006) and focuses on strategies to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of outpatient services.

Findings from the scoping review

Evidence from the scoping review suggests that, with appropriate safeguards, training and support, substantial parts of care given in outpatient clinics can be transferred to primary care. This includes additional evidence since our 2006 review which supports general practitioner (GP) follow-up as an alternative to outpatient follow-up appointments, primary medical care of chronic conditions and minor surgery in primary care. Relocating specialists to primary care settings is popular with patients, and increased joint working between specialists and GPs, as suggested in the NHS Five Year Forward View, can be of substantial educational value. However, for these approaches there is very limited information on cost-effectiveness; we do not know whether they increase or reduce overall demand and whether the new models cost more or less than traditional approaches. One promising development is the increasing use of e-mail between GPs and specialists, with some studies suggesting that better communication (including the transmission of results and images) could substantially reduce the need for some referrals.

Findings from the substudies

Because of the limited literature on some areas, we conducted a number of substudies in England. The first was of referral management centres, which have been established to triage and, potentially, divert referrals away from hospitals. These centres encounter practical and administrative challenges and have difficulty getting buy-in from local clinicians. Their effectiveness is uncertain, as is the effect of schemes which provide systematic review of referrals within GP practices. However, the latter appear to have more positive educational value, as shown in our second substudy. We also studied consultants who held contracts with community-based organisations rather than with hospital trusts. Although these posts offer opportunities in terms of breaking down artificial and unhelpful primary–secondary care barriers, they may be constrained by their idiosyncratic nature, a lack of clarity around roles, challenges to professional identity and a lack of opportunities for professional development. Finally, we examined the work done by other countries to reform activity at the primary–secondary care interface. Common approaches included the use of financial mechanisms and incentives, the transfer of work to primary care, the relocation of specialists and the use of guidelines and protocols. With the possible exception of financial incentives, the lack of robust evidence on the effect of these approaches and the contexts in which they were introduced limits the lessons that can be drawn for the English NHS.

Conclusions

For many conditions, high-quality care in the community can be provided and is popular with patients. There is little conclusive evidence on the cost-effectiveness of the provision of more care in the community. In developing new models of care for the NHS, it should not be assumed that community-based care will be cheaper than conventional hospital-based care. Possible reasons care in the community may be more expensive include supply-induced demand and addressing unmet need through new forms of care and through loss of efficiency gained from concentrating services in hospitals. Evidence from this study suggests that further shifts of care into the community can be justified only if (a) high value is given to patient convenience in relation to NHS costs or (b) community care can be provided in a way that reduces overall health-care costs. However, reconfigurations of services are often introduced without adequate evaluation and it is important that new NHS initiatives should collect data to show whether or not they have added value, and improved quality and patient and staff experience.

Funding

The NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Consultation liaison in primary care for people with mental disorders

BACKGROUND

Approximately 25% of people will be affected by a mental disorder at some stage in their life. Despite the prevalence and negative impacts of mental disorders, many people are not diagnosed or do not receive adequate treatment. Therefore primary health care has been identified as essential to improving the delivery of mental health care. Consultation liaison is a model of mental health care where the primary care provider maintains the central role in the delivery of mental health care with a mental health specialist providing consultative support. Consultation liaison has the potential to enhance the delivery of mental health care in the primary care setting and in turn improve outcomes for people with a mental disorder.

OBJECTIVES

To identify whether consultation liaison can have beneficial effects for people with a mental disorder by improving the ability of primary care providers to provide mental health care.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the EPOC Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and bibliographic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO, in March 2014. We also searched reference lists of relevant studies and reviews to identify any potentially relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared consultation liaison to standard care or other service models of mental health care in the primary setting. Included participants were people attending primary care practices who required mental health care or had a mental disorder, and primary care providers who had direct contact with people in need of mental health care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified studies against the inclusion criteria and extracted details including the study design, participants and setting, intervention, outcomes and any risk of bias. We resolved any disagreements by discussion or referral to a third author. We contacted trial authors to obtain any missing information.We collected and analysed data for all follow-up periods: up to and including three months following the start of treatment; between three and 12 months; and more than 12 months following the start of therapy.We used a random-effects model to calculate the risk difference (RD) for binary data and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB), if differences between groups were significant. The mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) was calculated for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

There were 8203 citations identified from database searches and reference lists. We included 12 trials with 2605 consumer participants and more than 905 primary care practitioner participants. Eleven trials compared consultation liaison to standard care and one compared consultation liaison to collaborative care, with a case manager co-ordinating mental health care. People with depression were included in eight trials; and one trial each included people with a variety of disorders: depression, anxiety and somatoform disorders; medically unexplained symptoms; and drinking problems. None of the included trials reported separate data for children or older people.There was some evidence that consultation liaison improved mental health up to three months following the start of treatment (two trials, n = 445, NNTB 8, 95% CI 5 to 25) but there was no evidence of its effectiveness between three and 12 months. Consultation liaison also appeared to improve consumer satisfaction (up to three months: one trial, n = 228, NNTB 3, 95% CI 3 to 5; 3 to 12 months: two trials, n = 445, NNTB 8, 95% CI 5 to 17) and adherence (3 to 12 months: seven trials, n = 1251, NNTB 6, 95% CI 4 to 13) up to 12 months. There was also an improvement in the primary care provider outcomes of providing adequate treatment between three to 12 months (three trials, n = 797, NNTB 7, 95% CI 4 to 17) and prescribing pharmacological treatment up to 12 months (four trials, n = 796, NNTB 13, 95% CI 7 to 50). There was also some evidence that consultation liaison may not be as effective as collaborative care in regards to symptoms of mental disorder, disability, general health status, and provision of treatment.The quality of these findings were low for all outcomes however, apart from consumer adherence from three to 12 months, which was of moderate quality. Eight trials were rated a high risk of performance bias because consumer participants were likely to have known whether or not they were allocated to the intervention group and most outcomes were self reported. Bias due to attrition was rated high in eight trials and reporting bias was rated high in six.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that consultation liaison improves mental health for up to three months; and satisfaction and adherence for up to 12 months in people with mental disorders, particularly those who are depressed. Primary care providers were also more likely to provide adequate treatment and prescribe pharmacological therapy for up to 12 months. There was also some evidence that consultation liaison may not be as effective as collaborative care in terms of mental disorder symptoms, disability, general health status, and provision of treatment. However, the overall quality of trials was low particularly in regards to performance and attrition bias and may have resulted in an overestimation of effectiveness. More evidence is needed to determine the effectiveness of consultation liaison for people with mental disorders particularly for those with mental disorders other than depression.

Interventions to improve safe and effective medicines use by consumers: an overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Many systematic reviews exist on interventions to improve safe and effective medicines use by consumers, but research is distributed across diseases, populations and settings. The scope and focus of such reviews also vary widely, creating challenges for decision-makers seeking to inform decisions by using the evidence on consumers' medicines use.This is an update of a 2011 overview of systematic reviews, which synthesises the evidence, irrespective of disease, medicine type, population or setting, on the effectiveness of interventions to improve consumers' medicines use.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions which target healthcare consumers to promote safe and effective medicines use, by synthesising review-level evidence.

METHODS

SEARCH METHODS

We included systematic reviews published on the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects. We identified relevant reviews by handsearching databases from their start dates to March 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We screened and ranked reviews based on relevance to consumers' medicines use, using criteria developed for this overview.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standardised forms to extract data, and assessed reviews for methodological quality using the AMSTAR tool. We used standardised language to summarise results within and across reviews; and gave bottom-line statements about intervention effectiveness. Two review authors screened and selected reviews, and extracted and analysed data. We used a taxonomy of interventions to categorise reviews and guide syntheses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 75 systematic reviews of varied methodological quality. Reviews assessed interventions with diverse aims including support for behaviour change, risk minimisation and skills acquisition. No reviews aimed to promote systems-level consumer participation in medicines-related activities. Medicines adherence was the most frequently-reported outcome, but others such as knowledge, clinical and service-use outcomes were also reported. Adverse events were less commonly identified, while those associated with the interventions themselves, or costs, were rarely reported.Looking across reviews, for most outcomes, medicines self-monitoring and self-management programmes appear generally effective to improve medicines use, adherence, adverse events and clinical outcomes; and to reduce mortality in people self-managing antithrombotic therapy. However, some participants were unable to complete these interventions, suggesting they may not be suitable for everyone.Other promising interventions to improve adherence and other key medicines-use outcomes, which require further investigation to be more certain of their effects, include:· simplified dosing regimens: with positive effects on adherence;· interventions involving pharmacists in medicines management, such as medicines reviews (with positive effects on adherence and use, medicines problems and clinical outcomes) and pharmaceutical care services (consultation between pharmacist and patient to resolve medicines problems, develop a care plan and provide follow-up; with positive effects on adherence and knowledge).Several other strategies showed some positive effects, particularly relating to adherence, and other outcomes, but their effects were less consistent overall and so need further study. These included:· delayed antibiotic prescriptions: effective to decrease antibiotic use but with mixed effects on clinical outcomes, adverse effects and satisfaction;· practical strategies like reminders, cues and/or organisers, reminder packaging and material incentives: with positive, although somewhat mixed effects on adherence;· education delivered with self-management skills training, counselling, support, training or enhanced follow-up; information and counselling delivered together; or education/information as part of pharmacist-delivered packages of care: with positive effects on adherence, medicines use, clinical outcomes and knowledge, but with mixed effects in some studies;· financial incentives: with positive, but mixed, effects on adherence.Several strategies also showed promise in promoting immunisation uptake, but require further study to be more certain of their effects. These included organisational interventions; reminders and recall; financial incentives; home visits; free vaccination; lay health worker interventions; and facilitators working with physicians to promote immunisation uptake. Education and/or information strategies also showed some positive but even less consistent effects on immunisation uptake, and need further assessment of effectiveness and investigation of heterogeneity.There are many different potential pathways through which consumers' use of medicines could be targeted to improve outcomes, and simple interventions may be as effective as complex strategies. However, no single intervention assessed was effective to improve all medicines-use outcomes across all diseases, medicines, populations or settings.Even where interventions showed promise, the assembled evidence often only provided part of the picture: for example, simplified dosing regimens seem effective for improving adherence, but there is not yet sufficient information to identify an optimal regimen.In some instances interventions appear ineffective: for example, the evidence suggests that directly observed therapy may be generally ineffective for improving treatment completion, adherence or clinical outcomes.In other cases, interventions may have variable effects across outcomes. As an example, strategies providing information or education as single interventions appear ineffective to improve medicines adherence or clinical outcomes, but may be effective to improve knowledge; an important outcome for promoting consumers' informed medicines choices.Despite a doubling in the number of reviews included in this updated overview, uncertainty still exists about the effectiveness of many interventions, and the evidence on what works remains sparse for several populations, including children and young people, carers, and people with multimorbidity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This overview presents evidence from 75 reviews that have synthesised trials and other studies evaluating the effects of interventions to improve consumers' medicines use.Systematically assembling the evidence across reviews allows identification of effective or promising interventions to improve consumers' medicines use, as well as those for which the evidence indicates ineffectiveness or uncertainty.Decision makers faced with implementing interventions to improve consumers' medicines use can use this overview to inform decisions about which interventions may be most promising to improve particular outcomes. The intervention taxonomy may also assist people to consider the strategies available in relation to specific purposes, for example, gaining skills or being involved in decision making. Researchers and funders can use this overview to identify where more research is needed and assess its priority. The limitations of the available literature due to the lack of evidence for important outcomes and important populations, such as people with multimorbidity, should also be considered in practice and policy decisions.

Depression in primary care: current and future challenges

OBJECTIVES

To describe the current state of knowledge about detection and treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) by family physicians (FPs), and to identify gaps in practice and current and future challenges.

METHODS

We reviewed the recent literature on MDD (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, or International Classification of Diseases, Revision 10) in primary care, with an emphasis on systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing prevalence, the impact of an aging population and of chronic disease on MDD rates in primary care, detection and treatment rates by FPs, adequacy of treatment, and interventions that could improve recognition and treatment.

RESULTS

About 10% of primary care patients are likely to meet criteria for MDD. The number of cases will increase as the baby boomer cohort ages and as the prevalence of chronic disease increases. The bidirectional relation between MDD and chronic disease is now firmly established. Detection and treatment rates in primary care remain low. Treatment quality is frequently inadequate in terms of follow-up and monitoring. Formal case management and collaborative care interventions are likely to provide some benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

Low detection rates and low treatment rates need to be addressed. Planned reassessment may improve detection rates when the FP is uncertain whether MDD is present, but further research is needed to determine why FPs frequently do not initiate treatment, even when MDD is detected. A caring, attentive FP who monitors depressed patients is likely to have considerable placebo effect. Greater focus on integrated, concurrent treatment for MDD and chronic physical diseases in the middle-aged and elderly is also required.

Implementing a knowledge application program for anxiety and depression in community-based primary mental health care: a multiple case study research protocol

BACKGROUND

Anxiety and depressive disorders are increasingly recognized as a health care policy priority. Reducing the treatment gap for common mental disorders requires strengthening the quality of primary mental health care. We developed a knowledge application program designed to improve the organization and delivery of care for anxiety and depression in community-based primary mental health care teams in Quebec, Canada. The principal objectives of the study are: to implement and evaluate this evidence-based knowledge application program; to examine the contextual factors associated with the selection of local quality improvement strategies; to explore barriers and facilitators associated with the implementation of local quality improvement plans; and to study the implementation of local quality monitoring strategies.

METHODS

The research design is a mixed-methods prospective multiple case study. The main analysis unit (cases) is composed of the six multidisciplinary community-based primary mental health care teams, and each of the cases has identified at least one primary care medical clinic interested in collaborating with the implementation project. The training modules of the program are based on the Chronic Care Model, and the implementation strategies were developed according to the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services conceptual framework.

DISCUSSION

The implementation of an evidence-based knowledge application program for anxiety and depression in primary care aims to improve the organization and delivery of mental health services. The uptake of evidence to improve the quality of care for common mental disorders in primary care is a complex process that requires careful consideration of the context in which innovations are introduced. The project will provide a close examination of the interplay between evidence, context and facilitation, and contribute to the understanding of factors associated with the process of implementation of interventions in routine care. The implementation of the knowledge application program with a population health perspective is consistent with the priorities set forth in the current mental health care reform in Quebec. Strengthening primary mental health care will lead to a more efficient health care system.

Stepped care: a method to deliver increased access to psychological therapies

OBJECTIVE

To introduce stepped care as a method of organizing the delivery of treatments, and to consider the factors necessary for implementation.

METHOD

Stepped care is described within the context of strategies such as collaborative care that aim to increase access to mental health care through the improved coordination of care between primary and specialist mental health services. Results from the implementation of stepped care in the United Kingdom and elsewhere are used to highlight the factors required for introducing stepped care into routine services. Issues to address when implementing high-volume services for common mental health problems are derived from this experience.

RESULTS

Stepped care sits within the continuum of organizational systems, from situations where responsibility rests almost entirely with primary care clinicians to systems where all patients are managed by specialists for the entire duration of their treatment. Its core principles of delivering low-burden treatments first, followed by careful patient progress monitoring to step patients up to more intensive treatment, are easy to articulate but lead to considerable implementation diversity when services attempt to work in this manner. Services need to ensure they have specific staff competency training, including skills in delivering evidence-based treatments, access to telephony, and smart patient management informatics systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Stepped care can provide the delivery system for supported self-management. To be successful, health systems need high levels of clinical outcome data and appropriately trained workers. Further attention is required to ensure equity of access and to reduce patient attrition in these systems.

Does GP training in depression care affect patient outcome? - A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Primary care practices provide a gate-keeping function in many health care systems. Since depressive disorders are highly prevalent in primary care settings, reliable detection and diagnoses are a first step to enhance depression care for patients. Provider training is a self-evident approach to enhance detection, diagnoses and treatment options and might even lead to improved patient outcomes.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted reviewing research studies providing training of general practitioners, published from 1999 until May 2011, available on the electronic databases Medline, Web of Science, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library as well as national guidelines and health technology assessments (HTA).

Results

108 articles were fully assessed and 11 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included. Training of providers alone (even in a specific interventional method) did not result in improved patient outcomes. The additional implementation of guidelines and the use of more complex interventions in primary care yield a significant reduction in depressive symptomatology. The number of studies examining sole provider training is limited, and studies include different patient samples (new on-set cases vs. chronically depressed patients), which reduce comparability.

Conclusions

This is the first overview of randomized controlled trials introducing GP training for depression care. Provider training by itself does not seem to improve depression care; however, if combined with additional guidelines implementation, results are promising for new-onset depression patient samples. Additional organizational structure changes in form of collaborative care models are more likely to show effects on depression care.

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.

Shared care in mental illness: A rapid review to inform implementation

BACKGROUND

While integrated primary healthcare for the management of depression has been well researched, appropriate models of primary care for people with severe and persistent psychotic disorders are poorly understood. In 2010 the NSW (Australia) Health Department commissioned a review of the evidence on "shared care" models of ambulatory mental health services. This focussed on critical factors in the implementation of these models in clinical practice, with a view to providing policy direction. The review excluded evidence about dementia, substance use and personality disorders.

METHODS

A rapid review involving a search for systematic reviews on The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). This was followed by a search for papers published since these systematic reviews on Medline and supplemented by limited iterative searching from reference lists.

RESULTS

Shared care trials report improved mental and physical health outcomes in some clinical settings with improved social function, self management skills, service acceptability and reduced hospitalisation. Other benefits include improved access to specialist care, better engagement with and acceptability of mental health services. Limited economic evaluation shows significant set up costs, reduced patient costs and service savings often realised by other providers. Nevertheless these findings are not evident across all clinical groups. Gains require substantial cross-organisational commitment, carefully designed and consistently delivered interventions, with attention to staff selection, training and supervision. Effective models incorporated linkages across various service levels, clinical monitoring within agreed treatment protocols, improved continuity and comprehensiveness of services.

CONCLUSIONS

"Shared Care" models of mental health service delivery require attention to multiple levels (from organisational to individual clinicians), and complex service re-design. Re-evaluation of the roles of specialist mental health staff is a critical requirement. As expected, no one model of "shared" care fits diverse clinical groups. On the basis of the available evidence, we recommended a local trial that examined the process of implementation of core principles of shared care within primary care and specialist mental health clinical services.

Ways of working at the interface between primary and specialist mental healthcare

Ways of working at the interface between primary and specialist care are considered with discussion of the limits of available evidence and the potential for a new role for psychiatrists in providing supervision and consultation in novel models of care.