Cargando…

Clinical effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in UK primary care (CADET): cluster randomised controlled trial

Objective To compare the clinical effectiveness of collaborative care with usual care in the management of patients with moderate to severe depression. Design Cluster randomised controlled trial. Setting 51 primary care practices in three primary care districts in the United Kingdom. Participants 58...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Richards, David A, Hill, Jacqueline J, Gask, Linda, Lovell, Karina, Chew-Graham, Carolyn, Bower, Peter, Cape, John, Pilling, Stephen, Araya, Ricardo, Kessler, David, Bland, J Martin, Green, Colin, Gilbody, Simon, Lewis, Glyn, Manning, Chris, Hughes-Morley, Adwoa, Barkham, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3746956/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23959152
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f4913
_version_ 1782280847443886080
author Richards, David A
Hill, Jacqueline J
Gask, Linda
Lovell, Karina
Chew-Graham, Carolyn
Bower, Peter
Cape, John
Pilling, Stephen
Araya, Ricardo
Kessler, David
Bland, J Martin
Green, Colin
Gilbody, Simon
Lewis, Glyn
Manning, Chris
Hughes-Morley, Adwoa
Barkham, Michael
author_facet Richards, David A
Hill, Jacqueline J
Gask, Linda
Lovell, Karina
Chew-Graham, Carolyn
Bower, Peter
Cape, John
Pilling, Stephen
Araya, Ricardo
Kessler, David
Bland, J Martin
Green, Colin
Gilbody, Simon
Lewis, Glyn
Manning, Chris
Hughes-Morley, Adwoa
Barkham, Michael
author_sort Richards, David A
collection PubMed
description Objective To compare the clinical effectiveness of collaborative care with usual care in the management of patients with moderate to severe depression. Design Cluster randomised controlled trial. Setting 51 primary care practices in three primary care districts in the United Kingdom. Participants 581 adults aged 18 years and older who met ICD-10 (international classification of diseases, 10th revision) criteria for a depressive episode on the revised Clinical Interview Schedule. We excluded acutely suicidal patients and those with psychosis, or with type I or type II bipolar disorder; patients whose low mood was associated with bereavement or whose primary presenting problem was alcohol or drug abuse; and patients receiving psychological treatment for their depression by specialist mental health services. We identified potentially eligible participants by searching computerised case records in general practices for patients with depression. Interventions Collaborative care, including depression education, drug management, behavioural activation, relapse prevention, and primary care liaison, was delivered by care managers. Collaborative care involved six to 12 contacts with participants over 14 weeks, supervised by mental health specialists. Usual care was family doctors’ standard clinical practice. Main outcome measures Depression symptoms (patient health questionnaire 9; PHQ-9), anxiety (generalised anxiety disorder 7; GAD-7), and quality of life (short form 36 questionnaire; SF-36) at four and 12 months; satisfaction with service quality (client satisfaction questionnaire; CSQ-8) at four months. Results 276 participants were allocated to collaborative care and 305 allocated to usual care. At four months, mean depression score was 11.1 (standard deviation 7.3) for the collaborative care group and 12.7 (6.8) for the usual care group. After adjustment for baseline depression, mean depression score was 1.33 PHQ-9 points lower (95% confidence interval 0.35 to 2.31, P=0.009) in participants receiving collaborative care than in those receiving usual care at four months, and 1.36 points lower (0.07 to 2.64, P=0.04) at 12 months. Quality of mental health but not physical health was significantly better for collaborative care than for usual care at four months, but not 12 months. Anxiety did not differ between groups. Participants receiving collaborative care were significantly more satisfied with treatment than those receiving usual care. The number needed to treat for one patient to drop below the accepted diagnostic threshold for depression on the PHQ-9 was 8.4 immediately after treatment, and 6.5 at 12 months. Conclusions Collaborative care has persistent positive effects up to 12 months after initiation of the intervention and is preferred by patients over usual care. Trial registration number ISRCTN32829227.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3746956
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37469562013-08-22 Clinical effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in UK primary care (CADET): cluster randomised controlled trial Richards, David A Hill, Jacqueline J Gask, Linda Lovell, Karina Chew-Graham, Carolyn Bower, Peter Cape, John Pilling, Stephen Araya, Ricardo Kessler, David Bland, J Martin Green, Colin Gilbody, Simon Lewis, Glyn Manning, Chris Hughes-Morley, Adwoa Barkham, Michael BMJ Research Objective To compare the clinical effectiveness of collaborative care with usual care in the management of patients with moderate to severe depression. Design Cluster randomised controlled trial. Setting 51 primary care practices in three primary care districts in the United Kingdom. Participants 581 adults aged 18 years and older who met ICD-10 (international classification of diseases, 10th revision) criteria for a depressive episode on the revised Clinical Interview Schedule. We excluded acutely suicidal patients and those with psychosis, or with type I or type II bipolar disorder; patients whose low mood was associated with bereavement or whose primary presenting problem was alcohol or drug abuse; and patients receiving psychological treatment for their depression by specialist mental health services. We identified potentially eligible participants by searching computerised case records in general practices for patients with depression. Interventions Collaborative care, including depression education, drug management, behavioural activation, relapse prevention, and primary care liaison, was delivered by care managers. Collaborative care involved six to 12 contacts with participants over 14 weeks, supervised by mental health specialists. Usual care was family doctors’ standard clinical practice. Main outcome measures Depression symptoms (patient health questionnaire 9; PHQ-9), anxiety (generalised anxiety disorder 7; GAD-7), and quality of life (short form 36 questionnaire; SF-36) at four and 12 months; satisfaction with service quality (client satisfaction questionnaire; CSQ-8) at four months. Results 276 participants were allocated to collaborative care and 305 allocated to usual care. At four months, mean depression score was 11.1 (standard deviation 7.3) for the collaborative care group and 12.7 (6.8) for the usual care group. After adjustment for baseline depression, mean depression score was 1.33 PHQ-9 points lower (95% confidence interval 0.35 to 2.31, P=0.009) in participants receiving collaborative care than in those receiving usual care at four months, and 1.36 points lower (0.07 to 2.64, P=0.04) at 12 months. Quality of mental health but not physical health was significantly better for collaborative care than for usual care at four months, but not 12 months. Anxiety did not differ between groups. Participants receiving collaborative care were significantly more satisfied with treatment than those receiving usual care. The number needed to treat for one patient to drop below the accepted diagnostic threshold for depression on the PHQ-9 was 8.4 immediately after treatment, and 6.5 at 12 months. Conclusions Collaborative care has persistent positive effects up to 12 months after initiation of the intervention and is preferred by patients over usual care. Trial registration number ISRCTN32829227. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2013-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC3746956/ /pubmed/23959152 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f4913 Text en © Richards et al 2013 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/.
spellingShingle Research
Richards, David A
Hill, Jacqueline J
Gask, Linda
Lovell, Karina
Chew-Graham, Carolyn
Bower, Peter
Cape, John
Pilling, Stephen
Araya, Ricardo
Kessler, David
Bland, J Martin
Green, Colin
Gilbody, Simon
Lewis, Glyn
Manning, Chris
Hughes-Morley, Adwoa
Barkham, Michael
Clinical effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in UK primary care (CADET): cluster randomised controlled trial
title Clinical effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in UK primary care (CADET): cluster randomised controlled trial
title_full Clinical effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in UK primary care (CADET): cluster randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Clinical effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in UK primary care (CADET): cluster randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Clinical effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in UK primary care (CADET): cluster randomised controlled trial
title_short Clinical effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in UK primary care (CADET): cluster randomised controlled trial
title_sort clinical effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in uk primary care (cadet): cluster randomised controlled trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3746956/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23959152
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f4913
work_keys_str_mv AT richardsdavida clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hilljacquelinej clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT gasklinda clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT lovellkarina clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT chewgrahamcarolyn clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT bowerpeter clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT capejohn clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT pillingstephen clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT arayaricardo clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT kesslerdavid clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT blandjmartin clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT greencolin clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT gilbodysimon clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT lewisglyn clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT manningchris clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hughesmorleyadwoa clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT barkhammichael clinicaleffectivenessofcollaborativecarefordepressioninukprimarycarecadetclusterrandomisedcontrolledtrial