A Fidelity Measure for Integrated Management of Depression in Primary Care

Exploring the Use of the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) in Special Education Settings

The Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) is an Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) system which is widely used to support children with developmental disabilities. In the present study, we surveyed individuals responsible for implementing PECS in special educational settings in the United Kingdom (N=283). We explored knowledge of and adherence to the  intervention, with a view to identifying training and support needs. Specifically, we examined participants' knowledge, implementation accuracy, training experiences, access to resources, and attitudes towards PECS. We developed hierarchical logistic regression models to explore the association between training experience and both knowledge and use of PECS. We pre-registered our methods, predictions and the analysis plan on the Open Science Framework (OSF).We found considerable variation in practitioner knowledge and implementation of PECS. Formal training predicted greater knowledge and more accurate implementation when practitioner role and the degree of setting support were accounted for. While PECS was rated by a large majority to be effective and practical, many participants identified that time and the availability of resources were barriers to implementation. We also found that the purpose of PECS was not always fully understood by practitioners, and we identified some consistent gaps in knowledge and implementation.  This study contributes new information regarding the real-world  use of PECS in educational settings and offers new insights for supporting practitioners.

Stepped implementation-to-target: a study protocol of an adaptive trial to expand access to addiction medications

BACKGROUND

In response to the US opioid epidemic, significant national campaigns have been launched to expand access to `opioid use disorder (MOUD). While adoption has increased in general medical care settings, specialty addiction programs have lagged in both reach and adoption. Elevating the quality of implementation strategy, research requires more precise methods in tailoring strategies rather than a one-size-fits-all-approach, documenting participant engagement and fidelity to the delivery of the strategy, and conducting an economic analysis to inform decision making and policy. Research has yet to incorporate all three of these recommendations to address the challenges of implementing and sustaining MOUD in specialty addiction programs.

METHODS

This project seeks to recruit 72 specialty addiction programs in partnership with the Washington State Health Care Authority and employs a measurement-based stepped implementation-to-target approach within an adaptive trial design. Programs will be exposed to a sequence of implementation strategies of increasing intensity and cost: (1) enhanced monitoring and feedback (EMF), (2) 2-day workshop, and then, if outcome targets are not achieved, randomization to either internal facilitation or external facilitation. The study has three aims: (1) evaluate the sequential impact of implementation strategies on target outcomes, (2) examine contextual moderators and mediators of outcomes in response to the strategies, and (3) document and model costs per implementation strategy. Target outcomes are organized by the RE-AIM framework and the Addiction Care Cascade.

DISCUSSION

This implementation project includes elements of a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design and a criterion-based design. An innovative and efficient approach, participating programs only receive the implementation strategies they need to achieve target outcomes. Findings have the potential to inform implementation research and provide key decision-makers with evidence on how to address the opioid epidemic at a systems level.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05343793) on April 25, 2022.

Expanding access to medications for opioid use disorder in primary care clinics: an evaluation of common implementation strategies and outcomes

BACKGROUND

To combat the opioid epidemic in the USA, unprecedented federal funding has been directed to states and territories to expand access to prevention, overdose rescue, and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Similar to other states, California rapidly allocated these funds to increase reach and adoption of MOUD in safety-net, primary care settings such as Federally Qualified Health Centers. Typical of current real-world implementation endeavors, a package of four implementation strategies was offered to all clinics. The present study examines (i) the pre-post effect of the package of strategies, (ii) whether/how this effect differed between new (start-up) versus more established (scale-up) MOUD practices, and (iii) the effect of clinic engagement with each of the four implementation strategies.

METHODS

Forty-one primary care clinics were offered access to four implementation strategies: (1) Enhanced Monitoring and Feedback, (2) Learning Collaboratives, (3) External Facilitation, and (4) Didactic Webinars. Using linear mixed effects models, RE-AIM guided outcomes of reach, adoption, and implementation quality were assessed at baseline and at 9 months follow-up.

RESULTS

Of the 41 clinics, 25 (61%) were at MOUD start-up and 16 (39%) were at scale-up phases. Pre-post difference was observed for the primary outcome of percent of patient prescribed MOUD (reach) (βtime = 3.99; 0.73 to 7.26; p = 0.02). The largest magnitude of change occurred in implementation quality (ES = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.66 to 0.70). Baseline MOUD capability moderated the change in reach (start-ups 22.60%, 95% CI = 16.05 to 29.15; scale-ups -4.63%, 95% CI = -7.87 to -1.38). Improvement in adoption and implementation quality were moderately associated with early prescriber engagement in Learning Collaboratives (adoption: ES = 0.61; 95% CI = 0.25 to 0.96; implementation quality: ES = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.41 to 0.69). Improvement in adoption was also associated with early prescriber engagement in Didactic Webinars (adoption: ES = 0.61; 95% CI = 0.20 to 1.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Rather than providing an all-clinics-get-all-components package of implementation strategies, these data suggest that it may be more efficient and effective to tailor the provision of implementation strategies based on the needs of clinic. Future implementation endeavors could benefit from (i) greater precision in the provision of implementation strategies based on contextual determinants, and (ii) the inclusion of strategies targeting engagement.

The Integrating Medications for Addiction Treatment (IMAT) Index: A measure of capability at the organizational level

Primary care provides a treatment opportunity for many persons with opioid use disorder (OUD). The push to integrate and expand reach and adoption of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) within primary care has been a major focus of national, state and health systems endeavors. To guide high capability MOUD practice, we introduce the Integrating Medications for Addiction Treatment (IMAT) Index. The research team has developed IMAT along similar lines to other organizational measures of integrated services capability. We present the development and validation of the measure, and suggest its applicability for systems and organizations, as well as for process improvement and implementation research. Forty-one primary care clinics completed the IMAT at two time points: baseline and 9-month follow-up. Findings support the IMAT Index as psychometrically acceptable and pragmatically useful. It has good internal consistency, as well as concurrent and predictive validity. Changes in IMAT scores between baseline and follow-up significantly predicted increases in proportion of patients on MOUD. The IMAT has the potential to support both scientific and public health care activities.

Advancing Evidence Synthesis from Effectiveness to Implementation: Integration of Implementation Measures into Evidence Reviews

BACKGROUND

In order to close the gap between discoveries that could improve health, and widespread impact on routine health care practice, there is a need for greater attention to the factors that influence dissemination and implementation of evidence-based practices. Evidence synthesis projects (e.g., systematic reviews) could contribute to this effort by collecting and synthesizing data relevant to dissemination and implementation. Such an advance would facilitate the spread of high-value, effective, and sustainable interventions.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this paper is to evaluate the feasibility of extracting factors related to implementation during evidence synthesis in order to enhance the replicability of successes of studies of interventions in health care settings.

DESIGN

Drawing on the implementation science literature, we suggest 10 established implementation measures that should be considered when conducting evidence synthesis projects. We describe opportunities to assess these constructs in current literature and illustrate these methods through an example of a systematic review.

SUBJECTS

Twenty-nine studies of interventions aimed at improving clinician-patient communication in clinical settings.

KEY RESULTS

We identified acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, implementation cost, intervention complexity, penetration, reach, and sustainability as factors that are feasible and appropriate to extract during an evidence synthesis project.

CONCLUSIONS

To fully understand the potential value of a health care innovation, it is important to consider not only its effectiveness, but also the process, demands, and resource requirements involved in downstream implementation. While there is variation in the degree to which intervention studies currently report implementation factors, there is a growing demand for this information. Abstracting information about these factors may enhance the value of systematic reviews and other evidence synthesis efforts, improving the dissemination and adoption of interventions that are effective, feasible, and sustainable across different contexts.

A regional systems intervention for suicide prevention in the Netherlands (SUPREMOCOL): study protocol with a stepped wedge trial design

BACKGROUND

In the Netherlands, suicide rates showed a sharp incline and this pertains particularly to the province of Noord-Brabant, one of the southern provinces in the Netherlands. This calls for a regional suicide prevention effort.

METHODS/DESIGN

Study protocol. A regional suicide prevention systems intervention is implemented and evaluated by a stepped wedge trial design in five specialist mental health institutions and their adherent chain partners. Our system intervention is called SUPREMOCOL, which stands for Suicide Prevention by Monitoring and Collaborative Care, and focuses on four pillars: 1) recognition of people at risk for suicide by the development and implementation of a monitoring system with decision aid, 2) swift access to specialist care of people at risk, 3) positioning nurse care managers for collaborative care case management, and 4) 12 months telephone follow up. Eligible patients are persons attempting suicide or expressing suicidal ideation. Primary outcome is number of completed suicides, as reported by Statistics Netherlands and regional Public Health Institutes. Secondary outcome is number of attempted suicides, as reported by the regional ambulance transport and police. Suicidal ideation of persons registered in the monitoring system will, be assessed by the PHQ-9 and SIDAS questionnaires at baseline and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after registration, and used as exploratory process measure. The impact of the intervention will be evaluated by means of the RE-AIM dimensions reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Intervention integrity will be assessed and taken into account in the analysis.

DISCUSSION

The present manuscript presents the design and development of the SUPREMOCOL study. The ultimate goal is to lower the completed suicides rate by 20%, compared to the control period and compared to other provinces in the Netherlands. Moreover, our goal is to provide specialist mental health institutions and chain partners with a sustainable and adoptable intervention for suicide prevention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register under registration number NL6935 (5 April 2018). This is the first version of the study protocol (September 2019).

Validation of an Expanded Measure of Integrated Care Provider Fidelity: PPAQ-2

This study aimed to validate the factor structure of the expanded Primary Care Behavioral Health Provider Adherence Questionnaire (PPAQ-2), which is designed to assess provider fidelity to both the Primary Care Behavioral Health (PCBH) and collaborative care management (CCM) models of integrated primary care. Two-hundred fifty-three integrated care providers completed self-reports of professional background, perceptions of clinic integration and related practice barriers, and the PPAQ-2. Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to assess the theorized factor structure and criterion validity was assessed through correlational analysis. Factor analyses demonstrated adequate fit with the data and acceptable to excellent composite reliabilities across five PCBH domains and five CCM domains. Validity was demonstrated by correlations between adherence scores and measures of clinic integration and barriers to fidelity. The PPAQ-2 is a psychometrically sound measure that can be used in future integrated care dismantling studies to identify provider behaviors that best predict patient outcomes.

Collaborative Care for Depression and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: Evaluation of Collaborative Care Fidelity on Symptom Trajectories and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite the growing consensus that collaborative care is effective, limited research has focused on the importance of collaborative care fidelity as it relates to mental health clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relationship of collaborative care fidelity on symptom trajectories and clinical outcomes among military service members enrolled in a multi-site randomized controlled trial for the treatment of depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

DESIGN

Study data for our analyses came from a two-parallel arm randomized trial that evaluated the effectiveness of a centralized collaborative care model compared to the existing collaborative care model for the treatment of PTSD and depression. All patients were included in the analyses to evaluate how longitudinal trajectories of PTSD and depression scores differed across various collaborative care fidelity groupings.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 666 US Military Service members screening positive for probable PTSD or depression through primary care.

MAIN MEASURES

Disease registry data from a web-based clinical management support tool was used to measure collaborative care fidelity for patients enrolled in the trial. Participant depression and PTSD symptoms were collected independently from research survey assessments at four time points across the 1-year trial period. Treatment utilization records were acquired from the Military Health System administrative records to determine mental health service use.

KEY RESULTS

Consistent and late fidelity to the collaborative care model predicted an improving symptom trajectory over the course of treatment. This effect was more pronounced for patients with depression than for patients with PTSD.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term fidelity to key collaborative care elements throughout care episodes may improve depression outcomes, particularly for patients with elevated symptoms. More controlled research is needed to further understand the influence of collaborative care fidelity on clinical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT01492348.

Implementing collaborative primary care for depression and posttraumatic stress disorder: design and sample for a randomized trial in the U.S. military health system

BACKGROUND

War-related trauma, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression and suicide are common in US military members. Often, those affected do not seek treatment due to stigma and barriers to care. When care is sought, it often fails to meet quality standards. A randomized trial is assessing whether collaborative primary care improves quality and outcomes of PTSD and depression care in the US military health system.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to describe the design and sample for a randomized effectiveness trial of collaborative care for PTSD and depression in military members attending primary care.

METHODS

The STEPS-UP Trial (STepped Enhancement of PTSD Services Using Primary Care) is a 6 installation (18 clinic) randomized effectiveness trial in the US military health system. Study rationale, design, enrollment and sample characteristics are summarized.

FINDINGS

Military members attending primary care with suspected PTSD, depression or both were referred to care management and recruited for the trial (2592), and 1041 gave permission to contact for research participation. Of those, 666 (64%) met eligibility criteria, completed baseline assessments, and were randomized to 12 months of usual collaborative primary care versus STEPS-UP collaborative care. Implementation was locally managed for usual collaborative care and centrally managed for STEPS-UP. Research reassessments occurred at 3-, 6-, and 12-months. Baseline characteristics were similar across the two intervention groups.

CONCLUSIONS

STEPS-UP will be the first large scale randomized effectiveness trial completed in the US military health system, assessing how an implementation model affects collaborative care impact on mental health outcomes. It promises lessons for health system change.

RESPECT-PTSD: re-engineering systems for the primary care treatment of PTSD, a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although collaborative care is effective for treating depression and other mental disorders in primary care, there have been no randomized trials of collaborative care specifically for patients with Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

OBJECTIVE

To compare a collaborative approach, the Three Component Model (3CM), with usual care for treating PTSD in primary care.

DESIGN

The study was a two-arm, parallel randomized clinical trial. PTSD patients were recruited from five primary care clinics at four Veterans Affairs healthcare facilities and randomized to receive usual care or usual care plus 3CM. Blinded assessors collected data at baseline and 3-month and 6-month follow-up.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were 195 Veterans. Their average age was 45 years, 91% were male, 58% were white, 40% served in Iraq or Afghanistan, and 42% served in Vietnam.

INTERVENTION

All participants received usual care. Participants assigned to 3CM also received telephone care management. Care managers received supervision from a psychiatrist.

MAIN MEASURES

PTSD symptom severity was the primary outcome. Depression, functioning, perceived quality of care, utilization, and costs were secondary outcomes.

KEY RESULTS

There were no differences between 3CM and usual care in symptoms or functioning. Participants assigned to 3CM were more likely to have a mental health visit, fill an antidepressant prescription, and have adequate antidepressant refills. 3CM participants also had more mental health visits and higher outpatient pharmacy costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest the need for careful examination of the way that collaborative care models are implemented for treating PTSD, and for additional supports to encourage primary care providers to manage PTSD.

Collaborative care for depression and anxiety problems

BACKGROUND

Common mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety, are estimated to affect up to 15% of the UK population at any one time, and health care systems worldwide need to implement interventions to reduce the impact and burden of these conditions. Collaborative care is a complex intervention based on chronic disease management models that may be effective in the management of these common mental health problems.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of collaborative care for patients with depression or anxiety.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases to February 2012: The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDAN) trials registers (CCDANCTR-References and CCDANCTR-Studies) which include relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from MEDLINE (1950 to present), EMBASE (1974 to present), PsycINFO (1967 to present) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, all years); the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal (ICTRP); ClinicalTrials.gov; and CINAHL (to November 2010 only). We screened the reference lists of reports of all included studies and published systematic reviews for reports of additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of collaborative care for participants of all ages with depression or anxiety.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent researchers extracted data using a standardised data extraction sheet. Two independent researchers made 'Risk of bias' assessments using criteria from The Cochrane Collaboration. We combined continuous measures of outcome using standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We combined dichotomous measures using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the results.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seventy-nine RCTs (including 90 relevant comparisons) involving 24,308 participants in the review. Studies varied in terms of risk of bias.The results of primary analyses demonstrated significantly greater improvement in depression outcomes for adults with depression treated with the collaborative care model in the short-term (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.27; RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.43), medium-term (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.15; RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.48), and long-term (SMD -0.35, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.24; RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.41). However, these significant benefits were not demonstrated into the very long-term (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.27).The results also demonstrated significantly greater improvement in anxiety outcomes for adults with anxiety treated with the collaborative care model in the short-term (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.17; RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.87), medium-term (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.19; RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.69), and long-term (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.06; RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.42). No comparisons examined the effects of the intervention on anxiety outcomes in the very long-term.There was evidence of benefit in secondary outcomes including medication use, mental health quality of life, and patient satisfaction, although there was less evidence of benefit in physical quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Collaborative care is associated with significant improvement in depression and anxiety outcomes compared with usual care, and represents a useful addition to clinical pathways for adult patients with depression and anxiety.

Treating post-CABG depression with telephone-delivered collaborative care: does patient age affect treatment and outcome?

OBJECTIVE

To determine the nature of telephone-delivered collaborative care intervention provided to patients younger than and older than 60 years experiencing clinically significant depressive symptoms after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and whether patient age is related to response and remission rates and delivery of care at 8-month follow-up.

DESIGN

: Exploratory post-hoc analysis of data collected in a randomized controlled trial (RCT).

SETTING

Seven Pittsburgh-area general hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty-eight depressed post-CABG patients younger than 60 and 92 comparable patients age 60 years and older randomized to the RCT's intervention arm.

MEASUREMENTS

: Components of collaborative care provided to patients over the 8-month study period and Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression scores at 8-month follow-up to determine response and remission status.

RESULTS

There were no differences in the cumulative 8-month rates at which the components of collaborative care were delivered to the two age groups. Similar response and remission rates were also achieved by these groups.

CONCLUSION

Older and younger patients experiencing clinical depression after CABG surgery can be treated with comparable components of collaborative care, and both age groups will achieve clinical outcomes that do not differ significantly from each other.

Depression care management for late-life depression in China primary care: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

As a major public health issue in China and worldwide, late-life depression is associated with physical limitations, greater functional impairment, increased utilization and cost of health care, and suicide. Like other chronic diseases in elders such as hypertension and diabetes, depression is a chronic disease that the new National Health Policy of China indicates should be managed in primary care settings. Collaborative care, linking primary and mental health specialty care, has been shown to be effective for the treatment of late-life depression in primary care settings in Western countries. The primary aim of this project is to implement a depression care management (DCM) intervention, and examine its effectiveness on the depressive symptoms of older patients in Chinese primary care settings.

METHODS/DESIGN

The trial is a multi-site, primary clinic based randomized controlled trial design in Hangzhou, China. Sixteen primary care clinics will be enrolled in and randomly assigned to deliver either DCM or care as usual (CAU) (8 clinics each) to 320 patients (aged ≥ 60 years) with major depression (20/clinic; n = 160 in each treatment condition). In the DCM arm, primary care physicians (PCPs) will prescribe 16 weeks of antidepressant medication according to the treatment guideline protocol. Care managers monitor the progress of treatment and side effects, educate patients/family, and facilitate communication between providers; psychiatrists will provide weekly group psychiatric consultation and CM supervision. Patients in both DCM and CAU arms will be assessed by clinical research coordinators at baseline, 4, 8, 12, 18, and 24 months. Depressive symptoms, functional status, treatment stigma and clients' satisfaction will be used to assess patients' outcomes; and clinic practices, attitudes/knowledge, and satisfaction will be providers' outcomes.

DISCUSSION

This will be the first trial of the effectiveness of a collaborative care intervention aiming to the management of late-life depression in China primary care. If effective, its finding will have relevance to policy makers who wish to scale up DCM treatments for late-life depression in national wide primary care across China.

STUDY REGISTRATION

The DCM project is registered through the National Institutes of Health sponsored by clinical trials registry and has been assigned the identifier: NCT01287494.

Does the Veterans Affairs depression performance measure predict quality care?

BACKGROUND

In 2000, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) instituted a performance measure to improve the quality of depression care. The measure evaluated adequacy of follow-up for depressed patients but was removed from clinic directors' performance plans in fiscal year (FY) 2009 because it had not been empirically validated. The VA depression performance measure was compared with an empirically validated model for assessing adherence to important depression treatment processes.

METHODS

VA medical centers (VAMCs) whose performance on the VA depression measure was in the top or bottom quartile nationally for all four quarters in FY2008 were selected for inclusion. A blinded interviewer attempted to contact clinical directors of both primary care and mental health at each VAMC and conducted telephone interviews using a protocol designed to employ the 3-Component Model (3CM) fidelity measure, which assesses domains of evidence-based depression care.

RESULTS

There were 9 sites in the "high-performing" group and 10 sites in the "low-performing" group. At least one interview was completed at 8 of the 9 sites in the high-performing group and 9 of the 10 sites in the low-performing group. There was a significant difference in the percentage of patients meeting the VA depression performance measure between the high- and low-performing groups (47.5% versus 14.7%; chi2 = 837.5, p < .001). The adapted version of the 3CM fidelity scale detected a significant difference in process of depression care between the high- and low-performing sites (82.3 versus 71.4; z = 2.4, p = .018).

CONCLUSIONS

The highest-performing sites on the VA depression performance measure adhered to important care processes more often than did the lowest-performing sites.

Promotoras as mental health practitioners in primary care: a multi-method study of an intervention to address contextual sources of depression

We assessed the role of promotoras--briefly trained community health workers--in depression care at community health centers. The intervention focused on four contextual sources of depression in underserved, low-income communities: underemployment, inadequate housing, food insecurity, and violence. A multi-method design included quantitative and ethnographic techniques to study predictors of depression and the intervention's impact. After a structured training program, primary care practitioners (PCPs) and promotoras collaboratively followed a clinical algorithm in which PCPs prescribed medications and/or arranged consultations by mental health professionals and promotoras addressed the contextual sources of depression. Based on an intake interview with 464 randomly recruited patients, 120 patients with depression were randomized to enhanced care plus the promotora contextual intervention, or to enhanced care alone. All four contextual problems emerged as strong predictors of depression (chi square, p < .05); logistic regression revealed housing and food insecurity as the most important predictors (odds ratios both 2.40, p < .05). Unexpected challenges arose in the intervention's implementation, involving infrastructure at the health centers, boundaries of the promotoras' roles, and "turf" issues with medical assistants. In the quantitative assessment, the intervention did not lead to statistically significant improvements in depression (odds ratio 4.33, confidence interval overlapping 1). Ethnographic research demonstrated a predominantly positive response to the intervention among stakeholders, including patients, promotoras, PCPs, non-professional staff workers, administrators, and community advisory board members. Due to continuing unmet mental health needs, we favor further assessment of innovative roles for community health workers.

Multidisciplinary collaborative care for depressive disorder in the occupational health setting: design of a randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness study

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) has major consequences for both patients and society, particularly in terms of needlessly long sick leave and reduced functioning. Although evidence-based treatments for MDD are available, they show disappointing results when implemented in daily practice. A focus on work is also lacking in the treatment of depressive disorder as well as communication of general practitioners (GPs) and other health care professionals with occupational physicians (OPs). The OP may play a more important role in the recovery of patients with MDD. Purpose of the present study is to tackle these obstacles by applying a collaborative care model, which has proven to be effective in the USA, with a focus on return to work (RTW). From a societal perspective, the (cost)effectiveness of this collaborative care treatment, as a way of transmural care, will be evaluated in depressed patients on sick leave in the occupational health setting.

METHODS/DESIGN

A randomised controlled trial in which the treatment of MDD in the occupational health setting will be evaluated in the Netherlands. A transmural collaborative care model, including Problem Solving Treatment (PST), a workplace intervention, antidepressant medication and manual guided self-help will be compared with care as usual (CAU). 126 Patients with MDD on sick leave between 4 and 12 weeks will be included in the study. Care in the intervention group will be provided by a multidisciplinary team of a trained OP-care manager and a consultant psychiatrist. The treatment is separated from the sickness certification. Data will be collected by means of questionnaires at baseline and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after baseline. Primary outcome measure is reduction of depressive symptoms, secondary outcome measure is time to RTW, tertiary outcome measure is the cost effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

The high burden of MDD and the high level of sickness absence among people with MDD contribute to the relevance of this study. The intervention is an innovative approach, with trained OPs in a new role as care managers in the treatment of MDD. If this intervention proves to be cost-effective, implementation will be very relevant for individual patients as well as for society.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN78462860.

A nurse coach quality improvement intervention: feasibility and treatment fidelity

As the U.S. population ages and chronic illness prevalence increases, new approaches to care are needed. Although large health systems have begun to respond to this challenge, most Americans seek care from practitioners functioning in small office settings. Implementing systematic sustainable changes for quality improvement in this setting remains an unresolved challenge. In this study, trained Nurse Coaches (NCs) were employed to assist practices in adopting a new model of patient care called Virtual Integrated Practice (VIP). The feasibility and treatment fidelity of this approach were assessed through process measures and interviews in three practices. Findings document high acceptance of the NC approach and consistent delivery of the intervention. Enactment of the VIP model took place across practices, although to a variable degree. The study suggests that NCs may be an effective delivery method for quality and organizational improvements in small primary care practices.