Adaptation and outcomes of a lay-guided mental health self-care model: Results of six trials.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesize results of six controlled trials of self-care interventions for depression and/or anxiety, focusing on five trials in which lay guidance was compared to self-directed use of the same self-care tools. METHODS: The trials were conducted in Canada in different target populations. Self-care tools were adapted to each population. Guidance was provided in 3-15 calls over a period of 6-26 weeks. Depression and/or anxiety were assessed at follow-up (6-26 weeks). Pooled analyses used a meta-analytic approach. Engagement with the self-care tools was compared using the standardized difference or Cohen's d effect size. RESULTS: In studies with homogeneous outcomes (three for depression, four for anxiety), the pooled effect sizes of guidance vs. self-directed use of the self-care tools were 0.36 (95% CI 0.10, 0.62, N = 235) for depression and 0.21 (95% CI -0.03, 0.44, N = 285) for anxiety. Guidance consistently led to greater engagement with the tools. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention model is a potentially sustainable and accessible alternative to professionally guided self-care for people with mild-moderate depression. Factors which may have limited implementation success include: co-interventions, reduced number of guide calls (3 vs 6 or more), and delivery to dyads (patient-caregiver).

Trained lay coaches and self-care cognitive-behavioral tools improve depression outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Identify the key effective components of a depression self-care intervention. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from 3 studies that demonstrated effectiveness of a similar depression self-care intervention (n = 275): 2 studies among patients with chronic physical conditions and 1 among cancer survivors. The studies used similar tools, and telephone-based lay coaching. Depression remission and reduction at 6 months were assessed with either PHQ-9 (chronic condition cohorts) or CES-D (cancer survivor cohort). Multiple logistic regression was used to analyze data when the interaction p-value with cohort was < 0.10. RESULTS: The 3 coached cohorts achieved better depression outcomes than usual care. The combination of coaching and joint use of 2 tools based on cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) was associated with depression remission and reduction among chronic condition cohorts but not among cancer survivors. Neither the number nor the length of coach calls were associated with outcomes in pooled data. CONCLUSIONS: Trained lay coaching and use of CBT-based self-care tools were associated with improved depression outcomes in patients with chronic conditions but not among cancer survivors. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Trained lay coaching and CBT tools are key components of depression self-care interventions. Further research is needed on the effective components in cancer survivors.

Incremental cost-effectiveness of pharmacotherapy and two brief cognitive-behavioral therapies compared with usual care for panic disorder and noncardiac chest pain.

The aim of this study was to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of two brief cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT)-based interventions and a pharmacological treatment, compared with usual care, initiated in the emergency department (ED) for individuals with panic disorder (PD) with a chief complaint of noncardiac chest pain. A total of 69 patients were followed up to 6 months. The primary outcome variables were direct and indirect costs of treatment and PD severity. Panic management (PM) had an ICER of $124.05, per the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, severity score change (95% confidence interval [CI], $54.63-$314.57), compared with pharmacotherapy (paroxetine), with an ICER of $213.90 (95% CI, $133.51-$394.94), and brief CBT, with an ICER of $309.31 (95% CI, $151.27-$548.28). The pharmacological and CBT interventions were associated with a greater clinical improvement compared with usual care at posttest. PM presented a superior ICER, suggesting that it may be a promising treatment option to implement in EDs.

Comparing two brief psychological interventions to usual care in panic disorder patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain.

BACKGROUND: Panic disorder (PD) is a common, often unrecognized condition among patients presenting with chest pain to the emergency departments (ED). Nevertheless, psychological treatment is rarely initiated. We are unaware of studies that evaluated the efficacy of brief cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) for this population. AIM: Evaluate the efficacy of two brief CBT interventions in PD patients presenting to the ED with chest pain. METHOD: Fifty-eight PD patients were assigned to either a 1-session CBT-based panic management intervention (PMI) (n = 24), a 7-session CBT intervention (n = 19), or a usual-care control condition (n = 15). A structured diagnostic interview and self-reported questionnaires were administered at pre-test, post-test, 3- and 6-month follow-ups. RESULTS: Statistical analysis showed significant reduction in PD severity following both interventions compared to usual care control condition, but with neither showing superiority compared to the other. CONCLUSIONS: CBT-based interventions as brief as a single session initiated within 2 weeks after an ED visit for chest pain appear to be effective for PD. Given the high prevalence of PD in emergency care settings, greater efforts should be made to implement these interventions in the ED and/or primary care setting.

Preliminary investigation of the Panic Screening Score for emergency department patients with unexplained chest pain.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to demonstrate the derivation and the preliminary validation of a brief screening score to improve recognition of panic-like anxiety in emergency department (ED) patients with unexplained chest pain. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 507 ED patients with unexplained chest pain randomly assigned to the derivation condition (n = 201) or the validation condition (n = 306). The Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for DSM-IV (ADIS-IV) acted as the criterion standard for panic diagnosis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine which of the sociodemographic, medical, and questionnaire response variables best predicted the presence of panic-like anxiety in the derivation condition. The selected predictors were entered in a logistic regression analysis to determine variables to be included in the screening score. The predictive validity of the resulting score was evaluated in both conditions. RESULTS: The four-item Panic Screening Score (PSS) identified panic-like anxiety with a sensitivity of 63% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 52% to 73%) and a specificity of 84% (95% CI = 76% to 90%) in the derivation phase. The positive predictive value was 74% (95% CI = 62% to 93%) and the negative predictive value was 76% (95% CI = 68% to 89%). In the validation phase, the sensitivity and specificity were 53% (95% CI = 44% to 62%) and 85% (95% CI = 78% to 89%), respectively. The positive predictive value was 72% (95% CI = 62% to 80%) and the negative predictive value was 71% (95% CI = 65% to 77%). CONCLUSIONS: The PSS may be useful to identify patients with unexplained chest pain who could benefit from referral to mental health professionals or their primary care providers for evaluation of panic attack and panic disorder. Prospective studies to improve and validate the PSS, followed by impact analysis, are mandatory before clinical implementation.

Unexplained chest pain in the ED: could it be panic?

PURPOSE: This study aimed at (1) establishing the prevalence of paniclike anxiety in emergency department (ED) patients with unexplained chest pain (UCP); (2) describing and comparing the sociodemographic, medical, and psychiatric characteristics of UCP patients with and without paniclike anxiety; and (3) measuring the rate of identification of panic in this population. BASIC PROCEDURE: A structured interview, the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, was administered to identify paniclike anxiety and evaluate patients' psychiatric status. Anxious and depressive symptoms were evaluated with self-report questionnaires. Medical information was extracted from patients' medical records. MAIN FINDINGS: The prevalence of paniclike anxiety was 44% (95% CI, 40%-48%) in the sample (n = 771). Psychiatric disorders were more common in panic patients (63.4% vs 20.1%), as were suicidal thoughts (21.3% vs 11.3%). Emergency physician diagnosed only 7.4% of panic cases. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: Paniclike anxiety is common in ED patients with UCP, and this condition is rarely diagnosed in this population.

Efficacy of 2 interventions for panic disorder in patients presenting to the ED with chest pain.

BACKGROUND: Brief and efficacious interventions for panic disorder (PD) in patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs) for chest pain are essential. This study assessed the effects of 2 interventions for this population: a brief cognitive-behavioral therapy delivered by psychologists, and a 6-month pharmacologic treatment initiated and managed by the ED physician. The relative efficacy of both interventions was also examined. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-seven adult patients meeting the diagnostic criteria for PD upon presentation to the ED were assigned to 1 of 3 experimental conditions: a brief cognitive-behavioral therapy (7 sessions), a pharmacologic intervention (paroxetine; 6 months); and a usual care control condition. The primary outcome was severity of PD on Anxiety Disorder Interview Schedule for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, and secondary outcomes included measures of PD symptoms, depressive symptoms, and cardiac anxiety. Outcome measures were taken at baseline, postintervention, as well as at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. RESULTS: Patients receiving either intervention demonstrated significant reductions of PD severity (P = .012), frequency of panic attacks (P = .048), and depressive symptoms (P = .027). CONCLUSION: Taken together, these findings suggest that empirically validated interventions for PD initiated in an ED setting can be feasible and efficacious, and future studies should assess their impact on both the direct (ie, health care utilization) and indirect (ie, lost productivity) costs associated with PD morbidity in this population.