Collaborative care for depressed patients with chronic medical conditions: a randomized trial in Puerto Rico. Can collaborative care address the needs of low-income Latinas with comorbid depression and cancer? Results from a randomized pilot study. A randomised controlled trial to test the feasibility of a collaborative care model for the management of depression in older people. Collaborative Depression Trial (CADET): multi-centre randomised controlled trial of collaborative care for depression--study protocol. A collaborative care depression management program for cardiac inpatients: depression characteristics and in-hospital outcomes. Effectiveness of collaborative care depression treatment in Veterans' Affairs primary care. Effectiveness of collaborative care in addressing depression treatment preferences among low-income Latinos. Collaborative care management of major depression among low-income, predominantly Hispanic subjects with diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Collaborative care for depression in UK primary care: a randomized controlled trial. A randomized effectiveness trial of collaborative care for patients with panic disorder in primary care. Treatment of depression improves physical functioning in older adults. Randomised controlled trial of a collaborative care model with psychiatric consultation for persistent medically unexplained symptoms in general practice. Collaborative care management of late-life depression in the primary care setting: a randomized controlled trial. Randomized controlled trial of collaborative care management of depression among low-income patients with cancer. The effects of a shared decision-making intervention in primary care of depression: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Stepped collaborative care for primary care patients with persistent symptoms of depression: a randomized trial. Impact of a collaborative care model on depression in a primary care setting: a randomized controlled trial. A randomized trial of telemedicine-based collaborative care for depression. Collaborative care for patients with depression and chronic illnesses. Culturally sensitive collaborative treatment for depressed chinese americans in primary care. Implementing collaborative care for depression treatment in primary care: a cluster randomized evaluation of a quality improvement practice redesign. Multifaceted shared care intervention for late life depression in residential care: randomised controlled trial. Telephone-delivered collaborative care for treating post-CABG depression: a randomized controlled trial. Reducing distress in cancer patients with an orientation program. Case management for depression by health care assistants in small primary care practices: a cluster randomized trial. Managing depression in home health care: a randomized clinical trial. Professional and paraprofessional group treatments for depression: a comparison of cognitive-behavioral and mutual support interventions. A multifaceted intervention to improve treatment of depression in primary care. A randomized trial to improve the quality of treatment for panic and generalized anxiety disorders in primary care. Randomised controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy and usual general practitioner care in the management of depression as well as mixed anxiety and depression in primary care. Effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in human immunodeficiency virus clinics. Randomized trial of coordinated psychosocial interventions based on patient self-assessments versus standard care to improve the psychosocial functioning of patients with cancer. Intervention to improve psychological functioning for newly diagnosed patients with cancer. Collaborative care for bipolar disorder: part I. Intervention and implementation in a randomized effectiveness trial. PHASE: a randomised, controlled trial of supervised self-help cognitive behavioural therapy in primary care. Understanding team-based quality improvement for depression in primary care. Re-engineering systems for the treatment of depression in primary care: cluster randomised controlled trial. A randomized trial of the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy and supportive counseling for anxiety symptoms in older adults. A group cognitive behaviour therapy programme with metastatic breast cancer patients. Problem-solving therapy in palliative care. Effectiveness of a quality improvement intervention for adolescent depression in primary care clinics: a randomized controlled trial. Collaborative management to achieve treatment guidelines. Impact on depression in primary care. The Pathways Study: a randomized trial of collaborative care in patients with diabetes and depression. A pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial of an educational intervention for GPs in the assessment and management of depression. A cluster randomized trial comparing two interventions to improve treatment of major depression in primary care. Randomised controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy, and usual general practitioner care for patients with depression. II: cost effectiveness. Graduate mental health worker case management of depression in UK primary care: a pilot study. Controlled trial of a brief cognitive-behavioural intervention in adolescent patients with depressive disorders. Comparative effects of cognitive-behavioral and brief psychodynamic psychotherapies for depressed family caregivers. Cognitive-behavior therapy for late-life generalized anxiety disorder in primary care: preliminary findings. Differential effectiveness of depression disease management for rural and urban primary care patients. Relaxation and imagery for anxiety and depression control in community patients with advanced cancer. A trial of problem-solving by community mental health nurses for anxiety, depression and life difficulties among general practice patients. The CPN-GP study. Improving access to geriatric mental health services: a randomized trial comparing treatment engagement with integrated versus enhanced referral care for depression, anxiety, and at-risk alcohol use. Caregiver-Assisted Coping Skills Training for Lung Cancer: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial. The effects and expense of augmenting usual cancer clinic care with telephone problem-solving counseling. [Interpersonal psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy for post-stroke depression. Feasibility and effectiveness]. Depression and anxiety. Impact of improved depression treatment in primary care on daily functioning and disability. Stepped care treatment of postpartum depression: impact on treatment, health, and work outcomes. A pilot study of telephone care management and structured disease self-management groups for chronic depression. Randomized clinical trial on cognitive therapy for depression in women with metastatic breast cancer: psychological and immunological effects. Delivery of evidence-based treatment for multiple anxiety disorders in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. Effectiveness of an intervention led by lay health counsellors for depressive and anxiety disorders in primary care in Goa, India (MANAS): a cluster randomised controlled trial. Systematic detection and multidisciplinary care of depression in older medical inpatients: a randomized trial. Group cognitive-behavioral therapy for generalized anxiety disorder: treatment outcome and long-term follow-up. A randomized trial to evaluate an education programme for patients and carers after stroke. Improving psychologic adjustment to chronic illness in cardiac patients. The role of depression and anxiety. Cognitive-behavioral group treatments in childhood anxiety disorders: the role of parental involvement. Exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial of shared care development for long-term mental illness. Applied relaxation vs. cognitive therapy in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder. Randomised controlled trial of effects of coordinating care for terminally ill cancer patients. Reducing emotional distress in people caring for patients receiving specialist palliative care. Randomised trial. Effects of group CBT on the survival time of patients with metastatic breast cancer. Group prevention of depression and anxiety symptoms. Improving physicians' recognition and treatment of depression in general medical care. Results from a randomized clinical trial. Preventing anxiety and depression in gynaecological cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Impact of disseminating quality improvement programs for depression in managed primary care: a randomized controlled trial. Cognitive therapy and pharmacotherapy. Singly and together in the treatment of depression.
This study examined whether a collaborative care model for depression would improve clinical and functional outcomes for depressed patients with chronic general medical conditions in primary care practices in Puerto Rico.
                A total of 179 primary care patients with major depression and chronic general medical conditions were randomly assigned to receive collaborative care or usual care. The collaborative care intervention involved enhanced collaboration among physicians, mental health specialists, and care managers paired with depression-specific treatment guidelines, patient education, and follow-up. In usual care, study personnel informed the patient and provider of the diagnosis and encouraged patients to discuss treatment options with their provider. Depression severity was assessed with the Hopkins Symptom Checklist; social functioning was assessed with the 36-item Short Form.
                Compared with usual care, collaborative care significantly reduced depressive symptoms and improved social functioning in the six months after randomization. Integration of collaborative care in primary care practices considerably increased depressed patients' use of mental health services.
                Collaborative care significantly improved clinical symptoms and functional status of depressed patients with coexisting chronic general medical conditions receiving treatment for depression in primary care practices in Puerto Rico. These findings highlight the promise of the collaborative care model for strengthening the relationship between mental health and primary care services in Puerto Rico. In a pilot study, 55 low-income Latina patients with breast or cervical cancer and comorbid depression were randomly assigned to receive collaborative care as part of the Multifaceted Oncology Depression Program or usual care. Relative to patients in the usual care condition, patients receiving collaborative care were more likely to show>or=50% improvement in depressive symptoms as measured by the Personal Health Questionnaire (OR=4.51, 95% CI=1.07-18.93). Patients in the collaborative care program were also more likely to show improvement in emotional well-being (increase of 2.15) as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Scale than were those receiving usual care (decrease of 0.50) (group difference=2.65, 95% CI: 0.18-5.12). Despite health system, provider, and patient barriers to care, these initial results suggest that patients in public sector oncology clinics can benefit from onsite depression treatment. Depression is the most common mental health disorder in people aged over 65 years. Late-life depression is associated with chronic illness and disability.
                To investigate the feasibility of a collaborative care model for depression in older people in a primary care setting.
                Randomised controlled trial with 16-weeks follow up.
                A primary care trust in Manchester.
                Participants were 105 people aged 60 years or older who scored 5 or more on the Geriatric Depression Scale; 53 were randomly allocated to an intervention group and 52 to a usual care group. The intervention group received care managed by a community psychiatric nurse who delivered an intervention comprising a facilitated self-help programme with close liaison with primary care professionals and old-age psychiatry according to a defined protocol. The usual care group received usual GP care. A nested qualitative study explored the views of the health professionals and patients regarding the acceptability and effectiveness of the intervention.
                The main outcome measure was recovery from depression. Patients in the intervention group were less likely to suffer from major depressive disorder at follow up compared with usual care (0.32, 95% confidence = interval = 0.11 to 0.93, P = 0.036). The qualitative component of the study demonstrated the acceptability of the intervention to patients.
                A model of collaborative care for older people with depression, used in a primary care setting with a facilitated self-help intervention is more effective than usual GP care. This study demonstrates that the implementation of a collaborative care model is feasible in UK primary care and that the intervention is effective and acceptable to patients. Comprising of both organisational and patient level components, collaborative care is a potentially powerful intervention for improving depression treatment in UK primary Care. However, as previous models have been developed and evaluated in the United States, it is necessary to establish the effect of collaborative care in the UK in order to determine whether this innovative treatment model can replicate benefits for patients outside the US. This Phase III trial was preceded by a Phase II patient level RCT, following the MRC Complex Intervention Framework.
                A multi-centre controlled trial with cluster-randomised allocation of GP practices. GP practices will be randomised to usual care control or to "collaborative care" - a combination of case manager coordinated support and brief psychological treatment, enhanced specialist and GP communication. The primary outcome will be symptoms of depression as assessed by the PHQ-9.
                If collaborative care is demonstrated to be effective we will have evidence to enable the NHS to substantially improve the organisation of depressed patients in primary care, and to assist primary care providers to deliver a model of enhanced depression care which is both effective and acceptable to patients. Depression in cardiac patients is common, under-recognized, and independently associated with mortality.
                Our objectives in this initial report from a 6-month longitudinal trial were to determine whether a collaborative care program improves rates of depression treatment by discharge among patients hospitalized with acute cardiovascular disease, and to assess key clinical characteristics of depression in this cohort.
                This was a prospective, randomized trial comparing collaborative care and usual care interventions for depressed cardiac patients who were admitted to cardiac units in an urban academic medical center. For collaborative care subjects, the care manager performed a multi-component depression intervention in the hospital that included patient education and treatment coordination; usual care subjects' inpatient providers were informed of the depression diagnosis.
                The mean Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for subjects (N = 175) was 17.6 (SD 3.5; range 11-26), consistent with moderate-severe depression. The majority of subjects had depression for over one month (n = 134; 76.6%) and a prior depressive episode (n = 124; 70.8%); nearly one-half (n = 75; 42.9%) had thoughts that life was not worth living in the preceding 2 weeks. Collaborative care subjects were far more likely to receive adequate depression treatment by discharge (71.9% collaborative care vs. 9.5% usual care; p < 0.001).
                Depression identified by systematic screening in hospitalized cardiac patients appears was prolonged, and of substantial severity. A collaborative care depression management model appears to vastly increase rates of appropriate treatment by discharge.
                Copyright © 2011 The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. To compare collaborative care for treatment of depression in primary care with consult-liaison (CL) care. In collaborative care, a mental health team provided a treatment plan to the primary care provider, telephoned patients to support adherence to the plan, reviewed treatment results, and suggested modifications to the provider. In CL care, study clinicians informed the primary care provider of the diagnosis and facilitated referrals to psychiatry residents practicing in the primary care clinic.
                Patients were randomly assigned to treatment model by clinic firm.
                VA primary care clinic.
                One hundred sixty-eight collaborative care and 186 CL patients who met criteria for major depression and/or dysthymia.
                Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-20), Short Form (SF)-36, Sheehan Disability Scale.
                Collaborative care produced greater improvement than CL in depressive symptomatology from baseline to 3 months (SCL-20 change scores), but at 9 months there was no significant difference. The intervention increased the proportion of patients receiving prescriptions and cognitive behavioral therapy. Collaborative care produced significantly greater improvement on the Sheehan at 3 months. A greater proportion of collaborative care patients exhibited an improvement in SF-36 Mental Component Score of 5 points or more from baseline to 9 months.
                Collaborative care resulted in more rapid improvement in depression symptomatology, and a more rapid and sustained improvement in mental health status compared to the more standard model. Mounting evidence indicates that collaboration between primary care providers and mental health specialists can improve depression treatment and supports the necessary changes in clinic structure and incentives. This study assessed treatment preferences among low-income Latino patients in public-sector primary care clinics and examined whether a collaborative care intervention that included patient education and allowed patients to choose between medication, therapy, or both would increase the likelihood that patients received preferred treatment.
                A total of 339 Latino patients with probable depressive disorders were recruited; participants completed a baseline conjoint analysis preference survey and were randomly assigned to receive the intervention or enhanced usual care. At 16 weeks, a patient survey assessed depression treatment received during the study period. Logistic regression models were constructed to estimate treatment preferences, examine patient characteristics associated with treatment preferences, and examine patient characteristics associated with a match between stated preference and actual treatment received.
                The conjoint analysis preference survey showed that patients preferred counseling or counseling plus medication over antidepressant medication alone and that they preferred treatment in primary care over specialty mental health care, but they showed no significant preference for individual versus group treatment. Patients also indicated that individual education sessions, telephone sessions, transportation assistance, and family involvement were barrier reduction strategies that would enhance their likelihood of accepting treatment. Compared with patients assigned to usual care, those in the intervention group were 21 times as likely to receive preferred treatment. Among all participants, women, unemployed persons, those who spoke English, and those referred by providers were more likely to receive preferred treatment.
                Collaborative care interventions that include psychotherapy can increase the likelihood that Latino patients receive preferred care; however, special efforts may be needed to address preferences of working persons, men, and Spanish-speaking patients. To determine whether evidence-based socioculturally adapted collaborative depression care improves receipt of depression care and depression and diabetes outcomes in low-income Hispanic subjects.
                This was a randomized controlled trial of 387 diabetic patients (96.5% Hispanic) with clinically significant depression recruited from two public safety-net clinics from August 2005 to July 2007 and followed over 18 months. Intervention (INT group) included problem-solving therapy and/or antidepressant medication based on a stepped-care algorithm; first-line treatment choice; telephone treatment response, adherence, and relapse prevention follow-up over 12 months; plus systems navigation assistance. Enhanced usual care (EUC group) included standard clinic care plus patient receipt of depression educational pamphlets and a community resource list.
                INT patients had significantly greater depression improvement (> or =50% reduction in Symptom Checklist-20 depression score from baseline; 57, 62, and 62% vs. the EUC group's 36, 42, and 44% at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively; odds ratio 2.46-2.57; P < 0.001). Mixed-effects linear regression models showed a significant study group-by-time interaction over 18 months in diabetes symptoms; anxiety; Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) emotional, physical, and pain-related functioning; Sheehan disability; financial situation; and number of social stressors (P = 0.04 for disability and SF-12 physical functioning, P < 0.001 for all others) but no study group-by-time interaction in A1C, diabetes complications, self-care management, or BMI.
                Socioculturally adapted collaborative depression care improved depression, functional outcomes, and receipt of depression treatment in predominantly Hispanic patients in safety-net clinics. Collaborative care is an effective intervention for depression which includes both organizational and patient-level intervention components. The effect in the UK is unknown, as is whether cluster- or patient-randomization would be the most appropriate design for a Phase III clinical trial.
                We undertook a Phase II patient-level randomized controlled trial in primary care, nested within a cluster-randomized trial. Depressed participants were randomized to 'collaborative care' - case manager-coordinated medication support and brief psychological treatment, enhanced specialist and GP communication - or a usual care control. The primary outcome was symptoms of depression (PHQ-9).
                We recruited 114 participants, 41 to the intervention group, 38 to the patient randomized control group and 35 to the cluster-randomized control group. For the intervention compared to the cluster control the PHQ-9 effect size was 0.63 (95% CI 0.18-1.07). There was evidence of substantial contamination between intervention and patient-randomized control participants with less difference between the intervention group and patient-randomized control group (-2.99, 95% CI -7.56 to 1.58, p=0.186) than between the intervention and cluster-randomized control group (-4.64, 95% CI -7.93 to -1.35, p=0.008). The intra-class correlation coefficient for our primary outcome was 0.06 (95% CI 0.00-0.32).
                Collaborative care is a potentially powerful organizational intervention for improving depression treatment in UK primary care, the effect of which is probably partly mediated through the organizational aspects of the intervention. A large Phase III cluster-randomized trial is required to provide the most methodologically accurate test of these initial encouraging findings. Effectiveness studies have tested interventions to improve quality of care for depression in primary care, but none, to our knowledge, have been completed for panic disorder (PD) in this setting. This study sought to test the clinical effectiveness of PD pharmacotherapy embedded in a disease management framework of "collaborative care" (CC).
                One hundred fifteen patients with PD from 3 primary care clinics were randomized to CC or "usual care" (UC). Patients in CC (n = 57) received educational videotapes and pamphlets; pharmacotherapy with the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor paroxetine; 2 psychiatrist visits and 2 telephone calls in the first 8 weeks; and up to 5 telephone calls between 3 and 12 months' follow-up. Usual care patients (n = 58) were treated by their primary care physician. Telephone assessments of panic, anxiety sensitivity, depression, and disability variables were performed at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months' follow-up. Adequacy of pharmacotherapy was assessed with an algorithm based on a review of efficacy studies.
                Patients in CC were more likely to receive adequate (type, dose, duration) medication and more likely to adhere to this medication at 3 and 6 months. Random regression analyses showed that CC patients improved significantly more over time compared with UC patients on anxiety, depression, and disability measures, with the greatest effects at 3 and 6 months.
                Compared with UC, CC interventions significantly improved both quality of care and clinical and functional outcomes in primary care PD patients. Clinical differences were greatest in the first 6 months, corresponding to the greater quality of care and the greater intensity of intervention. To determine the effect of collaborative care management for depression on physical functioning in older adults.
                Multisite randomized clinical trial.
                Eighteen primary care clinics from eight healthcare organizations.
                One thousand eight hundred one patients aged 60 and older with major depressive disorder.
                Patients were randomized to the Improving Mood: Promoting Access to Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT) intervention (n=906) or to a control group receiving usual care (n=895). Control patients had access to all health services available as part of usual care. Intervention patients had access for 12 months to a depression clinical specialist who coordinated depression care with their primary care physician.
                The 12-item short form Physical Component Summary (PCS) score (range 0-100) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) (range 0-7).
                The mean patient age was 71.2, 65% were women, and 77% were white. At baseline, the mean PCS was 40.2, and the mean number of IADL dependencies was 0.7; 45% of participants rated their health as fair or poor. Intervention patients experienced significantly better physical functioning at 1 year than usual-care patients as measured using between-group differences on the PCS of 1.71 (95% confidence interval (CI)=0.96-2.46) and IADLs of -0.15 (95% CI=-0.29 to -0.01). Intervention patients were also less likely to rate their health as fair or poor (37.3% vs 52.4%, P<.001). Combining both study groups, patients whose depression improved were more likely to experience improvement in physical functioning.
                The IMPACT collaborative care model for late-life depression improves physical function more than usual care. Patients with persistent medically unexplained symptoms often exhibit general dysfunction and psychiatric comorbidity and frequently resist psychiatric referral. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a collaborative care model including training for general practitioners (GPs) and a psychiatric consultation model for patients with persistent medically unexplained symptoms in general practice.
                Randomised controlled trial. Cluster randomisation at GP practices and multilevel analysis were performed. A total of 81 patients from 36 general practices completed the study. A collaborative care model of training and psychiatric consultation in general practice in the presence of the GP was compared with training plus care as usual by the GP. Outcome assessment on the patients' well-being, functioning and utilisation of health care services was performed 6 weeks and 6 months later.
                All the patients had somatoform disorders (Whitely Index 7.46), and 86% had comorbid psychiatric disorders. In the intervention group, the severity of the main medically unexplained symptoms decreased by 58%. The patients' social functioning improved. The utilization of health care was lower than in the care as usual group.
                A collaborative care model combining training with psychiatric consultation in the general practice setting is an effective intervention in the treatment of persistent medically unexplained symptoms. Anxiety and depressive disorders are highly comorbid in this group. The findings warrant a larger study. Few depressed older adults receive effective treatment in primary care settings.
                To determine the effectiveness of the Improving Mood-Promoting Access to Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT) collaborative care management program for late-life depression.
                Randomized controlled trial with recruitment from July 1999 to August 2001.
                Eighteen primary care clinics from 8 health care organizations in 5 states.
                A total of 1801 patients aged 60 years or older with major depression (17%), dysthymic disorder (30%), or both (53%).
                Patients were randomly assigned to the IMPACT intervention (n = 906) or to usual care (n = 895). Intervention patients had access for up to 12 months to a depression care manager who was supervised by a psychiatrist and a primary care expert and who offered education, care management, and support of antidepressant management by the patient's primary care physician or a brief psychotherapy for depression, Problem Solving Treatment in Primary Care.
                Assessments at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months for depression, depression treatments, satisfaction with care, functional impairment, and quality of life.
                At 12 months, 45% of intervention patients had a 50% or greater reduction in depressive symptoms from baseline compared with 19% of usual care participants (odds ratio [OR], 3.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.71-4.38; P<.001). Intervention patients also experienced greater rates of depression treatment (OR, 2.98; 95% CI, 2.34-3.79; P<.001), more satisfaction with depression care (OR, 3.38; 95% CI, 2.66-4.30; P<.001), lower depression severity (range, 0-4; between-group difference, -0.4; 95% CI, -0.46 to -0.33; P<.001), less functional impairment (range, 0-10; between-group difference, -0.91; 95% CI, -1.19 to -0.64; P<.001), and greater quality of life (range, 0-10; between-group difference, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.32-0.79; P<.001) than participants assigned to the usual care group.
                The IMPACT collaborative care model appears to be feasible and significantly more effective than usual care for depression in a wide range of primary care practices. To determine the effectiveness of the Alleviating Depression Among Patients With Cancer (ADAPt-C) collaborative care management for major depression or dysthymia.
                Study patients included 472 low-income, predominantly female Hispanic patients with cancer age >or= 18 years with major depression (49%), dysthymia (5%), or both (46%). Patients were randomly assigned to intervention (n = 242) or enhanced usual care (EUC; n = 230). Intervention patients had access for up to 12 months to a depression clinical specialist (supervised by a psychiatrist) who offered education, structured psychotherapy, and maintenance/relapse prevention support. The psychiatrist prescribed antidepressant medications for patients preferring or assessed to require medication.
                At 12 months, 63% of intervention patients had a 50% or greater reduction in depressive symptoms from baseline as assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) depression scale compared with 50% of EUC patients (odds ratio [OR] = 1.98; 95% CI, 1.16 to 3.38; P = .01). Improvement was also found for 5-point decrease in PHQ-9 score among 72.2% of intervention patients compared with 59.7% of EUC patients (OR = 1.99; 95% CI, 1.14 to 3.50; P = .02). Intervention patients also experienced greater rates of depression treatment (72.3% v 10.4% of EUC patients; P < .0001) and significantly better quality-of-life outcomes, including social/family (adjusted mean difference between groups, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.22 to 4.17; P < .001), emotional (adjusted mean difference, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.26 to 2.22; P = .01), functional (adjusted mean difference, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.08 to 2.59; P = .04), and physical well-being (adjusted mean difference, 2.79; 95% CI, 0.49 to 5.1; P = .02).
                ADAPt-C collaborative care is feasible and results in significant reduction in depressive symptoms, improvement in quality of life, and lower pain levels compared with EUC for patients with depressive disorders in a low-income, predominantly Hispanic population in public sector oncology clinics. Patient-centred depression care approaches should better address barriers of insufficient patient information and involvement in the treatment decision process. Additional research is needed to test the effect of increased patient participation on outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess, if patient participation in decision-making via a shared decision-making intervention leads to improved treatment adherence, satisfaction, and clinical outcome without increasing consultation time.
                Cluster-randomized controlled intervention study based on physician training and patient-centered decision aid compared to usual care in primary care settings in Südbaden region of Germany. Twenty-three primary care physicians treating 405 patients with newly diagnosed depression were enrolled. Patient involvement was measured with the patient perceived involvement in care scale (PICS) and a patient participation scale (MSH-scale). Patient satisfaction was measured by the CSQ-8 questionnaire. Treatment adherence was evaluated by patient and provider self-report. Depression severity and remission outcomes were assessed with the Brief PHQ-D.
                Physician facilitation of patient participation improved significantly and to a greater extent in the intervention compared to the control group. There was no intervention effect for depression severity reduction. Doctor facilitation of patient participation, patient-rated involvement, and physician assessment of adherence improved only in the intervention group. Patient satisfaction at post-intervention was higher in the intervention group compared to the control group. The consultation time did not differ between groups.
                A shared decision-making intervention was better than usual care for improving patient participation in treatment decision-making, and patient satisfaction without increasing consultation time. Additional research is needed to model causal linkages in the decision-making process in regard to outcomes.
                The study results encourage the implementation of patient participation in primary care of depression. Despite improvements in the accuracy of diagnosing depression and use of medications with fewer side effects, many patients treated with antidepressant medications by primary care physicians have persistent symptoms.
                A group of 228 patients recognized as depressed by their primary care physicians and given antidepressant medication who had either 4 or more persistent major depressive symptoms or a score of 1.5 or more on the Hopkins Symptom Checklist depression items at 6 to 8 weeks were randomized to a collaborative care intervention (n = 114) or usual care (n = 114) by the primary care physician. Patients in the intervention group received enhanced education and increased frequency of visits by a psychiatrist working with the primary care physician to improve pharmacologic treatment. Follow-up assessments were completed at 1, 3, and 6 months by a telephone survey team blinded to randomization status.
                Those in the intervention group had significantly greater adherence to adequate dosage of medication for 90 days or more and were more likely to rate the quality of care they received for depression as good to excellent compared with usual care controls. Intervention patients showed a significantly greater decrease compared with usual care controls in severity of depressive symptoms over time and were more likely to have fully recovered at 3 and 6 months.
                A multifaceted program targeted to patients whose depressive symptoms persisted 6 to 8 weeks after initiation of antidepressant medication by their primary care physician was found to significantly improve adherence to antidepressants, satisfaction with care, and depressive outcomes compared with usual care. To measure the effects of a collaborative care model that emphasized the role of clinical pharmacists in providing drug therapy management and treatment follow-up to patients with depression, we conducted a randomized controlled trial at a staff model health maintenance organization. We compared the outcomes of subjects treated in this collaborative care model (75 patients, intervention group) with subjects receiving usual care (50 patients, control group). After 6 months, the intervention group demonstrated a significantly higher drug adherence rate than that of the control group (67% vs 48%, odds ratio 2.17, 95% confidence interval 1.04-4.51, p=0.038). Patient satisfaction was significantly greater among members randomly assigned to pharmacists' services than among controls, and provider satisfaction surveys revealed high approval rates as well. Changes in resource utilization were favorable for the intervention group, but differences from the control group did not achieve statistical significance. Clinical improvement was noted in both groups, but the difference was not significant. Clinical pharmacists had a favorable effect on multiple aspects of patient care. Future studies of this model in other health care settings appear warranted. Evidence-based practices designed for large urban clinics are not necessarily portable into smaller isolated clinics. Implementing practice-based collaborative care for depression in smaller primary care clinics presents unique challenges because it is often not feasible to employ on-site psychiatrists.
                The purpose of the Telemedicine Enhanced Antidepressant Management (TEAM) study was to evaluate a telemedicine-based collaborative care model adapted for small clinics without on-site psychiatrists.
                Matched sites were randomized to the intervention or usual care.
                Small VA Community-based outpatient clinics with no on-site psychiatrists, but access to telepsychiatrists. In 2003-2004, 395 primary care patients with PHQ9 depression severity scores > or = 12 were enrolled, and followed for 12 months. Patients with serious mental illness and current substance dependence were excluded.
                Medication adherence, treatment response, remission, health status, health-related quality of life, and treatment satisfaction.
                The sample comprised mostly elderly, white, males with substantial physical and behavioral health comorbidity. At baseline, subjects had moderate depression severity (Hopkins Symptom Checklist, SCL-20 = 1.8), 3.7 prior depression episodes, and 67% had received prior depression treatment. Multivariate analyses indicated that intervention patients were more likely to be adherent at both 6 (odds ratio [OR] = 2.1, p = .04) and 12 months (OR = 2.7, p = .01). Intervention patients were more likely to respond by 6 months (OR = 2.0, p = .02), and remit by 12 months (OR = 2.4, p = .02). Intervention patients reported larger gains in mental health status and health-related quality of life, and reported higher satisfaction.
                Collaborative care can be successfully adapted for primary care clinics without on-site psychiatrists using telemedicine technologies. Patients with depression and poorly controlled diabetes, coronary heart disease, or both have an increased risk of adverse outcomes and high health care costs. We conducted a study to determine whether coordinated care management of multiple conditions improves disease control in these patients.
                We conducted a single-blind, randomized, controlled trial in 14 primary care clinics in an integrated health care system in Washington State, involving 214 participants with poorly controlled diabetes, coronary heart disease, or both and coexisting depression. Patients were randomly assigned to the usual-care group or to the intervention group, in which a medically supervised nurse, working with each patient's primary care physician, provided guideline-based, collaborative care management, with the goal of controlling risk factors associated with multiple diseases. The primary outcome was based on simultaneous modeling of glycated hemoglobin, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, and systolic blood-pressure levels and Symptom Checklist-20 (SCL-20) depression outcomes at 12 months; this modeling allowed estimation of a single overall treatment effect.
                As compared with controls, patients in the intervention group had greater overall 12-month improvement across glycated hemoglobin levels (difference, 0.58%), LDL cholesterol levels (difference, 6.9 mg per deciliter [0.2 mmol per liter]), systolic blood pressure (difference, 5.1 mm Hg), and SCL-20 depression scores (difference, 0.40 points) (P<0.001). Patients in the intervention group also were more likely to have one or more adjustments of insulin (P=0.006), antihypertensive medications (P<0.001), and antidepressant medications (P<0.001), and they had better quality of life (P<0.001) and greater satisfaction with care for diabetes, coronary heart disease, or both (P<0.001) and with care for depression (P<0.001).
                As compared with usual care, an intervention involving nurses who provided guideline-based, patient-centered management of depression and chronic disease significantly improved control of medical disease and depression. (Funded by the National Institute of Mental Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00468676.). We examined the feasibility and effectiveness of using culturally sensitive collaborative treatment (CSCT) to improve recognition, engagement, and treatment of depressed Chinese Americans in primary care.
                Chinese American patients in a primary care setting (n = 4228) were screened for depression. The primary study outcome was treatment engagement rate, and the secondary outcome was treatment response.
                Of the study participants, 296 (7%) screened positive for depression, 122 (41%) of whom presented for a psychiatric assessment; 104 (85%) were confirmed with major depressive disorder, and 100 (96%) of these patients were randomized into treatment involving either care management or usual care. Patients in the care management and usual care groups did not differ in terms of their outcomes. CSCT resulted in a nearly 7-fold increase in treatment rate among depressed patients in primary care.
                CSCT is both feasible and effective in improving recognition and treatment engagement of depressed Chinese Americans. Care management may have limited effects on depressed patients treated by psychiatrists, given that these patients tend to have favorable responses in general. Meta-analyses show collaborative care models (CCMs) with nurse care management are effective for improving primary care for depression. This study aimed to develop CCM approaches that could be sustained and spread within Veterans Affairs (VA). Evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) uses QI approaches within a research/clinical partnership to redesign care. The study used EBQI methods for CCM redesign, tested the effectiveness of the locally adapted model as implemented, and assessed the contextual factors shaping intervention effectiveness.
                The study intervention is EBQI as applied to CCM implementation. The study uses a cluster randomized design as a formative evaluation tool to test and improve the effectiveness of the redesign process, with seven intervention and three non-intervention VA primary care practices in five different states. The primary study outcome is patient antidepressant use. The context evaluation is descriptive and uses subgroup analysis. The primary context evaluation measure is naturalistic primary care clinician (PCC) predilection to adopt CCM.For the randomized evaluation, trained telephone research interviewers enrolled consecutive primary care patients with major depression in the evaluation, referred enrolled patients in intervention practices to the implemented CCM, and re-surveyed at seven months.
                Interviewers enrolled 288 CCM site and 258 non-CCM site patients. Enrolled intervention site patients were more likely to receive appropriate antidepressant care (66% versus 43%, p = 0.01), but showed no significant difference in symptom improvement compared to usual care. In terms of context, only 40% of enrolled patients received complete care management per protocol. PCC predilection to adopt CCM had substantial effects on patient participation, with patients belonging to early adopter clinicians completing adequate care manager follow-up significantly more often than patients of clinicians with low predilection to adopt CCM (74% versus 48%%, p = 0.003).
                Depression CCM designed and implemented by primary care practices using EBQI improved antidepressant initiation. Combining QI methods with a randomized evaluation proved challenging, but enabled new insights into the process of translating research-based CCM into practice. Future research on the effects of PCC attitudes and skills on CCM results, as well as on enhancing the link between improved antidepressant use and symptom outcomes, is needed.
                ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00105820. To evaluate the effectiveness of a population based, multifaceted shared care intervention for late life depression in residential care.
                Randomised controlled trial, with control and intervention groups studied one after the other and blind follow up after 9.5 months.
                Population of residential facility in Sydney living in self care units and hostels.
                220 depressed residents aged >/=65 without severe cognitive impairment.
                The shared care intervention included: (a) multidisciplinary consultation and collaboration, (b) training of general practitioners and carers in detection and management of depression, and (c) depression related health education and activity programmes for residents. The control group received routine care.
                Geriatric depression scale.
                Intention to treat analysis was used. There was significantly more movement to "less depressed" levels of depression at follow up in the intervention than control group (Mantel-Haenszel stratification test, P=0.0125). Multiple linear regression analysis found a significant intervention effect after controlling for possible confounders, with the intervention group showing an average improvement of 1.87 points on the geriatric depression scale compared with the control group (95% confidence interval 0.76 to 2.97, P=0.0011).
                The outcome of depression among elderly people in residential care can be improved by multidisciplinary collaboration, by enhancing the clinical skills of general practitioners and care staff, and by providing depression related health education and activity programmes for residents. Depressive symptoms commonly follow coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and are associated with less positive clinical outcomes.
                To test the effectiveness of telephone-delivered collaborative care for post-CABG depression vs usual physician care.
                Single-blind effectiveness trial at 7 university-based and community hospitals in or near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Participants were 302 post-CABG patients with depression (150, intervention; 152, usual care) and a comparison group of 151 randomly sampled post-CABG patients without depression recruited between March 2004 and September 2007 and observed as outpatients until June 2008.
                Eight months of telephone-delivered collaborative care provided by nurses working with patients' primary care physicians and supervised by a psychiatrist and primary care physician from this study.
                Mental health-related quality of life (HRQL) measured by the Short Form-36 Mental Component Summary (SF-36 MCS) at 8-month follow-up; secondary outcome measures included assessment of mood symptoms (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HRS-D]), physical HRQL (SF-36 PCS), and functional status (Duke Activity Status Index [DASI]); and hospital readmissions.
                The intervention patients reported greater improvements in mental HRQL (all P < or = .02) (SF-36 MCS: Delta, 3.2 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-6.0), physical functioning (DASI: Delta, 4.6 points; 95% CI, 1.9-7.3), and mood symptoms (HRS-D: Delta, 3.1 points; 95% CI, 1.3-4.9); and were more likely to report a 50% or greater decline in HRS-D score from baseline (50.0% vs 29.6%; number needed to treat, 4.9 [95% CI, 3.2-10.4]) than usual care patients (P < .001). Men with depression were particularly likely to benefit from the intervention (SF-36 MCS: Delta, 5.7 points; 95% CI, 2.2-9.2; P = .001). However, the mean HRQL and physical functioning of intervention patients did not reach that of the nondepressed comparison group.
                Compared with usual care, telephone-delivered collaborative care for treatment of post-CABG depression resulted in improved HRQL, physical functioning, and mood symptoms at 8-month follow-up.
                clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00091962. The purpose of this study was to test a brief orientation program for reducing anxiety, depressive symptoms, and overall distress in cancer patients at their initial clinic visit. One hundred and fifty consecutively referred patients seen in an oncology outpatient clinic were randomly assigned to an intervention or usual care control group. The intervention group received a clinic tour, general information about clinic operations, and a question and answer session with an oncology counselor. Outcome measures included the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), the Brief Profile of Mood States (POMS), the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CES-D) Scale, and an oncology clinic questionnaire which were administered at the initial clinic visit and follow-up. There were no statistically significant clinical or demographic differences between groups at initial assessment. At follow-up, the intervention group had lower state anxiety, lower overall distress, and fewer patients reporting depressive symptoms. Patients in the intervention group demonstrated significantly more knowledge about clinic operations and greater satisfaction with care. These data provide evidence that anxiety, distress and depressive symptoms can be reduced with an orientation program. This finding has particular relevance in the early stages of diagnosis where patients may suffer symptoms of anxiety and depression. Case management by health care assistants in small primary care practices provides unclear benefit for improving depression symptoms.
                To determine whether case management provided by health care assistants in small primary care practices is more effective than usual care in improving depression symptoms and process of care for patients with major depression.
                Cluster randomized, controlled trial. A central automated system generated the randomization scheme, which was stratified by urban and rural practices; allocation sequence was concealed until groups were assigned.
                74 small primary care practices in Germany from April 2005 to September 2007.
                626 patients age 18 to 80 years with major depression.
                Structured telephone interview to monitor depression symptoms and support for adherence to medication, with feedback to the family physician.
                Depression symptoms at 12 months, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9); secondary outcomes were patient assessment of chronic illness care, adherence to medication, and quality of life.
                A total of 310 patients were randomly assigned to case management and 316 to usual care. At 12 months, 249 intervention recipients and 278 control patients were assessed; 555 patients were included in a modified intention-to-treat-analysis (267 intervention recipients vs. 288 control patients). Compared with control patients, intervention recipients had lower mean PHQ-9 values in depression symptoms (-1.41 [95% CI, -2.49 to -0.33]; P = 0.014), more favorable assessments of care (3.41 vs. 3.11; P = 0.011), and increased treatment adherence (2.70 vs. 2.53; P = 0.042). Quality-of-life scores did not differ between groups.
                Patients, health care assistants, family physicians, and researchers were not blinded to group assignment, and 12-month follow-up of patients was incomplete.
                Case management provided by primary care practice-based health care assistants may reduce depression symptoms and improve process of care for patients with major depression more than usual care.
                German Ministry of Education and Research. A prospective randomized trial was conducted to examine the effectiveness, feasibility, and degree of implementation of home health care quality improvement interventions when implemented under usual conditions by usual care providers. A total of 311 older adults were randomized to enhanced usual care (EUC) that included routine depression screening and staff training in depression care management for older adults or to the intervention group (INT) that included antidepressants and/or psychotherapy treatment plus EUC. Implementing a routine screening protocol using the PHQ-9 and depression care management quality improvements is feasible in diverse home health care organizations and results in consistently better (but not statistically significant) depression outcomes in the INT group. The relative efficacy of professional and paraprofessional therapists in providing group cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and mutual support group therapy (MSG) was examined. Depressed outpatients (N = 98) were randomly assigned to CBT or MSG led by either 2 professional or 2 paraprofessional therapists. Results suggest that nonprofessionals were as effective as professionals in reducing depressive symptoms and that clients in the CBT and MSG conditions improved equally. Clinically significant improvement was demonstrated for both conditions. However, following treatment, more patients in the professionally led CBT groups were classified as nondepressed and alleviated than in the paraprofessionally led CBT groups. Additionally, therapist adherence to manual-based treatments was associated with greater improvement in clinician-rated depressive symptoms in both conditions and skills in cognitive restructuring were associated with greater improvement among clients in CBT. This research study evaluates the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention program to improve the management of depression in primary care.
                One hundred fifty-three primary care patients with current depression were entered into a randomized controlled trial. Intervention patients received a structured depression treatment program in the primary care setting that included both behavioral treatment to increase use of adaptive coping strategies and counseling to improve medication adherence. Control patients received "usual" care by their primary care physicians. Outcome measures included adherence to antidepressant medication, satisfaction with care of depression and with antidepressant treatment, and reduction of depressive symptoms over time.
                At 4-month follow-up, significantly more intervention patients with major and minor depression than usual care patients adhered to antidepressant medication and rated the quality of care they received for depression as good to excellent. Intervention patients with major depression demonstrated a significantly greater decrease in depression severity over time compared with usual care patients on all 4 outcome analyses. Intervention patients with minor depression were found to have a significant decrease over time in depression severity on only 1 of 4 study outcome analyses compared with usual care patients.
                A multifaceted primary care intervention improved adherence to antidepressant regimens and satisfaction with care in patients with major and minor depression. The intervention consistently resulted in more favorable depression outcomes among patients with major depression, while outcome effects were ambiguous among patients with minor depression. Panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder are prevalent in primary care, associated with poor functional outcomes, and are often unrecognized and ineffectively treated by primary care physicians.
                To examine whether telephone-based collaborative care for panic and generalized anxiety disorders improves clinical and functional outcomes more than the usual care provided by primary care physicians.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                Four Pittsburgh area primary care practices linked by a common electronic medical record system. Patients A total of 191 adults aged 18 to 64 years with panic and/or generalized anxiety disorder who were recruited from July 2000 to April 2002. Intervention Patients were randomly assigned to a telephone-based care management intervention (n = 116) or to notification alone of the anxiety disorder to patients and their physicians (usual care, n = 75). The intervention involved non-mental health professionals who provided patients with psychoeducation, assessed preferences for guideline-based care, monitored treatment responses, and informed physicians of their patients' care preferences and progress via an electronic medical record system under the direction of study investigators.
                Independent blinded assessments of anxiety and depressive symptoms, mental health-related quality of life, and employment status at baseline, 2-, 4-, 8-, and 12-month follow-up.
                At 12-month follow-up, intervention patients reported reduced anxiety (effect size [ES], 0.33-0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04 to 0.67; P</=.02) and depressive symptoms (ES, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.25-0.46; P = .03); improved mental health-related quality of life (ES, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.68; P = .01); and larger improvements relative to baseline in hours worked per week (5.7; 95% CI, 0.1 to 11.3; P = .05) and fewer work days absent in the past month (-2.6; 95% CI, - 4.8 to -0.3; P = .03) than usual care patients. If working at baseline, more intervention patients than usual care patients remained working at 12-month follow-up (94% vs 79% [15% absolute difference, 0.7%-28.6%]; P = .04).
                Telephone-based collaborative care for panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder is more effective than usual care at improving anxiety symptoms, health-related quality of life, and work-related outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine both the clinical and cost-effectiveness of usual general practitioner (GP) care compared with two types of brief psychological therapy (non-directive counselling and cognitive-behaviour therapy) in the management of depression as well as mixed anxiety and depression in the primary care setting.
                The design was principally a pragmatic randomised controlled trial, but was accompanied by two additional allocation methods allowing patient preference: the option of a specific choice of treatment (preference allocation) and the option to be randomised between the psychological therapies only. Of the 464 patients allocated to the three treatments, 197 were randomised between the three treatments, 137 chose a specific treatment, and 130 were randomised between the psychological therapies only. The patients underwent follow-up assessments at 4 and 12 months.
                The study was conducted in 24 general practices in Greater Manchester and London.
                A total of 464 eligible patients, aged 18 years and over, were referred by 73 GPs and allocated to one of the psychological therapies or usual GP care for depressive symptoms.
                The interventions consisted of brief psychological therapy (12 sessions maximum) or usual GP care. Non-directive counselling was provided by counsellors who were qualified for accreditation by the British Association for Counselling. Cognitive-behaviour therapy was provided by clinical psychologists who were qualified for accreditation by the British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies. Usual GP care included discussions with patients and the prescription of medication, but GPs were asked to refrain from referring patients for psychological intervention for at least 4 months. Most therapy sessions took place on a weekly basis in the general practices. By the 12-month follow-up, GP care in some cases did include referral to mental healthcare specialists.
                The clinical outcomes included depressive symptoms, general psychiatric symptoms, social function and patient satisfaction. The economic outcomes included direct and indirect costs and quality of life. Assessments were carried out at baseline during face-to-face interviews as well as at 4 and 12 months in person or by post.
                At 4 months, both psychological therapies had reduced depressive symptoms to a significantly greater extent than usual GP care. Patients in the psychological therapy groups exhibited mean scores on the Beck Depression Inventory that were 4-5 points lower than the mean score of patients in the usual GP care group, a difference that was also clinically significant. These differences did not generalize to other measures of outcome. There was no significant difference in outcome between the two psychological therapies when they were compared directly using all 260 patients randomised to a psychological therapy by either randomised allocation method. At 12 months, the patients in all three groups had improved to the same extent. The lack of a significant difference between the treatment groups at this point resulted from greater improvement of the patients in the GP care group between the 4- and 12-month follow-ups. At 4 months, patients in both psychological therapy groups were more satisfied with their treatment than those in the usual GP care group. However, by 12 months, patients who had received non-directive counselling were more satisfied than those in either of the other two groups. There were few differences in the baseline characteristics of patients who were randomised or expressed a treatment preference, and no differences in outcome between these patients. Similar outcomes were found for patients who chose either psychological therapy. Again, there were no significant differences between the two groups at 4 or 12 months. Patients who chose counselling were more satisfied with treatment than those who chose c Depression is common among persons with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and is associated with unfavorable outcomes.
                A single-blind randomized controlled effectiveness trial at 3 Veterans Affairs HIV clinics (HIV Translating Initiatives for Depression Into Effective Solutions [HITIDES]). The HITIDES intervention consisted of an off-site HIV depression care team (a registered nurse depression care manager, pharmacist, and psychiatrist) that delivered up to 12 months of collaborative care backed by a Web-based decision support system. Participants who completed the baseline telephone interview were 249 HIV-infected patients with depression, of whom 123 were randomized to the intervention and 126 to usual care. Participant interview data were collected at baseline and at the 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. The primary outcome was depression severity measured using the 20-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-20) and reported as treatment response (≥50% decrease in SCL-20 item score), remission (mean SCL-20 item score, <0.5), and depression-free days. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, health status, HIV symptom severity, and antidepressant or HIV medication regimen adherence.
                Intervention participants were more likely to report treatment response (33.3% vs 17.5%) (odds ratio, 2.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37-4.56) and remission (22.0% vs 11.9%) (2.25; 1.11-4.54) at 6 months but not 12 months. Intervention participants reported more depression-free days during the 12 months (β = 19.3; 95% CI, 10.9-27.6; P < .001). Significant intervention effects were observed for lowering HIV symptom severity at 6 months (β = -2.6; 95% CI, -3.5 to -1.8; P < .001) and 12 months (β = -0.82; -1.6 to -0.07; P = .03). Intervention effects were not significant for other secondary outcomes.
                The HITIDES intervention improved depression and HIV symptom outcomes and may serve as a model for collaborative care interventions in HIV and other specialty physical health care settings where patients find their "medical home."
                clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00304915. To determine whether making patient-reported cancer needs, quality-of-life (QOL), and psychosocial information available to the health care team, allowing coordinated specifically targeted psychosocial interventions, resulted in reduced cancer needs, improved QOL, and increased satisfaction with care received.
                Self-reported cancer needs, QOL, and psychosocial information was collected from 450 people with cancer, using standardized questionnaires via a touch-screen computer. For a randomly chosen two thirds, this information was made available to the health care team who coordinated targeted psychosocial interventions. Information from the remaining one third was not seen. Patients were assessed 2 and 6 months after randomization for changes in their cancer needs, QOL, and psychosocial functioning and satisfaction with overall care received.
                There were no significant differences between the two arms with respect to changes in cancer needs, QOL, or psychosocial functioning between the baseline and follow-up assessments, nor with respect to satisfaction with care. However, for the subgroup of patients who were moderately or severely depressed at baseline, there was a significant reduction in depression for the intervention arm relative to the control arm at the 6-month assessment (P =.001).
                Making patient-reported cancer needs, QOL, and psychosocial data available to the health care team at a single consultation together with coordinated psychosocial interventions does not seem to reduce cancer needs nor improve QOL, psychosocial functioning, or satisfaction with the care received. However, identification of patients with moderate or severe levels of depression may be valuable in reducing subsequent levels of depression. To test the effects of a computer-based nursing intervention designed to provide patients and family caregivers with concrete, objective information on symptom management; provide education about disease and treatment; coordinate medical resources; and provide emotional support and counseling.
                Two-site, randomized clinical trial.
                A large, urban, midwestern, tertiary-cancer center and a community-based cancer center in a medium-sized midwestern city.
                109 patients newly diagnosed with breast, colon, or lung cancer who were receiving chemotherapy; 54 received standard care, and 55 participated in the intervention group.
                Outcome data were collected via structured telephone interviews at three time points: baseline, midway through the intervention, and one month postintervention. The intervention consisting of nine visits, five in person and four by telephone, was conducted over 18 weeks by advanced practice oncology nurses.
                Psychosocial functioning, anxiety, and depression.
                Patients who received the intervention had significantly less depression between baseline and the midway point, as well as less anxiety and greater improvement in the role-emotional and mental health subscales of the Medical Outcomes Study 36 Short Form.
                Cancer-care nursing interventions can decrease psychosocial morbidity and improve quality of life for newly diagnosed patients with cancer undergoing treatment. Additional research is needed to understand who benefited most from the intervention.
                This nurse-directed intervention resulted in improved mental health for patients; however, physical subscales were not changed. Further work is needed to determine why depression and mental health were affected yet physical health and symptoms did not differ between groups. Results support the important role of nurses in addressing mental health issues in patients and families experiencing cancer. Outcome for bipolar disorder remains suboptimal despite the availability of efficacious treatments. To improve treatment effectiveness in clinical practice, a Veterans Affairs study team created a care model conceptually similar to the lithium clinics of the 1970s but augmented by principles of more recent collaborative care models for chronic medical illnesses. This intervention consists of improving patients' self-management skills through psychoeducation; supporting providers' decision making through simplified practice guidelines; and enhancing access to care, continuity of care, and information flow through the use of a nurse care coordinator. In this article, which is part I of a two-part report, the authors summarize the conceptual background and development of the intervention, describe the design of a three-year, 11-site randomized effectiveness trial, and report data describing its successful implementation. Trial design emphasized aspects of effectiveness to support generalizability of the findings and eventual dissemination of the intervention. Part II (see companion article, this issue) reports clinical, functional, and overall cost outcomes of the trial. Common mental health problems account for up to 40% of all general practitioner (GP) consultations. Patients have limited access to evidence-based psychological therapies. Cognitive behavioural therapy self-help strategies offer one potential solution.
                To determine differences in clinical outcome, patient satisfaction and costs, between a cognitive behavioural-based self-help package facilitated by practice nurses compared to ordinary care by GPs for mild to moderate anxiety and depression.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Seventeen primary healthcare teams.
                Patients presenting to their GP with mild to moderate anxiety and/or depression were recruited to the study and randomised to receive either a self-help intervention facilitated by practice nurses or ordinary care. The self-help intervention consisted of up to three appointments: two 1 week apart and a third 3 months later. There were no restrictions on ordinary care.
                Intention-to-treat analysis showed that patients treated with practice nurse-supported cognitive behavioural therapy self-help attained similar clinical outcomes for similar costs and were more satisfied than patients treated by GPs with ordinary care. On-treatment analysis showed patients receiving the facilitated cognitive behavioural therapy self-help were more likely to be below clinical threshold at 1 month compared to the ordinary care group (odds ratio [OR] = 3.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.87 to 4.37). This difference was less well marked at 3 months (OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 0.52 to 3.56).
                Facilitated cognitive behavioural self-help may provide a short-term cost-effective clinical benefit for patients with mild to moderate anxiety and depression. This has the potential to help primary care provide a choice of effective psychological as well as pharmacological treatments for mental health problems. To assess the impacts of the characteristics of quality improvement (QI) teams and their environments on team success in designing and implementing high quality, enduring depression care improvement programs in primary care (PC) practices.
                Two nonprofit managed care organizations sponsored five QI teams tasked with improving care for depression in large PC practices. Data on characteristics of the teams and their environments is from observer process notes, national expert ratings, administrative data, and interviews.
                Comparative formative evaluation of the quality and duration of implementation of the depression improvement programs developed by Central Teams (CTs) emphasizing expert design and Local Teams (LTs) emphasizing participatory local clinician design, and of the effects of additional team and environmental factors on each type of team. Both types of teams depended upon local clinicians for implementation.
                The CT intervention program designs were more evidence-based than those of LTs. Expert team leadership, support from local practice management, and support from local mental health specialists strongly influenced the development of successful team programs. The CTs and LTs were equally successful when these conditions could be met, but CTs were more successful than LTs in less supportive environments.
                The LT approach to QI for depression requires high local support and expertise from primary care and mental health clinicians. The CT approach is more likely to succeed than the LT approach when local practice conditions are not optimal. To test the effectiveness of an evidence based model for management of depression in primary care with support from quality improvement resources.
                Cluster randomised controlled trial.
                Five healthcare organisations in the United States and 60 affiliated practices.
                405 patients, aged > or = 18 years, starting or changing treatment for depression.
                Care provided by clinicians, with staff providing telephone support under supervision from a psychiatrist.
                Severity of depression at three and six months (Hopkins symptom checklist-20): response to treatment (> or = 50% decrease in scores) and remission (score of < 0.5).
                At six months, 60% (106 of 177) of patients in intervention practices had responded to treatment compared with 47% (68 of 146) of patients in usual care practices (P = 0.02). At six months, 37% of intervention patients showed remission compared with 27% for usual care patients (P = 0.014). 90% of intervention patients rated their depression care as good or excellent at six months compared with 75% of usual care patients (P = 0.0003).
                Resources such as quality improvement programmes can be used effectively in primary care to implement evidence based management of depression and improve outcomes for patients with depression. The authors used a randomized trial to compare cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and supportive counseling (SC) in the treatment of anxiety symptoms in older adults who met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.: American Psychiatric Association, 1994) criteria for anxiety disorders. Both conditions had a 6-week baseline no-treatment phase. Treatment was delivered primarily in patients' own homes and in an individual format. Outcomes were assessed at posttreatment and at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. There was no spontaneous improvement during the baseline phase. Both groups showed improvement on anxiety measures following treatment, with a better outcome for the CBT group on self-rating of anxiety and depression. Over the follow-up period, the CBT group maintained improvement and had significantly greater improvement than the SC group on anxiety and 1 depression measure. Treatment response for anxiety was also superior for the CBT group, although there was no difference between groups in endstate functioning. One-hundred and twenty-four patients with metastatic breast cancer were randomised to either a group Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) intervention, or to a no-therapy control group condition. Both groups received standard oncological care; however, therapy recipients also attended eight weekly sessions of group CBT, followed by a family night, and three further monthly sessions. Patients completed the 'Profile of Mood States' (POMS) and the Coopersmith Self-esteem Inventory (CSI) before and after therapy, and at 3 and 6 month follow-up periods. Outcome data in the period following therapy showed reduced depression and total mood disturbance, as well as improved self-esteem amongst therapy participants, relative to a no-therapy control group. These improvements were no longer evident at the 3 or 6 month follow-up assessments. We also report on the difficulties associated with conducting a group intervention with this patient cohort. Emotional syndromes of depression and anxiety are common among palliative care patients. This pilot study evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of using a brief psychological treatment (problem-solving therapy) to treat these syndromes in patients receiving palliative care. Results were encouraging, particularly as regards acceptability to patients. Problems encountered during the study are discussed in the context of planning future research into the efficacy of treatments for emotional disorders in palliative care. Depression is a common condition associated with significant morbidity in adolescents. Few depressed adolescents receive effective treatment for depression in primary care settings.
                To evaluate the effectiveness of a quality improvement intervention aimed at increasing access to evidence-based treatments for depression (particularly cognitive-behavior therapy and antidepressant medication), relative to usual care, among adolescents in primary care practices.
                Randomized controlled trial conducted between 1999 and 2003 enrolling 418 primary care patients with current depressive symptoms, aged 13 through 21 years, from 5 health care organizations purposively selected to include managed care, public sector, and academic medical center clinics in the United States.
                Usual care (n = 207) or 6-month quality improvement intervention (n = 211) including expert leader teams at each site, care managers who supported primary care clinicians in evaluating and managing patients' depression, training for care managers in manualized cognitive-behavior therapy for depression, and patient and clinician choice regarding treatment modality. Participating clinicians also received education regarding depression evaluation, management, and pharmacological and psychosocial treatment.
                Depressive symptoms assessed by Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) score. Secondary outcomes were mental health-related quality of life assessed by Mental Health Summary Score (MCS-12) and satisfaction with mental health care assessed using a 5-point scale.
                Six months after baseline assessments, intervention patients, compared with usual care patients, reported significantly fewer depressive symptoms (mean [SD] CES-D scores, 19.0 [11.9] vs 21.4 [13.1]; P = .02), higher mental health-related quality of life (mean [SD] MCS-12 scores, 44.6 [11.3] vs 42.8 [12.9]; P = .03), and greater satisfaction with mental health care (mean [SD] scores, 3.8 [0.9] vs 3.5 [1.0]; P = .004). Intervention patients also reported significantly higher rates of mental health care (32.1% vs 17.2%, P<.001) and psychotherapy or counseling (32.0% vs 21.2%, P = .007).
                A 6-month quality improvement intervention aimed at improving access to evidence-based depression treatments through primary care was significantly more effective than usual care for depressed adolescents from diverse primary care practices. The greater uptake of counseling vs medication under the intervention reinforces the importance of practice interventions that include resources to enable evidence-based psychotherapy for depressed adolescents. To compare the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention in patients with depression in primary care with the effectiveness of "usual care" by the primary care physician.
                A randomized controlled trial among primary care patients with major depression or minor depression.
                Over a 12-month period a total of 217 primary care patients who were recognized as depressed by their primary care physicians and were willing to take antidepressant medication were randomized, with 91 patients meeting criteria for major depression and 126 for minor depression.
                Intervention patients received increased intensity and frequency of visits over the first 4 to 6 weeks of treatment (visits 1 and 3 with a primary care physician, visits 2 and 4 with a psychiatrist) and continued surveillance of adherence to medication regimens during the continuation and maintenance phases of treatment. Patient education in these visits was supplemented by videotaped and written materials.
                Primary outcome measures included short-term (30-day) and long-term (90-day) use of antidepressant medication at guideline dosage levels, satisfaction with overall care for depression and antidepressant medication, and reduction in depressive symptoms.
                In patients with major depression, the intervention group had greater adherence than the usual care controls to adequate dosage of antidepressant medication for 90 days or more (75.5% vs 50.0%; P < .01), were more likely to rate the quality of the care they received for depression as good to excellent (93.0% vs 75.0%; P < .03), and were more likely to rate antidepressant medications as helping somewhat to helping a great deal (88.1% vs 63.3%; P < .01). Seventy-four percent of intervention patients with major depression showed 50% or more improvement on the Symptom Checklist-90 Depressive Symptom Scale compared with 43.8% of controls (P < .01), and the intervention patients also demonstrated a significantly greater decrease in depression severity over time compared with controls (P < .004). In patients with minor depression, the intervention group had significantly greater adherence than controls to adequate dosage of antidepressant medication for 90 days or more (79.7% vs 40.3%; P < .001) and more often rated antidepressant medication as helping somewhat to helping a great deal (81.8% vs 61.4%; P < .02). However, no significant differences were found between the intervention and control groups in the percentage of patients who were satisfied with the care they received for depression (94.4% vs 89.3%), in the percentage who experienced a 50% or more decrease in depressive symptoms, or in the decrease of depressive symptoms over time.
                A multifaceted intervention consisting of collaborative management by the primary care physician and a consulting psychiatrist, intensive patient education, and surveillance of continued refills of antidepressant medication improved adherence to antidepressant regimens in patients with major and with minor depression. It improved satisfaction with care and resulted in more favorable depressive outcomes in patients with major, but not minor, depression. There is a high prevalence of depression in patients with diabetes mellitus. Depression has been shown to be associated with poor self-management (adherence to diet, exercise, checking blood glucose levels) and high hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels in patients with diabetes.
                To determine whether enhancing quality of care for depression improves both depression and diabetes outcomes in patients with depression and diabetes.
                Randomized controlled trial with recruitment from March 1, 2001, to May 31, 2002.
                Nine primary care clinics from a large health maintenance organization.
                A total of 329 patients with diabetes mellitus and comorbid major depression and/or dysthymia. Intervention Patients were randomly assigned to the Pathways case management intervention (n = 164) or usual care (n = 165). The intervention provided enhanced education and support of antidepressant medication treatment prescribed by the primary care physician or problem-solving therapy delivered in primary care.
                Independent blinded assessments at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months of depression (Hopkins Symptom Checklist 90), global improvement, and satisfaction with care. Automated clinical data were used to evaluate adherence to antidepressant regimens, percentage receiving specialty mental health visits, and HbA1c levels.
                When compared with usual care patients, intervention patients showed greater improvement in adequacy of dosage of antidepressant medication treatment in the first 6-month period (odds ratio [OR], 4.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.28-7.55) and the second 6-month period (OR, 2.90; 95% CI, 1.69-4.98), less depression severity over time (z = 2.84, P = .004), a higher rating of patient-rated global improvement at 6 months (intervention 69.4% vs usual care 39.3%; OR, 3.50; 95% CI, 2.16-5.68) and 12 months (intervention 71.9% vs usual care 42.3%; OR, 3.50; 95% CI, 2.14-5.72), and higher satisfaction with care at 6 months (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.18-3.43) and 12 months (OR, 2.88; 95% CI, 1.67-4.97). Although depressive outcomes were improved, no differences in HbA1c outcomes were observed.
                The Pathways collaborative care model improved depression care and outcomes in patients with comorbid major depression and/or dysthymia and diabetes mellitus, but improved depression care alone did not result in improved glycemic control. General practitioners (GPs) can be provided with effective training in the skills to manage depression. However, it remains uncertain whether such training achieves health gain for their patients.
                The study aimed to measure the health gain from training GPs in skills for the assessment and management of depression. The study design was a cluster randomized controlled trial. GP participants were assessed for recognition of psychological disorders, attitudes to depression, prescribing patterns and experience of psychiatry and communication skills training. They were then randomized to receive training at baseline or the end of the study. Patients selected by GPs were assessed at baseline, 3 and 12 months. The primary outcome was depression status, measured by HAM-D. Secondary outcomes were psychiatric symptoms (GHQ-12) quality of life (SF-36), satisfaction with consultations, and health service use and costs.
                Thirty-eight GPs were recruited and 36 (95%) completed the study. They selected 318 patients, of whom 189 (59%) were successfully recruited. At 3 months there were no significant differences between intervention and control patients on HAM-D, GHQ-12 or SF-36. At 12 months there was a positive training effect in two domains of the SF-36, but no differences in HAM-D, GHQ-12 or health care costs. Patients reported trained GPs as somewhat better at listening and understanding but not in the other aspects of satisfaction.
                Although training programmes may improve GPs' skills in managing depression, this does not appear to translate into health gain for depressed patients or the health service. Many patients with major depression are non-adherent to antidepressant medication and do not receive care according to current guidelines. There is increasing evidence that treatment of depression in primary care can be improved. Comparison between effective interventions may help to establish the active ingredients of such interventions.
                In a randomized trial two interventions to improve treatment of major depression in primary care were compared (1) a depression care programme, targeting general practitioners (GPs), patients, and systematic follow-up, and (2) a systematic follow-up programme. Thirty GPs were randomized and 211 primary-care patients with current major depression were included. All patients were prescribed a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Outcome measures included adherence to antidepressant medication, and depression outcome.
                No significant differences in adherence rates and treatment outcome measures were demonstrated between interventions at week 10 or week 26. Adherence rates were high and treatment outcome was favourable.
                The depression care programme was not superior to the systematic follow-up programme. Systematic follow-up in depression treatment in primary care seems to be an intervention per se, having the potential to improve adherence and treatment outcome. To compare the cost effectiveness of general practitioner care and two general practice based psychological therapies for depressed patients.
                Prospective, controlled trial with randomised and patient preference allocation arms.
                General practices in London and greater Manchester.
                464 of 627 patients presenting with depression or mixed anxiety and depression were suitable for inclusion.
                Usual general practitioner care or up to 12 sessions of non-directive counselling or cognitive-behaviour therapy provided by therapists.
                Beck depression inventory scores, EuroQol measure of health related quality of life, direct treatment and non-treatment costs, and cost of lost production.
                197 patients were randomly assigned to treatment, 137 chose their treatment, and 130 were randomised only between the two psychological therapies. At four months, both non-directive counselling and cognitive-behaviour therapy reduced depressive symptoms to a significantly greater extent than usual general practitioner care. There was no significant difference in outcome between treatments at 12 months. There were no significant differences in direct costs, production losses, or societal costs between the three treatments at either four or 12 months. Sensitivity analyses did not suggest that the results depended on particular assumptions in the statistical analysis.
                Within the constraints of available power, the data suggest that both brief psychological therapies may be significantly more cost effective than usual care in the short term, as benefit was gained with no significant difference in cost. There are no significant differences between treatments in either outcomes or costs at 12 months. Based on data from large multicentre US trials, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is advocating a stepped-care model for the management of depression, with 'case management' or 'collaborative care' for selected patients in primary care.
                To conduct a pilot study examining the use of graduate mental health workers case managing depressed primary care NHS patients.
                A randomised controlled trial comparing usual GP care with or without case management over 16 weeks of acute antidepressant drug treatment.
                Three primary care practices in the North East of England.
                Patients with depression, aged 18-65 years, who had failed to adequately respond to antidepressant treatment, were randomised to the two treatments. Assessments were made at baseline, 12, and 24 weeks using a combination of observer and self ratings.
                Randomisation of 62 patients required screening of 1073 potential patients. There was little difference in outcome between the two treatment arms but a gradual improvement in symptoms over time was seen. Client satisfaction was assessed as high across both treatments.
                While this pilot study confirmed the integrity of the study protocol and the suitability of the outcome measures and randomisation procedure, it raises questions regarding the practicality of recruitment and feasibility of the intervention. It would be crucial to address these issues prior to the implementation of a large multi-centre randomised controlled trial. Fifty-three child and adolescent psychiatric patients with depressive disorders were randomly allocated to brief cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) or to a control treatment, relaxation training. Forty-eight patients completed the treatment phase of the trial, which comprised 5-8 treatment sessions. Post-treatment assessments showed a clear advantage of CBT over relaxation on measures of both depression and overall outcome. However, there were no significant differences between the treatments on comorbid anxiety and conduct symptoms. At follow-up, the differences between the groups were reduced, partly because of a high relapse rate in the DTP group and partly because subjects in the relaxation group continued to recover. Clinically depressed family caregivers (N = 66) of frail, elderly relatives were randomly assigned to 20 sessions of either cognitive-behavioral (CB) or brief psychodynamic (PD) individual psychotherapy. At posttreatment, 71% of the caregivers were no longer clinically depressed according to research diagnostic criteria (RDC), with no differences found between the 2 outpatient treatments. The results suggested therapy specificity; there was an interaction between treatment modality and length of caregiving on symptom-oriented measures. Clients who had been caregivers for a shorter period showed improvement in the PD condition, whereas those who had been caregivers for at least 44 months improved with CB therapy. These findings suggest that patient-specific variables should be considered when choosing treatment for clinically depressed family caregivers. The authors present data from a pilot research program initiated to develop, refine, and test the outcomes of CBT-GAD/PC, a version of cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT) that targets the needs of older adults with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) in primary care (PC).
                The study involved a small, randomized clinical trial comparing the impact of CBT-GAD/PC to usual care (UC) in a sample of 12 older medical patients with GAD.
                Outcome data suggested significant improvements in worry and depression after CBT-GAD/PC, relative to UC.
                Authors discuss results in terms of the "real-world" applicability of this treatment for late-life GAD, and present implications for future research. Federally qualified health centers across the country are adopting depression disease management programs following federally mandated training; however, little is known about the relative effectiveness of depression disease management in rural versus urban patient populations.
                To explore whether a depression disease management program has a comparable impact on clinical outcomes over 2 years in patients treated in rural and urban primary care practices and whether the impact is mediated by receiving evidence-based care (antidepressant medication and specialty care counseling).
                A preplanned secondary analysis was conducted in a consecutively sampled cohort of 479 depressed primary care patients recruited from 12 practices in 10 states across the country participating in the Quality Enhancement for Strategic Teaming study.
                Depression disease management improved the mental health status of urban patients over 18 months but not rural patients. Effects were not mediated by antidepressant medication or specialty care counseling in urban or rural patients.
                Depression disease management appears to improve clinical outcomes in urban but not rural patients. Because these programs compete for scarce resources, health care organizations interested in delivering depression disease management to rural populations need to advocate for programs whose clinical effectiveness has been demonstrated for rural residents. A community-based nursing study was conducted in Sydney, Australia, to compare the effects of progressive muscle relaxation and guided imagery on anxiety, depression, and quality of life in people with advanced cancer. In this study, 56 people with advanced cancer who were experiencing anxiety and depression were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 treatment conditions: (1) progressive muscle relaxation training, (2) guided imagery training, (3) both of these treatments, and (4) control group. Subjects were tested before and after learning muscle relaxation and guided imagery techniques for anxiety, depression, and quality of life using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale and the Functional Living Index-Cancer scale. There was no significant improvement for anxiety; however, significant positive changes occurred for depression and quality of life. To compare the effectiveness of community mental health nurse (CMHN) problem-solving and generic CMHN care, against usual general practitioner (GP) care in reducing symptoms, alleviating problems, and improving social functioning and quality of life for people living in the community with common mental disorders; and to undertake a cost comparison of each CMHN treatment compared with usual GP care.
                A pragmatic, randomised controlled trial with three arms: CMHN problem-solving, generic CMHN care and usual GP care.
                General practices in two southern English counties were included in the study. CMHNs were employed by local NHS trusts providing community mental health services.
                Participants were GP patients aged 18--65 years with a new episode of anxiety, depression or reaction to life difficulties and had to score at least 3 points on the General Health Questionnaire-12 screening tool. Symptoms had to be present for a minimum of 4 weeks but no longer than 6 months.
                Patients were randomised to one of three groups: (1) CMHN problem-solving treatment, (2) generic CMHN treatment, or (3) usual GP care. All three groups of patients remained free to consult their GPs throughout the course of the study, and could be prescribed psychotropic drug treatments.
                Patients were assessed at baseline, and 8 weeks and 26 weeks after randomisation. The primary outcome measure was psychological symptoms measured on the Clinical Interview Schedule -- Revised. Other measures included social functioning, health-related quality of life, problem severity and satisfaction. The economic outcomes were evaluated with a cost--utility analysis.
                Twenty-four CMHNs were trained to provide problem-solving under supervision, and another 29 were referred patients for generic support. In total, 247 patients were randomised to the three arms of the study, referred by 98 GPs in 62 practices. All three groups of patients were greatly improved by the 8-week follow-up. No significant differences were found between the groups at 8 weeks or 26 weeks in symptoms, social functioning or quality of life. Greater satisfaction with treatment was found in the CMHN groups. CMHN care represented a significant additional health service cost and there were no savings in sickness absence.
                The study found that specialist mental health nurse support is no better than support from GPs for patients with anxiety, depression and reactions to life difficulties. The results suggest that healthcare providers could consider adopting policies of restricting referrals of unselected patients with common mental disorders to specialist CMHNs, although there may be other roles in primary care that CMHNs could play effectively. Further research should address the predictors of chronicity in common mental disorders and target extra treatment. More research is also needed into the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of problem-solving treatment for other disorders, of facilitated self-help treatments for common mental disorders and of CMHN care for people with severe and enduring mental illnesses, as well as the prevention of mental disorders. The authors sought to determine whether integrated mental health services or enhanced referral to specialty mental health clinics results in greater engagement in mental health/substance abuse services by older primary care patients.
                This multisite randomized trial included 10 sites consisting of primary care and specialty mental health/substance abuse clinics. Primary care patients 65 years old or older (N=24,930) were screened. The final study group consisted of 2,022 patients (mean age=73.5 years; 26% female; 48% ethnic minority) with depression (N=1,390), anxiety (N=70), at-risk alcohol use (N=414), or dual diagnosis (N=148) who were randomly assigned to integrated care (mental health and substance abuse providers co-located in primary care; N=999) or enhanced referral to specialty mental health/substance abuse clinics (i.e., facilitated scheduling, transportation, payment; N=1,023).
                Seventy-one percent of patients engaged in treatment in the integrated model compared with 49% in the enhanced referral model. Integrated care was associated with more mental health and substance abuse visits per patient (mean=3.04) relative to enhanced referral (mean=1.91). Overall, greater engagement was predicted by integrated care and higher mental distress. For depression, greater engagement was predicted by integrated care and more severe depression. For at-risk alcohol users, greater engagement was predicted by integrated care and more severe problem drinking. For all conditions, greater engagement was associated with closer proximity of mental health/substance abuse services to primary care.
                Older primary care patients are more likely to accept collaborative mental health treatment within primary care than in mental health/substance abuse clinics. These results suggest that integrated service arrangements improve access to mental health and substance abuse services for older adults who underuse these services. CONTEXT: Lung cancer is one of the most common cancers in the United States and is associated with high levels of symptoms, including pain, fatigue, shortness of breath, and psychological distress. Caregivers and patients are adversely affected. However, previous studies of coping skills training (CST) interventions have not been tested in patients with lung cancer nor have systematically included caregivers. OBJECTIVE: This study tested the efficacy of a caregiver-assisted CST protocol in a sample of patients with lung cancer. METHODS: Two hundred thirty-three lung cancer patients and their caregivers were randomly assigned to receive 14 telephone-based sessions of either caregiver-assisted CST or education/support involving the caregiver. Patients completed measures assessing pain, psychological distress, quality of life (QOL), and self-efficacy for symptom management; caregivers completed measures assessing psychological distress, caregiver strain, and self-efficacy for helping the patient manage symptoms. RESULTS: Patients in both treatment conditions showed improvements in pain, depression, QOL, and self-efficacy, and caregivers in both conditions showed improvements in anxiety and self-efficacy from baseline to four-month follow-up. Results of exploratory analyses suggested that the CST intervention was more beneficial to patients/caregivers with Stage II and III cancers, whereas the education/support intervention was more beneficial to patients/caregivers with Stage I cancer. CONCLUSION: Taken together with the broader literature in this area, results from this study suggest that psychosocial interventions can lead to improvements in a range of outcomes for cancer patients. Suggestions for future studies include the use of three-group designs (e.g., comparing two active interventions with a standard-care control) and examining mechanisms of change.
                Copyright © 2010 U.S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. This study was done to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of individualized, problem-solving counseling provided by baccalaureate nurses over the telephone to prevent the onset of depression in persons with breast, lung, or prostate cancer. Of 175 persons randomized, 149 completed the 8-month follow-up. The primary outcome measures were changes in the Jalowiec Coping Scale, the Centre for Epidemiologic Studies in Depression Scale, and the Derogotis Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale. In addition, expenditures for people's use of all health and social services were computed at baseline and follow-up. Telephone counseling improved the use of more favorable coping behaviors, prevented a clinically important but not statistically significant decline into depression, and poor psychosocial adjustment in a group of people with mixed cancer. These results were associated with a greater total per person per annum expenditure for use of all other health and social services in the community compared with the control group. In a situation of limited resources and a service producing more effect for more costs, one needs either to examine what services to forgo to offer this service or to carefully target the new service to those most likely to benefit. Only few studies investigated the effectiveness of psychotherapy in post-stroke depression (PSD). The aim of this feasibility study was to compare interpersonal psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, and their combination regarding depression and rehabilitation outcome.
                Post-stroke depression was found in 35% of 485 stroke patients examined. Seventy-four PSD patients were randomised to one of three treatment conditions. Severity of depression was measured by the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. The Barthel Index and a questionnaire for health-related quality of life were used as measurements of rehabilitation outcome.
                There were no significant differences between the three groups in patient mood or rehabilitation outcome. Concerning the severity of depression, quality of life, and social support, all patients showed benefits from antidepressive treatment. In addition a correlation was found between rehabilitation outcome and depression.
                In this feasibility study all antidepressive treatments were successfully implemented in the rehabilitation of post-stroke depressed patients. Combination therapy (interpersonal psychotherapy plus medication) was as effective as one of those elements alone. Because of the small sample size however, further randomized trials are required. Depression and anxiety are the most common psychiatric conditions in late life. Despite their prevalence, we know relatively little about their unique manifestation in older adults. And, Although the most common intervention for late-life depression and anxiety continues to be medication, research on psychosocial interventions for late-life depression and anxiety has burgeoned in the past several years. Unfortunately, this growing body of intervention research has yet to be widely translated into improved systems of care for late-life depression. This article is one step toward synthesizing the knowledge in this growing area of research. The review of literature presents the conclusions of several meta-analyses that have reviewed psychosocial interventions for late-life depression and anxiety. In addition, intervention studies concerning the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy, interpersonal therapy, reminiscence therapy, and alternative therapies with depressed and/or anxious older adults are reviewed. A brief description of various approaches to psychosocial intervention with anxious and/or depressed older adults is also presented. Few data are available regarding the impact of improved depression treatment on daily functioning and disability.
                In two studies of more intensive depression treatment in primary care, patients initiating antidepressant treatment were randomly assigned to either usual care or to a collaborative management programme including patient education, on-site mental health treatment, adjustment of antidepressant medication, behavioural activation and monitoring of medication adherence. Assessments at baseline as well as 4 and 7 months included several measures of impairment, daily functioning and disability: self-rated overall health, number of bodily pains, number of somatization symptoms, changes in work due to health, reduction in leisure activities due to health, number of disability days and number of restricted activity days.
                Average data from the 4- and 7-month assessments in both studies, intervention patients reported fewer somatic symptoms (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.46, 0.99) and more favourable overall health (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28, 0.91). While intervention patients fared better on other measures of functional impairment and disability, none of these differences reached statistical significance.
                More effective acute-phase depression treatment reduced somatic distress and improved self-rated overall health. The absence of a significant intervention effect on other disability measures may reflect the brief treatment and follow-up period and the influence of other individual and environmental factors on disability. The purpose of this study was to pilot a stepped collaborative care intervention for women with postpartum depression and evaluate health differences between self-diagnosed depressed and nondepressed women.
                Five hundred six mothers of infants from 7 clinics completed surveys at 0 to 1, 2, 4, 6, and 9 months postpartum and a Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). SCID-positive depressed women were randomized to stepped collaborative care or usual care. Nine-month treatment, health, and work outcomes were evaluated for stepped care women (n = 19) versus control depressed women (n = 20), and self-diagnosed depressed women (n = 122) versus nondepressed women (n = 344).
                Forty-five women had SCID-positive depression whereas 122 had self-diagnosed depression. For SCID-positive depressed women, the stepped care intervention increased mothers' awareness of their depression diagnosis (100% vs 61%; P = .008) and their receipt of treatment (94% vs 56%; P = .019). Self-diagnosed depressed women (vs nondepressed women) had more depressive symptoms and acute care visits, worse general and mental health, and greater impact of health problems on regular activities.
                The stepped care intervention improved women's knowledge of their postpartum depression diagnosis and their receipt of treatment. However, our formal diagnostic procedures missed many women whose depressed mood interfered with their health and function. The authors developed, implemented, and pilot-tested intervention programs to provide effective care for chronic or recurrent depression.
                A total of 104 patients with chronic or recurrent depression were randomly assigned to one of four groups: continued usual behavioral health care, usual care plus telephone monitoring and care management by a care manager, usual care plus care management plus a peer-led chronic-disease self-management group program, or usual care plus care management plus a professionally led depression psychotherapy group. Outcomes in intent-to-treat analyses were assessed at three, six, nine, and 12 months and included treatment participation rates, Hopkins Symptom Checklist depression scale scores, major depression (Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV), Patient-Rated Global Improvement ratings, treatment satisfaction, and adequacy of medication.
                Participation in care management was high in the three intervention groups. Close to 60% of participants invited to both group interventions attended at least an initial meeting, but a greater number assigned to the care management plus the professionally led group continued participation through the 12-month period. The sample was too small to reliably detect small or moderate differences in clinical outcomes, but various measures consistently favored the care management plus professionally led group.
                It is feasible to direct additional intervention services to patients with persistent or recurring depression. A larger trial of organized self-management support for chronic depression will be necessary for a definitive evaluation of program effectiveness. Depression is particularly prevalent in patients with advanced cancer. Cognitive therapy (CT) is an empirically supported treatment for depression in the general population. However, efficacy remains to be demonstrated in patients with advanced cancer. A prior controlled trial of CT in a group format showed improvements in depression, mood disturbance, and self-esteem; however, these effects were not maintained over time. Studies examining the efficacy of individual format CT interventions that may ensure more long-term maintenance of benefits are necessary. This study assessed the efficacy of CT for depression administered individually in women with metastatic breast cancer and its effect on immune function.
                Forty-five women were randomly assigned to either individual CT or to a waiting-list control (WLC) condition. CT was composed of eight weekly sessions of CT and three booster sessions administered at 3-week intervals following the end of treatment.
                Patients treated with CT had significantly lower scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale at posttreatment compared to untreated patients. Pooled data from both groups indicated significant reductions of depressive symptoms from pre- to posttreatment, as well as reduction of associated symptoms including anxiety, fatigue, and insomnia symptoms. These effects were well sustained at the 3- and 6-month follow-up evaluations. CT for depression did not appear to have a significant impact on immune functioning.
                Findings of this study support the efficacy of CT for depression in this population and suggest that the administration of individual and booster sessions after treatment termination may be instrumental in sustaining the treatment effects over time. Improving the quality of mental health care requires moving clinical interventions from controlled research settings into real-world practice settings. Although such advances have been made for depression, little work has been performed for anxiety disorders.
                To determine whether a flexible treatment-delivery model for multiple primary care anxiety disorders (panic, generalized anxiety, social anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorders) would be better than usual care (UC).
                A randomized controlled effectiveness trial of Coordinated Anxiety Learning and Management (CALM) compared with UC in 17 primary care clinics in 4 US cities. Between June 2006 and April 2008, 1004 patients with anxiety disorders (with or without major depression), aged 18 to 75 years, English- or Spanish-speaking, were enrolled and subsequently received treatment for 3 to 12 months. Blinded follow-up assessments at 6, 12, and 18 months after baseline were completed in October 2009.
                CALM allowed choice of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), medication, or both; included real-time Web-based outcomes monitoring to optimize treatment decisions; and a computer-assisted program to optimize delivery of CBT by nonexpert care managers who also assisted primary care clinicians in promoting adherence and optimizing medications.
                Twelve-item Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-12) anxiety and somatic symptoms score. Secondary outcomes included proportion of responders (> or = 50% reduction from pretreatment BSI-12 score) and remitters (total BSI-12 score < 6).
                A significantly greater improvement for CALM vs UC in global anxiety symptoms was found (BSI-12 group mean differences of -2.49 [95% confidence interval {CI}, -3.59 to -1.40], -2.63 [95% CI, -3.73 to -1.54], and -1.63 [95% CI, -2.73 to -0.53] at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively). At 12 months, response and remission rates (CALM vs UC) were 63.66% (95% CI, 58.95%-68.37%) vs 44.68% (95% CI, 39.76%-49.59%), and 51.49% (95% CI, 46.60%-56.38%) vs 33.28% (95% CI, 28.62%-37.93%), with a number needed to treat of 5.27 (95% CI, 4.18-7.13) for response and 5.50 (95% CI, 4.32-7.55) for remission.
                For patients with anxiety disorders treated in primary care clinics, CALM compared with UC resulted in greater improvement in anxiety symptoms, depression symptoms, functional disability, and quality of care during 18 months of follow-up.
                clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00347269. Depression and anxiety disorders are common mental disorders worldwide. The MANAS trial aimed to test the effectiveness of an intervention led by lay health counsellors in primary care settings to improve outcomes of people with these disorders.
                In this cluster randomised trial, primary care facilities in Goa, India, were assigned (1:1) by computer-generated randomised sequence to intervention or control (enhanced usual care) groups. All adults who screened positive for common mental disorders were eligible. The collaborative stepped-care intervention offered case management and psychosocial interventions, provided by a trained lay health counsellor, supplemented by antidepressant drugs by the primary care physician and supervision by a mental health specialist. The research assessor was masked. The primary outcome was recovery from common mental disorders as defined by the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10th revision (ICD-10) at 6 months. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00446407.
                24 study clusters, with an equal proportion of public and private facilities, were randomised equally between groups. 1160 of 1360 (85%) patients in the intervention group and 1269 of 1436 (88%) in the control group completed the outcome assessment. Patients with ICD-10-confirmed common mental disorders in the intervention group were more likely to have recovered at 6 months than were those in the control group (n=620 [65·0%] vs 553 [52·9%]; risk ratio 1·22, 95% CI 1·00-1·47; risk difference=12·1%, 95% CI 1·6%-22·5%). The intervention had strong evidence of an effect in public facility attenders (369 [65·9%] vs 267 [42·5%], risk ratio 1·55, 95% CI 1·02-2·35) but no evidence for an effect in private facility attenders (251 [64·1%] vs 286 [65·9%], risk ratio 0·95, 0·74-1·22). There were three deaths and four suicide attempts in the collaborative stepped-care group and six deaths and six suicide attempts in the enhanced usual care group. None of the deaths were from suicide.
                A trained lay counsellor-led collaborative care intervention can lead to an improvement in recovery from CMD among patients attending public primary care facilities.
                The Wellcome Trust.
                Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Major depression is a frequent and serious disorder in older medical inpatients. Because the condition goes undetected and untreated in most of these patients, we conducted a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a strategy of systematic detection and multidisciplinary treatment of depression in this population.
                Consecutive patients aged 65 years or more admitted to general medical services in a primary care hospital between October 1999 and November 2002 were screened for depression with the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS) within 48 hours after admission. Patients found to have major depression were randomly allocated to receive the intervention or usual care. The intervention involved consultation and treatment by a psychiatrist and follow-up by a research nurse and the patient's family physician. Research assistants, blind to group allocation, collected data from the patients at enrollment and at 3 and 6 months later using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), the Medical Outcomes 36-item Short Form (SF-36), the DIS, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Older Americans Resources and Services (OARS) questionnaire to assess basic and instrumental activities of daily living (OARS-ADL and OARS-IADL) and the Rating Scale for Side Effects. Data on the severity of illness, length of hospital stay, health services and medication use, mortality and process of care were also collected. The primary outcome measures were the HAMD and SF-36.
                Of 1500 eligible patients who were screened, 157 were found to have major depression and consented to participate (78 in the intervention group and 79 in the usual care group). At randomization, there were no clinically or statistically significant differences between the 2 groups. Sixty-four patients completed follow-up to 6 months, 57 withdrew, and 36 died. At 6 months, there were no clinically or statistically significant differences the 2 groups in HAMD or SF-36 scores or any of the secondary outcome measures.
                We were unable to demonstrate that systematic detection and multidisciplinary care of depression was more beneficial than usual care for elderly medical inpatients. A recently developed cognitive-behavioral treatment for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) targets intolerance of uncertainty by the reevaluation of positive beliefs about worry, problem-solving training, and cognitive exposure. As previous studies have established the treatment's efficacy when delivered individually, the present study tests the treatment in a group format as a way to enhance its cost-benefit ratio. A total of 52 GAD patients received 14 sessions of cognitive-behavioral therapy in small groups of 4 to 6 participants. A wait-list control design was used, and standardized clinician ratings and self-report questionnaires assessed GAD symptoms, intolerance of uncertainty, anxiety, depression, and social adjustment. Results show that the treatment group, relative to the wait-list group, had greater posttest improvement on all dependent variables and that treated participants made further gains over the 2-year follow-up phase of the study. To evaluate the effectiveness of an education programme for patients and carers recovering from stroke.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                One hundred and seventy patients admitted to a stroke rehabilitation unit and 97 carers of these patients.
                The intervention group received a specifically designed stroke information manual and were invited to attend education meetings every two weeks with members of their multidisciplinary team. The control group received usual practice.
                Primary outcome was knowledge of stroke and stroke services. Secondary outcomes were handicap (London Handicap Scale), physical function (Barthel Index), social function (Frenchay Activities Index), mood (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and satisfaction (Pound Scale). Carer mood was measured by the General Health Questionnaire-28.
                There was no statistical evidence for a treatment effect on knowledge but there were trends that favoured the intervention. The education programme was associated with a significantly greater reduction in patient anxiety score at both three months (p =0.034) and six months (p =0.021) and consequently fewer 'cases' (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale anxiety subscale score > or =11). There were no other significant statistical differences between the patient or carer groups for other outcomes, although there were trends in favour of the education programme.
                An education programme delivered within a stroke unit did not result in improved knowledge about stroke and stroke services but there was a significant reduction in patient anxiety at six months post stroke onset. Poor mood adjustment to chronic medical illness is often accompanied by decrements in function.
                To evaluate the effectiveness of a telephone-based intervention for psychologic distress and functional impairment in cardiac illness.
                Randomized, controlled trial.
                We recruited survivors of acute coronary syndromes using the Hospital and Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) with scores indicative of mood disturbances at 1-month postdischarge. Recruited patients were randomized to experimental or control status. Intervention patients received 6 30-minute telephone counseling sessions to identify and address illness-related fears and concerns. Control patients received usual care. Patients' responses to the HADS and the Workplace Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS) were collected at baseline, 2, 3, and 6 months using interactive voice recognition technology. At baseline, the PRIME-MD was used to establish diagnosis of depression. We used mixed effects regression to study changes in outcomes.
                We enrolled 100 patients. Mean age was 60; 67% of the patients were male. Findings confirmed that the intervention group had a 27% improvement in depression symptoms (P=.05), 27% in anxiety (P=.02), and a 38% improvement in home limitations (P=.04) compared with controls. Symptom improvement tracked those for WSAS measures of home function (P=.04) but not workplace function.
                The intervention had a moderate effect on patient's emotional and functional outcomes that were observed during a critical period in patients' lives. Patient convenience, ease of delivery, and the effectiveness of the intervention suggest that the counseling can help patients adjust to chronic illness. This study examined (1) the effect of a cognitive-behavioral group intervention on anxiety, depression, and coping strategies in school-age children (aged 7-12 years) with Axis I anxiety disorders; and (2) the effect of parental involvement on treatment outcomes.
                Parents and children (N = 62) were randomly assigned to one of three 12-week treatment conditions: parent and child intervention, child-only intervention, and parent-only intervention. Child anxiety, depression, and coping strategies were assessed before and after treatment.
                All treatment groups reported fewer symptoms of anxiety and depression posttreatment and changes in their use of coping strategies. Children in the parent and child intervention used more active coping strategies posttreatment compared with children in the other 2 treatment conditions. Parents in this treatment condition reported a significantly greater improvement in their children's emotional well-being than parents in the other treatment conditions.
                Cognitive-behavioral group interventions reduced symptoms of anxiety and depression in school-age children with anxiety disorders. Concurrent parental involvement enhanced the effect on coping strategies. Further investigation is needed to corroborate the effectiveness of such short-term interventions and the maintenance of treatment effects. Primary care clinicians have a considerable amount of contact with patients suffering from long-term mental illness. The United Kingdom's National Health Service now requires general practices to contribute more systematically to care for this group of patients.
                To determine the effects of Mental Health Link, a facilitation-based quality improvement programme designed to improve communication between the teams and systems of care within general practice. Design of study: Exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial.
                Twenty-three urban general practices and associated community mental health teams.
                Practices were randomised to service development as usual or to the Mental Health Link programme. Questionnaires and an audit of notes assessed 335 patients' satisfaction, unmet need, mental health status, processes of mental and physical care, and general practitioners' satisfaction with services and beliefs about service development. Service use and intervention costs were also measured.
                There were no significant differences in patients' perception of their unmet need, satisfaction or general health. Intervention patients had fewer psychiatric relapses than control patients (mean = 0.39 versus 0.71, respectively, P = 0.02) but there were no differences in documented processes of care. Intervention practitioners were more satisfied and services improved significantly for intervention practices. There was an additional mean direct cost of pound 63 per patient with long-term mental illness for the intervention compared with the control.
                Significant differences were seen in relapse rates and practitioner satisfaction. Improvements in service development did not translate into documented improvements in care. This could be explained by the intervention working via the improvements in informal shared care developed through better link working. This type of facilitated intervention tailored to context has the potential to improve care and interface working. The present study investigated the efficacy of a coping-technique, applied relaxation (AR) and cognitive therapy (CT), in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder. Thirty-six outpatients fulfilling the DSM-III-R criteria for generalized anxiety were assessed with independent assessor ratings and self-report scales before and after treatment and at a 1 yr follow-up. The patients were randomized and treated individually for 12 weekly sessions. The results showed that both treatments yielded large improvements, which were maintained, or furthered at follow-up. There was no difference between AR and CT on any measure. The drop-out rate was 12% for AR and 5% for CT. The proportions of clinically significantly improved patients were 53 and 62% at post-treatment and 67 and 56% at follow-up for AR and CT, respectively. Besides affecting generalized anxiety the treatments also yielded marked and lasting changes on ratings of worry, cognitive and somatic anxiety and depression. The conclusion that can be drawn is that both AR and CT have potential as treatments for generalized anxiety disorder but they have to be developed further in order to increase the efficacy to the level usually seen in panic disorder, 80-85% clinically improved. To measure effects on terminally ill cancer patients and their families of coordinating the services available within the NHS and from local authorities and the voluntary sector.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Inner London health district.
                Cancer patients were routinely notified from 1987 to 1990. 554 patients expected to survive less than one year entered the trial and were randomly allocated to a coordination or a control group.
                All patients received routinely available services. Coordination group patients received the assistance of two nurse coordinators, whose role was to ensure that patients received appropriate and well coordinated services, tailored to their individual needs and circumstances.
                Patients and carers were interviewed at home on entry to the trial and at intervals until death. Interviews after bereavement were also conducted. Outcome measures included the presence and severity of physical symptoms, psychiatric morbidity, use of and satisfaction with services, and carers' problems. Results from the baseline interview, the interview closest to death, and the interview after bereavement were analysed.
                Few differences between groups were significant. Coordination group patients were less likely to suffer from vomiting, were more likely to report effective treatment for it, and less likely to be concerned about having an itchy skin. Their carers were more likely to report that in the last week of life the patient had had a cough and had had effective treatment for constipation, and they were less likely to rate the patient's difficulty swallowing as severe or to report effective treatment for anxiety. Coordination group patients were more likely to have seen a chiropodist and their carers were more likely to contact a specialist nurse in a night time emergency. These carers were less likely to feel angry about the death of the patient.
                This coordinating service made little difference to patient or family outcomes, perhaps because the service did not have a budget with which it could obtain services or because the professional skills of the nurse-coordinators may have conflicted with the requirements of the coordinating role. Caring for relatives with advanced cancer may cause psychological and physical ill health.
                To evaluate the effectiveness of increased support for distressed, informal carers of patients receiving palliative care.
                The sample was composed of 271 informal carers who scored over 5 on the 28-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28). The intervention comprised six weekly visits by a trained advisor. Primary outcome was carer distress (GHQ-28) at 4-week, 9-week and 12-week follow-up. Secondary outcomes were carer strain and quality of life, satisfaction with care, and bereavement outcome.
                Scores on the GHQ-28 fell below the threshold of 5/6 in a third of participants in each trial arm at any follow-up point. Mean scores in the intervention group were lower at all time points but these differences were not significant. No difference was observed in secondary outcomes. Carers receiving the intervention reported qualitative benefit.
                The intervention might have been too brief, and ongoing help might have had accruing benefits. Alternatively, informal carers of patients with cancer may already receive considerable input and the advisor's help gave little additional advantage; or caring for a dying relative is extremely stressful and no amount of support is going to make it much better. We have recently reported the psychological outcome of a group Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) intervention with patients who had metastatic breast cancer. The data of 92 patients who were retained at the first follow-up assessment revealed short-term improvements on measures of mood and self-esteem amongst therapy participants. These changes were not sustained at the 3- and 6-month follow-up assessments. This report describes a survival analysis of 121 patients who entered the study, at 5 years after its commencement. The analysis, based on the Cox Proportional Hazards Regression model, revealed no survival advantage associated with the intervention. Only medical prognostic factors such as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, visceral metastases and chemotherapy treatment significantly predicted patients' survival time. The findings of this study are compared with those of two earlier studies which also examined the survival effects of a group psychological intervention with metastatic breast cancer patients.
                Copyright 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. To prevent depression and anxiety, we delivered a brief, classroom-based cognitive-behavioral workshop along with ongoing Web-based materials and e-mail coaching to college students at risk for depression. At risk was defined as having mild to moderate depressive symptoms on a self-report measure of depression. Two hundred forty students were randomized into either an eight-week workshop that met in groups of 10, once per week for 2 h or into an assessment-only control group. We plan to track participants for 3 years after the workshop and here we report the 6 month preventive effects on depression and anxiety. The workshop group had significantly fewer depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms than the control group, but there was no significant difference between the conditions on depression or anxiety episodes at 6 month follow up. The workshop group had significantly better well being than the control group, and the workshop group had significantly greater improvement in optimistic explanatory style than the control group. Improved explanatory style was a significant mediator of the prevention effects from pre- to post-workshop for depressive and anxiety symptoms, as well as for improved well being. A randomized clinical trial was performed to assess whether the results of a depression screening instrument, when provided to physicians, could influence their recognition and treatment of depression in a primary care setting. The intervention consisted of randomly informing or not informing physicians of the depression status of 100 patients who screened positively for depression on both the Zung Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) and a DSM-III screen. For 12 months patients were followed to assess depression status, and medical records were audited to assess depression recognition and treatment. Results show that feedback to physicians of SDS scores of previously unrecognized depressed patients makes a significant difference in greater recognition (56.2% vs. 34.6%) and treatment (56.2% vs. 42.3%) of depression over the 12-month study period. This was especially true for patients with high somatic (P less than 0.05) or low psychologic symptoms of depression (P less than 0.05). These results suggest that routine use of a depression screening instrument can improve physician recognition of depression, with increased initiation of treatment. To examine the effect of counselling and relaxation intervention on psychological symptoms in patients with gynaecological cancer between the post-operative period and the six-week review.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Fifty-three patients with gynaecological cancer.
                Three Australian tertiary referral hospitals.
                Fifty-three patients were randomised to control or intervention and completed the baseline Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and General Health Questionnaire-28 (GHQ-28) questionnaires. The intervention consisted of a relaxation and counselling session performed by a senior doctor. Follow up questionnaires were completed at six weeks. Demographic and tumour data were collated independently.
                Complete data were available on 50 patients. There were no significant differences in demographic, social support or tumour characteristics between the two groups. Multivariate analysis determined that only the intervention and baseline score were significant predictors of outcome. The intervention was associated with a significant reduction in total HADS score (P = 0.002). The reduction was seen in both anxiety and moderate depression subscales (P = 0.001 and P = 0.02). The intervention was also associated with a significant reduction in total GHQ-28 score and in three of the four subscale scores (somatisation, anxiety and personality development; all P < 0.02). However, no significant difference was found in the fourth subscale of major depression.
                A relaxation and counselling intervention performed by a treating doctor reduces psychological symptoms in women with a new diagnosis of gynaecological cancer. Care of patients with depression in managed primary care settings often fails to meet guideline standards, but the long-term impact of quality improvement (QI) programs for depression care in such settings is unknown.
                To determine if QI programs in managed care practices for depressed primary care patients improve quality of care, health outcomes, and employment.
                Randomized controlled trial initiated from June 1996 to March 1997.
                Forty-six primary care clinics in 6 US managed care organizations.
                Of 27332 consecutively screened patients, 1356 with current depressive symptoms and either 12-month, lifetime, or no depressive disorder were enrolled.
                Matched clinics were randomized to usual care (mailing of practice guidelines) or to 1 of 2 QI programs that involved institutional commitment to QI, training local experts and nurse specialists to provide clinician and patient education, identification of a pool of potentially depressed patients, and either nurses for medication follow-up or access to trained psychotherapists.
                Process of care (use of antidepressant medication, mental health specialty counseling visits, medical visits for mental health problems, any medical visits), health outcomes (probable depression and health-related quality of life [HRQOL]), and employment at baseline and at 6- and 12-month follow-up.
                Patients in QI (n = 913) and control (n = 443) clinics did not differ significantly at baseline in service use, HRQOL, or employment after nonresponse weighting. At 6 months, 50.9% of QI patients and 39.7% of controls had counseling or used antidepressant medication at an appropriate dosage (P<.001), with a similar pattern at 12 months (59.2% vs 50.1%; P = .006). There were no differences in probability of having any medical visit at any point (each P > or = .21). At 6 months, 47.5% of QI patients and 36.6% of controls had a medical visit for mental health problems (P = .001), and QI patients were more likely to see a mental health specialist at 6 months (39.8% vs 27.2%; P<.001) and at 12 months (29.1% vs 22.7%; P = .03). At 6 months, 39.9% of QI patients and 49.9% of controls still met criteria for probable depressive disorder (P = .001), with a similar pattern at 12 months (41.6% vs 51.2%; P = .005). Initially employed QI patients were more likely to be working at 12 months relative to controls (P = .05).
                When these managed primary care practices implemented QI programs that improve opportunities for depression treatment without mandating it, quality of care, mental health outcomes, and retention of employment of depressed patients improved over a year, while medical visits did not increase overall. Eight-seven moderately to severely depressed psychiatric outpatients were randomly assigned to 12 weeks of cognitive therapy (CT) (n = 24), pharmacotherapy (n = 24), CT plus pharmacotherapy (n = 22), or CT plus active placebo (n = 17). Seventy patients completed the treatment protocol. Seventeen dropped out before the end of the treatment period. Patients who completed treatment showed significant improvement in mean scores on two common measures of severity of depression (the Beck Depression Inventory and the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression) between evaluation and termination. Improvement did not differ as a function of the different treatment modalities. Inclusion of dropout patients' end-point scores did not alter these results. Treatment gains in all groups were maintained at one-month follow-up assessment. A portion of this study replicated an earlier study. While the results were not identical, they indicated that either CT or antidepressant drug treatment can be effective in treating outpatients with primary, nonbipolar depression of moderate or greater severity. Combining treatments did not lead either to additive effects or negative interactions.
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.