Hybrid Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions for Depressive Symptoms in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.

OBJECTIVE: Depression is common in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and is associated with poor outcomes. Although different treatments are available, it is unclear which are best or most acceptable to patients, so we conducted a network meta-analysis of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different depression treatments to ascertain relative efficacy. METHODS: We searched for systematic reviews of RCTs of depression treatments in CAD and updated these with a comprehensive search for recent individual RCTs. RCTs comparing depression treatments (pharmacological, psychotherapeutic, combined pharmacological/psychotherapeutic, exercise, collaborative care) were included. Primary outcomes were acceptability (dropout rate) and change in depressive symptoms 8 week after treatment commencement. Change in 26-week depression and mortality were secondary outcomes. Frequentist, random-effects network meta-analysis was used to synthesize the evidence, and evidence quality was evaluated following Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations recommendations. RESULTS: Thirty-three RCTs (7240 participants) provided analyzable data. All treatments were equally acceptable. At 8 weeks, combination therapy (1 study), exercise (1 study), and antidepressants (10 studies) yielded the strongest effects versus comparators. At 26 weeks, antidepressants were consistently effective, but psychotherapy was only effective versus usual care. There were no differences in treatment groups for mortality. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations ratings ranged from very low to low. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the evidence was limited and biased. Although all treatments for post-CAD depression were equally acceptable, antidepressants have the most robust evidence base and should be the first-line treatment. Combinations of antidepressants and psychotherapy, along with exercise, could be more effective than antidepressants alone but require further rigorous, multiarm intervention trials.Systematic Review Registration: CRD42018108293 (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews).

Barriers and facilitators to GP-patient communication about emotional concerns in UK primary care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, general practitioners (GPs) are the most commonly used providers of care for emotional concerns. OBJECTIVE: To update and synthesize literature on barriers and facilitators to GP-patient communication about emotional concerns in UK primary care. DESIGN: Systematic review and qualitative synthesis. METHOD: We conducted a systematic search on MEDLINE (OvidSP), PsycInfo and EMBASE, supplemented by citation chasing. Eligible papers focused on how GPs and adult patients in the UK communicated about emotional concerns. Results were synthesized using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Across 30 studies involving 342 GPs and 720 patients, four themes relating to barriers were: (i) emotional concerns are difficult to disclose; (ii) tension between understanding emotional concerns as a medical condition or arising from social stressors; (iii) unspoken assumptions about agency resulting in too little or too much involvement in decisions and (iv) providing limited care driven by little time. Three facilitative themes were: (v) a human connection improves identification of emotional concerns and is therapeutic; (vi) exploring, explaining and negotiating a shared understanding or guiding patients towards new understandings and (vii) upfront information provision and involvement manages expectations about recovery and improves engagement in treatment. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that treatment guidelines should acknowledge: the therapeutic value of a positive GP-patient relationship; that diagnosis is a two-way negotiated process rather than an activity strictly in the doctor's domain of expertise; and the value of exploring and shaping new understandings about patients' emotional concerns and their management.

Patients' experiences of seeking help for emotional concerns in primary care: doctor as drug, detective and collaborator.

BACKGROUND: NICE guidelines for the management of emotional concerns in primary care emphasise the importance of communication and a trusting relationship, which is difficult to operationalise in practice. Current pressures in the NHS mean that it is important to understand care from a patient perspective. This study aimed to explore patients' experiences of primary care consultations for emotional concerns and what patients valued when seeking care from their GP. METHODS: Eighteen adults with experience of consulting a GP for emotional concerns participated in 4 focus groups. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: (1) Doctor as Drug: Patients' relationship with their GP was considered therapeutic with continuity particularly valued. (2) Doctor as Detective and Validator: Patients were often puzzled by their symptoms, not recognising their emotional concerns. GPs needed to play the role of detective by exploring not just symptoms, but the person and their life circumstances. GPs were crucial in helping patients understand and validate their emotional concerns. (3) Doctor as Collaborator: Patients prefer a collaborative partnership, but often need to relinquish involvement because they are too unwell, or take a more active role because they feel GPs are ill-equipped or under too much pressure to help. Patients valued: GPs booking their follow up appointments; acknowledgement of stressful life circumstances; not relying solely on medication. CONCLUSIONS: Seeking help for emotional concerns is challenging due to stigma and unfamiliar symptoms. GPs can support disclosure and understanding of emotional concerns by fully exploring and validating patients' concerns, taking into account patients' life contexts. This process of exploration and validation forms the foundation of a curative, trusting GP-patient relationship. A trusting relationship, with an emphasis on empathy and understanding, can make patients more able to share involvement in their care with GPs. This process is cyclical, as patients feel that their GP is caring, interested, and treating them as a person, further strengthening their relationship. NICE guidance should acknowledge the importance of empathy and validation when building an effective GP-patient partnership, and the role this has in supporting patients' involvement in their care.

An integrative analytical model for the water-energy-food nexus: South Africa case study.

The missing link between cross-sectoral resource management and full-scale adoption of the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus has been the lack of analytical tools that provide evidence for policy and decision-making. This study defined WEF nexus sustainability indicators, from where an analytical model was developed to manage WEF resources in an integrated manner using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The model established quantitative relationships among WEF sectors, simplifying the intricate interlinkages among resources, using South Africa as a case study. A spider graph was used to illustrate sector performance as related to others, whose management is viewed either as sustainable or unsustainable. The model was then applied to assess progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals in South Africa. The estimated integrated indices of 0.155 and 0.203 for 2015 and 2018, respectively, classify South Africa's management of resources as marginally sustainable. The model is a decision support tool that highlights priority areas for intervention.

Capacity challenges in water quality monitoring: understanding the role of human development.

Monitoring the qualitative status of freshwaters is an important goal of the international community, as stated in the Sustainable Development Goal (SDGs) indicator 6.3.2 on good ambient water quality. Monitoring data are, however, lacking in many countries, allegedly because of capacity challenges of less-developed countries. So far, however, the relationship between human development and capacity challenges for water quality monitoring have not been analysed systematically. This hinders the implementation of fine-tuned capacity development programmes for water quality monitoring. Against this background, this study takes a global perspective in analysing the link between human development and the capacity challenges countries face in their national water quality monitoring programmes. The analysis is based on the latest data on the human development index and an international online survey amongst experts from science and practice. Results provide evidence of a negative relationship between human development and the capacity challenges to meet SDG 6.3.2 monitoring requirements. This negative relationship increases along the course of the monitoring process, from defining the enabling environment, choosing parameters for the collection of field data, to the analytics and analysis of five commonly used parameters (DO, EC, pH, TP and TN). Our assessment can be used to help practitioners improve technical capacity development activities and to identify and target investment in capacity development for monitoring.

Structured lifestyle education for people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and first-episode psychosis (STEPWISE): randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a major challenge for people with schizophrenia.AimsWe assessed whether STEPWISE, a theory-based, group structured lifestyle education programme could support weight reduction in people with schizophrenia. METHOD: In this randomised controlled trial (study registration: ISRCTN19447796), we recruited adults with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder or first-episode psychosis from ten mental health organisations in England. Participants were randomly allocated to the STEPWISE intervention or treatment as usual. The 12-month intervention comprised four 2.5 h weekly group sessions, followed by 2-weekly maintenance contact and group sessions at 4, 7 and 10 months. The primary outcome was weight change after 12 months. Key secondary outcomes included diet, physical activity, biomedical measures and patient-related outcome measures. Cost-effectiveness was assessed and a mixed-methods process evaluation was included. RESULTS: Between 10 March 2015 and 31 March 2016, we recruited 414 people (intervention 208, usual care 206) with 341 (84.4%) participants completing the trial. At 12 months, weight reduction did not differ between groups (mean difference 0.0 kg, 95% CI -1.6 to 1.7, P = 0.963); physical activity, dietary intake and biochemical measures were unchanged. STEPWISE was well-received by participants and facilitators. The healthcare perspective incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £246 921 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. CONCLUSIONS: Participants were successfully recruited and retained, indicating a strong interest in weight interventions; however, the STEPWISE intervention was neither clinically nor cost-effective. Further research is needed to determine how to manage overweight and obesity in people with schizophrenia.Declaration of interestR.I.G.H. received fees for lecturing, consultancy work and attendance at conferences from the following: Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Lundbeck, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Otsuka, Sanofi, Sunovion, Takeda, MSD. M.J.D. reports personal fees from Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Servier, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Inc.; and, grants from Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen. K.K. has received fees for consultancy and speaker for Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Lilly, Servier and Merck Sharp & Dohme. He has received grants in support of investigator and investigator-initiated trials from Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Lilly, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Merck Sharp & Dohme. K.K. has received funds for research, honoraria for speaking at meetings and has served on advisory boards for Lilly, Sanofi-Aventis, Merck Sharp & Dohme and Novo Nordisk. D.Sh. is expert advisor to the NICE Centre for guidelines; board member of the National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health (NCCMH); clinical advisor (paid consultancy basis) to National Clinical Audit of Psychosis (NCAP); views are personal and not those of NICE, NCCMH or NCAP. J.P. received personal fees for involvement in the study from a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) grant. M.E.C. and Y.D. report grants from NIHR Health Technology Assessment, during the conduct of the study; and The Leicester Diabetes Centre, an organisation (employer) jointly hosted by an NHS Hospital Trust and the University of Leicester and who is holder (through the University of Leicester) of the copyright of the STEPWISE programme and of the DESMOND suite of programmes, training and intervention fidelity framework that were used in this study. S.R. has received honorarium from Lundbeck for lecturing. F.G. reports personal fees from Otsuka and Lundbeck, personal fees and non-financial support from Sunovion, outside the submitted work; and has a family member with professional links to Lilly and GSK, including shares. F.G. is in part funded by the National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research & Care Funding scheme, by the Maudsley Charity and by the Stanley Medical Research Institute and is supported by the by the Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London.

Long-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of collaborative care (versus usual care) for people with mental-physical multimorbidity: cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Collaborative care can support the treatment of depression in people with long-term conditions, but long-term benefits and costs are unknown.AimsTo explore the long-term (24-month) effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of collaborative care in people with mental-physical multimorbidity. METHOD: A cluster randomised trial compared collaborative care (integrated physical and mental healthcare) with usual care for depression alongside diabetes and/or coronary heart disease. Depression symptoms were measured by the symptom checklist-depression scale (SCL-D13). The economic evaluation was from the perspective of the English National Health Service. RESULTS: 191 participants were allocated to collaborative care and 196 to usual care. At 24 months, the mean SCL-D13 score was 0.27 (95% CI, -0.48 to -0.06) lower in the collaborative care group alongside a gain of 0.14 (95% CI, 0.06-0.21) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The cost per QALY gained was £13 069. CONCLUSIONS: In the long term, collaborative care reduces depression and is potentially cost-effective at internationally accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds.Declaration of interestNone.

Stakeholders perspectives on the key components of community-based interventions coordinating care in dementia: a qualitative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Interventions aiming to coordinate services for the community-based dementia population vary in components, organisation and implementation. In this review we aimed to investigate the views of stakeholders on the key components of community-based interventions coordinating care in dementia. METHODS: We searched four databases from inception to June 2015; Medline, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE and PsycINFO, this was aided by a search of four grey literature databases, and backward and forward citation tracking of included papers. Title and abstract screening was followed by a full text screen by two independent reviewers, and quality was assessed using the CASP appraisal tool. We then conducted thematic synthesis on extracted data. RESULTS: A total of seven papers from five independent studies were included in the review, and encompassed the views of over 100 participants from three countries. Through thematic synthesis we identified 32 initial codes that were grouped into 5 second-order themes: (1) case manager had four associated codes and described preferences for the case manager personal and professional attributes, including a sound knowledge in dementia and availability of local services; (2) communication had five associated codes and emphasized the importance stakeholders placed on multichannel communication with service users, as well as between multidisciplinary teams and across organisations; (3) intervention had 11 associated codes which focused primarily on the practicalities of implementation such as the contact type and frequency between case managers and service users, and the importance of case manager training and service evaluation; (4) resources had five associated codes which outlined stakeholder views on the required resources for coordinating interventions and potential overlap with existing resources, as well as arising issues when available resources do not meet those required for successful implementation; and (5) support had seven associated codes that reflect the importance that was placed on the support network around the case manager and the investment of professionals involved directly in care as well as the wider professional network. CONCLUSION: The synthesis of relevant qualitative studies has shown how various stakeholder groups considered dementia care coordination interventions to be acceptable, useful and appropriate for dementia care, and have clear preferences for components, implementation methods and settings of these interventions. By incorporating stakeholders' perspectives and preferences when planning and developing coordinating interventions we may increase the likelihood of successful implementation and patient benefits.

The effectiveness of community-based coordinating interventions in dementia care: a meta-analysis and subgroup analysis of intervention components.

BACKGROUND: Interventions aiming to coordinate services for the community-based dementia population vary in components, organisation and implementation. In this review we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of community-based care coordinating interventions on health outcomes and investigate whether specific components of interventions influence their effects. METHODS: We searched four databases from inception to April 2017: Medline, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE and PsycINFO. This was aided by a search of four grey literature databases, and backward and forward citation tracking of included papers. Title and abstract screening was followed by a full text screen by two independent reviewers, and quality was assessed using the CASP appraisal tool. We then conducted meta-analyses and subgroup analyses. RESULTS: A total of 14 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving 10,372 participants were included in the review. Altogether we carried out 12 meta-analyses and 19 subgroup analyses. Meta-analyses found coordinating interventions showed a statistically significant improvement in both patient behaviour measured using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) (mean difference (MD) = -9.5; 95% confidence interval (CI): -18.1 to -1.0; p = 0.03; number of studies (n) = 4; I2 = 88%) and caregiver burden (standardised mean difference (SMD) = -0.54; 95% CI: -1.01 to -0.07; p = 0.02; n = 5, I2 = 92%) compared to the control group. Subgroup analyses found interventions using a case manager with a nursing background showed a greater positive effect on caregiver quality of life than those that used case managers from other professional backgrounds (SMD = 0.94 versus 0.03, respectively; p < 0.001). Interventions that did not provide supervision for the case managers showed greater effectiveness for reducing the percentage of patients that are institutionalised compared to those that provided supervision (odds ratio (OR) = 0.27 versus 0.96 respectively; p = 0.02). There was little evidence of effects on other outcomes, or that other intervention components modify the intervention effects. CONCLUSION: Results show that coordinating interventions in dementia care has a positive impact on some outcomes, namely patient behaviour and caregiver burden, but the evidence is inconsistent and results were not strong enough to draw definitive conclusions on general effectiveness. With the rising prevalence of dementia, effective complex interventions will be necessary to provide high quality and effective care for patients, and facilitate collaboration of health, social and third sector services.

Depression in people with coronary heart disease: prognostic significance and mechanisms.

Depression affects about 40 % of people with coronary heart disease (CHD). This group with depression and CHD have increased mortality and morbidity, worse health-related quality of life, use health services more frequently and consequently cost the health service and the national economy considerably more than their non-depressed counterparts. A number of characteristics of depression and plausible mechanisms have been proposed to explain this observed association, which could lead to improved understanding of the association and lead to new interventions to improve cardiac outcomes. This review summarises the evidence linking depression with worse cardiac outcomes, considers specific aspects of depression which may predict worse outcomes and reviews the mechanisms that could potentially explain the direct or indirect association of depression with coronary outcomes.

A mixed-methods pilot study of the acceptability and effectiveness of a brief meditation and mindfulness intervention for people with diabetes and coronary heart disease.

Mindfulness-based interventions can successfully target negative perseverative cognitions such as worry and thought suppression, but their acceptability and effectiveness in people with long-term conditions is uncertain. We therefore pilot tested a six-week meditation and mindfulness intervention in people (n = 40) with diabetes mellitus and coronary heart disease. We used a sequential mixed-methods approach that measured change in worry and thought suppression and qualitatively explored acceptability, feasibility, and user experience with a focus group (n = 11) and in-depth interviews (n = 16). The intervention was highly acceptable, with 90% completing ≥5 sessions. Meditation and mindfulness skills led to improved sleep, greater relaxation, and more-accepting approaches to illness and illness experience. At the end of the six-week meditation course, worry, and thought suppression were significantly reduced. Positive impacts of mindfulness-based interventions on psychological health may relate to acquisition and development of meta-cognitive skills but this needs experimental confirmation.

Proactive integrated consultation-liaison psychiatry and time spent in hospital by older medical inpatients in England (The HOME Study): a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Older people admitted to hospital in an emergency often have prolonged inpatient stays that worsen their outcomes, increase health-care costs, and reduce bed availability. Growing evidence suggests that the biopsychosocial complexity of their problems, which include cognitive impairment, depression, anxiety, multiple medical illnesses, and care needs resulting from functional dependency, prolongs hospital stays by making medical treatment less efficient and the planning of post-discharge care more difficult. We aimed to assess the effects of enhancing older inpatients' care with Proactive Integrated Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry (PICLP) in The HOME Study. We have previously described the benefits of PICLP reported by patients and clinicians. In this Article, we report the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PICLP-enhanced care, compared with usual care alone, in reducing time in hospital. METHODS: We did a parallel-group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial in 24 medical wards of three English acute general hospitals. Patients were eligible to take part if they were 65 years or older, had been admitted in an emergency, and were expected to remain in hospital for at least 2 days from the time of enrolment. Participants were randomly allocated to PICLP or usual care in a 1:1 ratio by a database software algorithm that used stratification by hospital, sex, and age, and randomly selected block sizes to ensure allocation concealment. PICLP clinicians (consultation-liaison psychiatrists supported by assisting clinicians) made proactive biopsychosocial assessments of patients' problems, then delivered discharge-focused care as integrated members of ward teams. The primary outcome was time spent as an inpatient (during the index admission and any emergency readmissions) in the 30 days post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes were the rate of discharge from hospital for the total length of the index admission; discharge destination; the length of the index admission after random allocation truncated at 30 days; the number of emergency readmissions to hospital, the number of days spent as an inpatient in an acute general hospital, and the rate of death in the year after random allocation; the patient's experience of the hospital stay; their view on the length of the hospital stay; anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2); depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-2); cognitive function (Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Telephone version); independent functioning (Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living); health-related quality of life (five-level EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire); and overall quality of life. Statisticians and data collectors were masked to treatment allocation; participants and ward staff could not be. Analyses were intention-to-treat. The trial had a patient and public involvement panel and was registered with ISRTCN (ISRCTN86120296). FINDINGS: 2744 participants (1399 [51·0%] male and 1345 [49·0%] female) were enrolled between May 2, 2018, and March 5, 2020; 1373 were allocated to PICLP and 1371 to usual care. Participants' mean age was 82·3 years (SD 8·2) and 2565 (93·5%) participants were White. The mean time spent in hospital in the 30 days post-randomisation (analysed for 2710 [98·8%] participants) was 11·37 days (SD 8·74) with PICLP and 11·85 days (SD 9·00) with usual care; adjusted mean difference -0·45 (95% CI -1·11 to 0·21; p=0·18). The only statistically and clinically significant difference in secondary outcomes was the rate of discharge, which was 8.5% higher (rate ratio 1·09 [95% CI 1·00 to 1·17]; p=0·042) with PICLP-a difference most apparent in patients who stayed for more than 2 weeks. Compared with usual care, PICLP was estimated to be modestly cost-saving and cost-effective over 1 and 3, but not 12, months. No intervention-related serious adverse events occurred. INTERPRETATION: This is the first randomised controlled trial of PICLP. PICLP is experienced by older medical inpatients and ward staff as enhancing medical care. It is also likely to be cost-saving in the short-term. Although the trial does not provide strong evidence that PICLP reduces time in hospital, it does support and inform its future development and evaluation. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Proactive and integrated consultation-liaison psychiatry for older medical inpatients: A mixed methods description of training, care provided and clinician experience in the HOME study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the practical experience of delivering a proactive and integrated consultation-liaison (C-L) psychiatry service model (PICLP). PICLP is designed for older medical inpatients and is explicitly biopsychosocial and discharge-focused. In this paper we report: (a) observations on the training of 15 clinicians (seven senior C-L psychiatrists and eight assisting clinicians) to deliver PICLP; (b) the care they provided to 1359 patients; (c) their experiences of working in this new way. METHOD: A mixed methods observational study using quantitative and qualitative data, collected prospectively over two years as part of The HOME Study (a randomized trial comparing PICLP with usual care). RESULTS: The clinicians were successfully trained to deliver PICLP according to the service manual. They proactively assessed all patients and found that most had multiple biopsychosocial problems impeding their timely discharge from hospital. They integrated with ward teams to provide a range of interventions aimed at addressing these problems. Delivering PICLP took a modest amount of clinical time, and the clinicians experienced it as both clinically valuable and professionally rewarding. CONCLUSION: The experience of delivering PICLP highlights the special role that C-L psychiatry clinicians, working in a proactive and integrated way, can play in medical care.

Characteristics of psychological interventions that improve depression in people with coronary heart disease: a systematic review and meta-regression.

OBJECTIVE: Despite previous intervention trials, it is unclear which psychological treatments are most effective for people with coronary heart disease (CHD). We have conducted a systematic review with meta-regression to identify the characteristics of psychological interventions that improve depression and depressive symptoms among people with CHD. METHODS: Searches of multiple electronic databases up to March 2012 were conducted, supplemented by hand-searching of identified reviews and citation tracing of eligible studies. Studies were included if they reported a randomized controlled trial of a psychological intervention for people with CHD and included depression as an outcome. Data on main effects and characteristics of interventions were extracted from eligible studies. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) were calculated for each study and pooled using random-effects models. Random-effects multivariate meta-regression was performed to identify treatment characteristics associated with improvements in depression. RESULTS: Sixty-four independent treatment comparisons were identified. Psychological interventions improved depression, although the effect was small (SMD=0.18, p<.001). Problem solving (SMD=0.34), general education (SMD=0.19), skills training (SMD=0.25), cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT; SMD=0.23), and relaxation (SMD=0.15) had small effects on CHD patients who were recruited irrespective of their depression status. Among high-quality trials of depressed CHD patients, only CBT showed significant but small effects (SMD=0.31). When entered into multivariable analysis, no individual treatment component significantly improved depression. CONCLUSIONS: CBT and problem solving should be considered for inclusion in future treatment developments and randomized controlled trials. However, the effects are small in magnitude, and there is room to develop new interventions that may be more effective.

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.

Depression interventions for individuals with coronary artery disease - Cost-effectiveness calculations from an Irish perspective.

BACKGROUND: A substantial proportion of individuals with coronary artery disease experience moderate or severe acute depression that requires treatment. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of four interventions for depression in individuals with coronary artery disease. METHODS: We assessed effectiveness of pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, collaborative care and exercise as remission rate after 8 and 26 weeks using estimates from a recent network meta-analysis. The cost assessment included standard doses of antidepressants, contact frequency, and staff time per contact. Unit costs were calculated as health services' purchase price for pharmaceuticals and mid-point staff salaries obtained from the Irish Health Service Executive and validated by clinical staff. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated as the incremental costs over incremental remissions compared to usual care. High- and low-cost scenarios and sensitivity analysis were performed with changed contact frequencies, and assuming individual vs. group psychotherapy or exercise. RESULTS: After 8 weeks, the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was lowest for group exercise (€526 per remission), followed by pharmacotherapy (€589), individual psychotherapy (€3117) and collaborative care (€4964). After 26 weeks, pharmacotherapy was more cost-effective (€591) than collaborative care (€7203) and individual psychotherapy (€9387); no 26-week assessment for exercise was possible. Sensitivity analysis showed that group psychotherapy could be most cost-effective after 8 weeks (€519) and cost-effective after 26 weeks (€1565); however no group psychotherapy trials were available investigating its effectiveness. DISCUSSION: Large variation in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios was seen. With the current assumptions, the most cost-effective depression intervention for individuals with coronary artery disease after 8 weeks was group exercise.

Multimorbidity, service organization and clinical decision making in primary care: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Primary care professionals often manage patients with multiple long-term health conditions, but managing multimorbidity is challenging given time and resource constraints and interactions between conditions. OBJECTIVE: To explore GP and nurse perceptions of multimorbidity and the influence on service organization and clinical decision making. METHODS: A qualitative interview study with primary care professionals in practices in Greater Manchester, U.K. Interviews were conducted with 15 GPs and 10 practice nurses. RESULTS: Primary care professionals identified tensions between delivering care to meet quality targets and fulfilling the patient's agenda, tensions which are exacerbated in multimorbidity. They were aware of the inconvenience suffered by patients through attendance at multiple clinic appointments when care was structured around individual conditions. They reported difficulties managing patients with multimorbidity in limited consultation time, which led to adoption of an 'additive-sequential' decision-making model which dealt with problems in priority order until consultation resources were exhausted, when further management was deferred. Other challenges included the need for patients to co-ordinate their care, the difficulties of self-management support in multimorbidity and problems of making sense of the relationships between physical and mental health. Doctor and nurse accounts included limited consideration of multimorbidity in terms of the interactions between conditions or synergies between management of different conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care professionals identify a number of challenges in care for multimorbidity and adopt a particular model of decision making to deliver care for multiple individual conditions. However, they did not describe specific decision making around managing multimorbidity per se.

Talking about depression: a qualitative study of barriers to managing depression in people with long term conditions in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The risk of depression is increased in people with long term conditions (LTCs) and is associated with poorer patient outcomes for both the depressive illness and the LTC, but often remains undetected and poorly managed. The aim of this study was to identify and explore barriers to detecting and managing depression in primary care in people with two exemplar LTCs: diabetes and coronary heart disease (CHD). METHODS: Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted with 19 healthcare professionals drawn predominately from primary care, along with 7 service users and 3 carers (n = 29). One focus group was then held with a set of 6 healthcare professionals and a set of 7 service users and 1 carer (n = 14). Interviews and the focus group were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed independently. The two data sets were then inspected for commonalities using a constant comparative method, leading to a final thematic framework used in this paper. RESULTS: Barriers to detecting and managing depression in people with LTCs in primary care exist: i) when practitioners in partnership with patients conceptualise depression as a common and understandable response to the losses associated with LTCs - depression in the presence of LTCs is normalised, militating against its recognition and treatment; ii) where highly performanced managed consultations under the terms of the Quality and Outcomes Framework encourage reductionist approaches to case-finding in people with CHD and diabetes, and iii) where there is uncertainty among practitioners about how to negotiate labels for depression in people with LTCs in ways that might facilitate shared understanding and future management. CONCLUSION: Depression was often normalised in the presence of LTCs, obviating rather than facilitating further assessment and management. Furthermore, structural constraints imposed by the QOF encouraged reductionist approaches to case-finding for depression in consultations for CHD and diabetes. Future work might focus on how interventions that draw on the principles of the chronic care model, such as collaborative care, could support primary care practitioners to better recognise and manage depression in patients with LTCs.

"Every structure we're taught goes out the window": General practitioners' experiences of providing help for patients with emotional concerns'.

Up to 40% of general practitioners (GP) consultations contain an emotional component. General practitioners (GPs) have to provide care with limited time and resources. This qualitative study aimed to explore how GPs care for patients experiencing emotional concerns within the constraints of busy clinical practice. Seven GPs participated in three focus groups. Groups were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. Three themes were identified. (a) Collaboratively negotiated diagnosis: How patients' emotional concerns are understood and managed is the result of a negotiation between patient and GP belief models and the availability of treatments including talking therapy. (b) Doctor as drug: Not only is a continuous relationship between GPs and patients therapeutic in its own right, it is also necessary to effectively diagnose and engage patients in treatment as patients may experience stigma regarding emotional concerns. (c) Personal responsibility and institutional pressure: GPs feel personally responsible for supporting patients through their care journey, however, they face barriers due to lack of time and pressure from guidelines. GPs are forced to prioritise high-risk patients and experience an emotional toll. In conclusion, guidelines focus on diagnosis and a stepped-care model, however, this assumes diagnosis is relatively straightforward. GPs and patients have different models of psychological distress. This and the experience of stigma mean that establishing rapport is an important step before the GP and patient negotiate openly and develop a shared understanding of the problem. This takes time and emotional resources to do well. Longer consultations, continuity of care and formal supervision for GPs could enable them to better support patients.

The role of relapse prevention for depression in collaborative care: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Relapse (the re-emergence of depression symptoms before full recovery) is common in depression and relapse prevention strategies are not well researched in primary care settings. Collaborative care is effective for treating acute phase depression but little is known about the use of relapse prevention strategies in collaborative care. We undertook a systematic review to identify and characterise relapse prevention strategies in the context of collaborative care. METHODS: We searched for Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) of collaborative care for depression. In addition to published material, we obtained provider and patient manuals from authors to provide more detail on intervention content. We reported the extent to which collaborative care interventions addressed four relapse prevention components. RESULTS: 93 RCTs were identified. 31 included a formal relapse prevention plan; 42 had proactive monitoring and follow-up after the acute phase; 39 reported strategies for optimising sustained medication adherence; and 20 of the trials reported psychological or psycho-educational treatments persisting beyond the acute phase or focussing on long-term health/relapse prevention. 30 (32.3%) did not report relapse prevention approaches. LIMITATIONS: We did not receive trial materials for approximately half of the trials, which limited our ability to identify relevant features of intervention content. CONCLUSION: Relapse is a significant risk amongst people treated for depression and interventions are needed that specifically address and minimise this risk. Given the advantages of collaborative care as a delivery system for depression care, there is scope for more consistency and increased effort to implement and evaluate relapse prevention strategies.