Multilevel perspectives on the implementation of the collaborative care model for depression and anxiety in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) is an evidence-based mental health treatment in primary care. A greater understanding of the determinants of successful CoCM implementation, particularly the characteristics of multi-level implementers, is needed. METHODS: This study was a process evaluation of the Collaborative Behavioral Health Program (CBHP) study (NCT04321876) in which CoCM was implemented in 11 primary care practices. CBHP implementation included screening for depression and anxiety, referral to CBHP, and treatment with behavioral care managers (BCMs). Interviews were conducted 4- and 15-months post-implementation with BCMs, practice managers, and practice champions (primary care clinicians). We used framework-guided rapid qualitative analysis with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Version 2.0, focused on the Individuals domain, to analyze response data. These data represented the roles of Mid-Level Leaders (practice managers), Implementation Team Members (clinicians, support staff), Innovation Deliverers (BCMs), and Innovation Recipients (primary care/CBHP patients) and their characteristics (i.e., Need, Capability, Opportunity, Motivation). RESULTS: Mid-level leaders (practice managers) were enthusiastic about CBHP (Motivation), appreciated integrating mental health services into primary care (Need), and had time to assist clinicians (Opportunity). Although CBHP lessened the burden for implementation team members (clinicians, staff; Need), some were hesitant to reallocate patient care (Motivation). Innovation deliverers (BCMs) were eager to deliver CBHP (Motivation) and confident in assisting patients (Capability); their opportunity to deliver CBHP could be limited by clinician referrals (Opportunity). Although CBHP alleviated barriers for innovation recipients (patients; Need), it was difficult to secure services for those with severe conditions (Capability) and certain insurance types (Opportunity). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, respondents favored sustaining CoCM and highlighted the positive impacts on the practice, health care team, and patients. Participants emphasized the benefits of integrating mental health services into primary care and how CBHP lessened the burden on clinicians while providing patients with comprehensive care. Barriers to CBHP implementation included ensuring appropriate patient referrals, providing treatment for patients with higher-level needs, and incentivizing clinician engagement. Future CoCM implementation should include strategies focused on education and training, encouraging clinician buy-in, and preparing referral paths for patients with more severe conditions or diverse needs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT04321876). Registered: March 25,2020. Retrospectively registered.

Implementation Barriers and Experiences of Eligible Patients Who Failed to Enroll in Collaborative Care for Depression and Anxiety.

BACKGROUND: Effective and efficient implementation of the Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) for depression and anxiety is imperative for program success. Studies examining barriers to implementation often omit patient perspectives. OBJECTIVES: To explore experiences and attitudes of eligible patients referred to CoCM who declined participation or were unable to be reached, and identify implementation barriers to inform strategies. DESIGN: Convergent mixed-methods study with a survey and interview. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care patients at an academic medical center who were referred to a CoCM program for anxiety and depression by their primary care clinician (PCC) but declined participation or were unable to be reached by the behavioral health care manager to initiate care (n = 80). Interviews were conducted with 45 survey respondents. MAIN MEASURES: Survey of patients' referral experiences and behavioral health preferences as they related to failing to enroll in the program. Interview questions were developed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research version 2.0 (CFIR 2.0) to identify implementation barriers to enrollment. KEY RESULTS: Survey results found that patients were uncertain about insurance coverage, did not understand the program, and felt services were not necessary. Referred patients who declined participation were concerned about how their mental health information would be used and preferred treatment without medication. Men agreed more that they did not need services. Qualitative results exhibited a variety of implementation determinants (n = 23) across the five CFIR 2.0 domains. Barriers included mental health stigma, perceiving behavioral health as outside of primary care practice guidelines, short or infrequent primary care appointments, prioritizing physical health over mental health, receiving inaccurate program information, low motivation to engage, and a less established relationship with their PCC. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple barriers to enrollment led to failing to link patients to care, which can inform implementation strategies to address the patient-reported experiences and concerns.

Improving Payment for Collaborative Mental Health Care in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: There is strong evidence supporting implementation of the Collaborative Care Model within primary care. Fee-for-service payment codes, published by Current Procedural Terminology in 2018, have made collaborative care separately reimbursable for the first time. These codes (ie, 99492-99494) reimburse for time spent per month by any member of the care team engaged in Collaborative Care, including behavioral care managers, primary care providers, and consulting psychiatrists. Time-based billing for these codes presents challenges for providers delivering Collaborative Care services. OBJECTIVES: Based on experience from multiple health care organizations, we reflect on these challenges and provide suggestions for implementation and future refinement of the codes. CONCLUSIONS: Further refinements to the codes are encouraged, including moving from a calendar month to a 30-day reimbursement cycle. In addition, we recommend payers adopt the new code proposed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to account for smaller increments of time.

Depression.

This issue provides a clinical overview of depression, focusing on screening, diagnosis, treatment, and practice improvement. The content of In the Clinic is drawn from the clinical information and education resources of the American College of Physicians (ACP), including MKSAP (Medical Knowledge and Self-Assessment Program). Annals of Internal Medicine editors develop In the Clinic in collaboration with the ACP's Medical Education and Publishing divisions and with the assistance of additional science writers and physician writers.

A Naturalistic Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial of Extended-Release Metformin to Prevent Weight Gain Associated With Olanzapine in a US Community-Dwelling Population.

OBJECTIVE: This 24-week pilot study assessed the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of adjunctive metformin versus placebo for the prevention of olanzapine-associated weight gain in community-dwelling adult patients with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, or major depression with psychotic features. METHODS: In a double-blind study, 25 patients were randomly assigned to receive 24 weeks of either olanzapine plus metformin or olanzapine plus placebo. Metformin extended release was titrated to 2000 mg daily as tolerated. No other antipsychotics were allowed, whereas psychotropic medications including antidepressants and mood stabilizers were permitted. The primary outcome measures were change in body weight and homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance from baseline to week 24. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population comprised patients who had 1 or more post-baseline visit. Mean change in body weight for the olanzapine plus metformin (O/M) group was 5.5 lb, which was less than the 12.8 lb gain for the olanzapine plus placebo (O/P) group (P < 0.05). Compared with O/P group who gained 7% of their body weight, patients in the O/M group gained 3% (P < 0.037). Body mass index change in the O/M group was 0.85 versus 2.02 in the O/P group (P < 0.045). There was a trend for a greater increase in baseline to end point homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance and waist circumference in the O/P group versus the O/M group. CONCLUSIONS: In this naturalistic sample of typical US community-dwelling patients, metformin was effective and well tolerated for the prevention of olanzapine-associated weight gain. Adjunctive metformin should be studied in a similar but larger population to determine its role in the prevention of olanzapine-associated weight gain.

The STOP COVID 2 Study: Fluvoxamine vs Placebo for Outpatients With Symptomatic COVID-19, a Fully Remote Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Prior randomized clinical trials have reported benefit of fluvoxamine ≥200 mg/d vs placebo for patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fully remote multisite clinical trial evaluated whether fluvoxamine prevents clinical deterioration in higher-risk outpatients with acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Between December 2020 and May 2021, nonhospitalized US and Canadian participants with confirmed symptomatic infection received fluvoxamine (50 mg on day 1, 100 mg twice daily thereafter) or placebo for 15 days. The primary modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population included participants who started the intervention within 7 days of symptom onset with a baseline oxygen saturation ≥92%. The primary outcome was clinical deterioration within 15 days of randomization, defined as having both (1) shortness of breath (severity ≥4 on a 0-10 scale or requiring hospitalization) and (2) oxygen saturation <92% on room air or need for supplemental oxygen. Results: A total of 547 participants were randomized and met mITT criteria (n = 272 fluvoxamine, n = 275 placebo). The Data Safety Monitoring Board recommended stopping early for futility related to lower-than-predicted event rates and declining accrual concurrent with vaccine availability in the United States and Canada. Clinical deterioration occurred in 13 (4.8%) participants in the fluvoxamine group and 15 (5.5%) participants in the placebo group (absolute difference at day 15, 0.68%; 95% CI, -3.0% to 4.4%; log-rank P = .91). Conclusions: This trial did not find fluvoxamine efficacious in preventing clinical deterioration in unvaccinated outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19. It was stopped early and underpowered due to low primary outcome rates. Clinical Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04668950.

Collaborative care for depression management in primary care: A randomized roll-out trial using a type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation design.

BACKGROUND: The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) is a well-established treatment for depression in primary care settings. The critical drivers and specific strategies for improving implementation and sustainment are largely unknown. Rigorous pragmatic research is needed to understand CoCM implementation processes and outcomes. METHODS: This study is a hybrid Type 2 randomized roll-out effectiveness-implementation trial of CoCM in 11 primary care practices affiliated with an academic medical center. The Collaborative Behavioral Health Program (CBHP) was developed as a means of improving access to effective mental health services for depression. Implementation strategies are provided to all practices. Using a sequential mixed methods approach, we will assess key stakeholders' perspectives on barriers and facilitators of implementation and sustainability of CBHP. The speed and quantity of implementation activities completed over a 30-month period for each practice will be assessed. Economic analyses will be conducted to determine the budget impact and cost offset of CBHP in the healthcare system. We hypothesize that CBHP will be effective in reducing depressive symptoms and spillover effects on chronic health conditions. We will also examine differential outcomes among racial/ethnic minority patients. DISCUSSION: This study will elucidate critical drivers of successful CoCM implementation. It will be among the first to conduct economic analyses on a fee-for-service model utilizing billing codes for CoCM. Data may inform ways to improve implementation efficiency with an optimization approach to successive practices due to the roll-out design. Changes to the protocol and current status of the study are discussed.

Management of SIADH-related hyponatremia due to psychotropic medications - An expert consensus from the Association of Medicine and Psychiatry.

OBJECTIVE: Hyponatremia is the most common electrolyte imbalance encountered in clinical practice and is associated with negative healthcare outcomes and cost. SIADH is thought to account for one third of all hyponatremia cases and is typically an insidious process. Psychotropic medications are commonly implicated in the etiology of drug induced SIADH. There is limited guidance for clinicians on management of psychotropic-induced SIADH. METHODS: After an extensive review of the existing literature, clinical-educators from the Association of Medicine and Psychiatry developed expert consensus recommendations for management of psychotropic-induced SIADH. A risk score was proposed based on risk factors for SIADH to guide clinical decision-making. RESULTS: SSRIs, SNRIs, antipsychotics, carbamazepine, and oxcarbazepine have moderate to high level of evidence demonstrating their association with SIADH. Evaluation for an avoidance of medications that cause hyponatremia is particularly important. Substitution with medication that is less likely to cause SIADH should be considered when appropriate. We propose an algorithmic approach to monitoring hyponatremia with SIADH and corresponding treatment depending on symptom severity. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed algorithm can help clinicians in determining whether psychotropic medication should be stopped, reduced or substituted where SIADH is suspected with recommendations for sodium (Na+) monitoring. These recommendations preserve a role for clinical judgment in the management of hyponatremia with consideration of the risks and benefits, which may be particularly relevant for complex patients that present with medical and psychiatric comorbidities. Further studies are needed to determine whether baseline and serial Na+ monitoring reduces morbidity and mortality.

QTc monitoring in adults with medical and psychiatric comorbidities: Expert consensus from the Association of Medicine and Psychiatry.

OBJECTIVE: Several psychiatric medications have the potential to prolong the QTc interval and subsequently increase the risk for ventricular arrhythmias such as torsades de pointes (TdP). There is limited guidance for clinicians to balance the risks and benefits of treatments. METHODS: After a review of the existing literature, clinical-educators from the Association of Medicine and Psychiatry developed expert consensus guidelines for ECG monitoring of the QTc interval for patients with medical and psychiatric comorbidities who are prescribed medications with the potential to prolong the QTc interval. A risk score was developed based on risk factors for QTc prolongation to guide clinical decision-making. RESULTS: A baseline ECG may not be necessary for individuals at low risk for arrythmia. Those individuals with a risk score of two or more should have an ECG prior to the start of a potentially QTc-prolonging medication or be started on a lower risk agent. Antipsychotics are not equivalent in causing QTc prolongation. A consensus-based algorithm is presented for the management of those identified at high (QTc >500 msec), intermediate (males with QTc 450-499 msec or females with QTc > 470-499 msec), or low risk. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed algorithm can help clinicians in determining whether ECG monitoring should be considered for a given patient. These guidelines preserve a role for clinical judgment in selection of treatments that balance the risks and benefits, which may be particularly relevant for complex patients with medical and psychiatric comorbidities. Additional studies are needed to determine whether baseline and serial ECG monitoring reduces mortality.

Vagus nerve stimulation for severe depression.

Treatment-resistant depression is a serious problem with significant costs in terms of health care dollars and patients' well-being. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is one novel, device-based therapy that may be effective in this population. In this article, we review the evidence to date on the use of VNS in major depression and describe the process of VNS treatment initiation, device implantation, and dosage adjustment and monitoring. It is important for psychiatric nurses to understand the evidence base for and how VNS is used in treatment so they may enhance care of patients with treatment-resistant depression.

Long-term efficacy and safety of iloperidone: an update.

Schizophrenia is a devastating neuropsychiatric disease with a worldwide prevalence of approximately 0.5%-1%. Since many patients do not achieve adequate symptom relief from available agents, alternate pharmacotherapeutic approaches are needed. In this context, iloperidone was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of schizophrenia. This paper first reviews its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic profiles, emphasizing their clinical relevance. Next, it summarizes the literature on its acute and maintenance efficacy, safety, and tolerability. It then considers pharmacogenetic data which may help to predict response and risk of cardiac arrhythmias with this agent. Finally, it critically positions iloperidone relative to other first- and second-generation antipsychotics.

Pharmacological and clinical profile of recently approved second-generation antipsychotics: implications for treatment of schizophrenia in older patients.

Antipsychotics are frequently used in elderly patients to treat a variety of conditions, including schizophrenia. While extensively studied for their impact in younger populations, there is comparatively limited evidence about the effectiveness of these agents in older patients. Further complicating this situation are the high comorbidity rates (both psychiatric and medical) in the elderly; age-related changes in pharmacokinetics that lead to a heightened proclivity for adverse effects; and the potential for multiple, clinically relevant drug interactions. With this background in mind, we review diagnostic and treatment-related issues specific to elderly patients suffering from schizophrenia. We then focus on the potential role of the most recently approved second-generation antipsychotics, paliperidone (both the extended-release oral formulation and the long-acting injectable formulation), iloperidone, asenapine and lurasidone, given the limited clinical experience with these agents in the elderly. While there is limited data to support their safety, tolerability and efficacy in older patients with schizophrenia, each has unique characteristics that should be considered when used in this population.

Quetiapine for the treatment of acute bipolar mania, mixed episodes and maintenance therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Bipolar disorder is characterized by mood instability, which can be challenging to manage. First-line pharmacological approaches usually involve lithium, anticonvulsants and antipsychotics. Over the past fifteen years, several second-generation antipsychotics have demonstrated benefits for various phases of this disorder. AREAS COVERED: This article examines the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of quetiapine ; its evidence base as an acute and maintenance monotherapy or adjunctive therapy for bipolar manic or mixed episodes is also discussed, along with the related issues of its safety and tolerability. EXPERT OPINION: In the context of bipolar disorder, quetiapine is the only agent approved as a monotherapy or adjunct therapy for acute manic/mixed episodes in adults and adolescents; as a monotherapy for acute depressive episodes in adults; and as an adjunctive maintenance therapy for bipolar I and II disorder in adults. In addition to its antipsychotic properties, this broad mood-stabilizing potential may simplify the management of select patients.

Quetiapine monotherapy for bipolar depression.

INTRODUCTION: Depression, in the context of bipolar disorder, is more prevalent than hypomania or mania and accounts for most of the disability. Furthermore, the treatment of bipolar depression is more complicated than the treatment of unipolar major depression. Finally, the evidence base for pharmacotherapy of bipolar depression is much smaller than for unipolar depression or hypomania/mania. AREAS COVERED: The article examines the mechanism of action and pharmacokinetics of quetiapine, its evidence base as a treatment for bipolar depression and related issues of safety and tolerability. EXPERT OPINION: In the context of bipolar disorder, quetiapine is the only monotherapy approved for the treatment of hypomania/mania, depression and as an adjunctive maintenance therapy. In addition to its antipsychotic properties, this broad mood stabilizing potential may uniquely benefit and simplify the management of some bipolar patients who can tolerate this agent.

Iloperidone for schizophrenia.

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD: No existing antipsychotic adequately controls all symptoms associated with schizophrenia. Also, no antipsychotic adequately benefits most patients with this disorder. Finally, the safety and tolerability of each antipsychotic frequently dictate the choice of agent. AREAS COVERED IN THE REVIEW: The mechanism of action of iloperidone, its efficacy and its safety and tolerability when used to treat patients with schizophrenia. WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN: An appreciation of the potential advantages and disadvantages of iloperidone when used for the treatment of schizophrenia. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: Iloperidone is a recent addition to the current group of second-generation antipsychotics. While it may share many qualities with other agents in this class, its unique neuroreceptor signature and adverse-effect profile may prove beneficial in clinical practice.