Email UpdatesLiterature Collection
Collection Insights
10K+
References
9K+
Articles
1400+
Grey Literature
4500+
Opioids & SU
The Literature Collection contains over 10,000 references for published and grey literature on the integration of behavioral health and primary care. Learn More
Use the Search feature below to find references for your terms across the entire Literature Collection, or limit your searches by Authors, Keywords, or Titles and by Year, Type, or Topic. View your search results as displayed, or use the options to: Show more references per page; Sort references by Title or Date; and Refine your search criteria. Expand an individual reference to View Details. Full-text access to the literature may be available through a link to PubMed, a DOI, or a URL. References may also be exported for use in bibliographic software (e.g., EndNote, RefWorks, Zotero).
10858 Results
2121
Collaborative and Integrated Care for Adolescent Depression
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2019
Publication Place: United States
Topic(s):
Healthcare Disparities
See topic collection
Reference Links: View the PubMed citation for Collaborative and Integrated Care for Adolescent Depression
2123
CollAborative care and active surveillance for Screen-Positive EldeRs with subthreshold depression (CASPER): a multicentred randomised controlled trial of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2017
Publication Place: England
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Efforts to reduce the burden of illness and personal suffering associated with depression in older adults have focused on those with more severe depressive syndromes. Less attention has been paid to those with mild disorders/subthreshold depression, but these patients also suffer significant impairments in their quality of life and level of functioning. There is currently no clear evidence-based guidance regarding treatment for this patient group. OBJECTIVES: To establish the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a low-intensity intervention of collaborative care for primary care older adults who screened positive for subthreshold depression. DESIGN: A pragmatic, multicentred, two-arm, parallel, individually randomised controlled trial with a qualitative study embedded within the pilot. Randomisation occurred after informed consent and baseline measures were collected. SETTING: Thirty-two general practitioner (GP) practices in the north of England. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 705 participants aged >/= 75 years during the pilot phase and >/= 65 years during the main trial with subthreshold depression. INTERVENTIONS: Participants in the intervention group received a low-intensity intervention of collaborative care, which included behavioural activation delivered by a case manager for an average of six sessions over 7-8 weeks, alongside usual GP care. Control-arm participants received only usual GP care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was a self-reported measure of depression severity, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items PHQ-9 score at 4 months post randomisation. Secondary outcome measures included the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, Short Form questionnaire-12 items, Patient Health Questionnaire-15 items, Generalised Anxiety Disorder seven-item scale, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale two-item version, a medication questionnaire and objective data. Participants were followed up for 12 months. RESULTS: In total, 705 participants were randomised (collaborative care n = 344, usual care n = 361), with 586 participants (83%; collaborative care 76%, usual care 90%) followed up at 4 months and 519 participants (74%; collaborative care 68%, usual care 79%) followed up at 12 months. Attrition was markedly greater in the collaborative care arm. Model estimates at the primary end point of 4 months revealed a statistically significant effect in favour of collaborative care compared with usual care [mean difference 1.31 score points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.95 score points; p < 0.001]. The difference equates to a standard effect size of 0.30, for which the trial was powered. Treatment differences measured by the PHQ-9 were maintained at 12 months' follow-up (mean difference 1.33 score points, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.10 score points; p = 0.001). Base-case cost-effectiveness analysis found that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was pound9633 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). On average, participants allocated to collaborative care displayed significantly higher QALYs than those allocated to the control group (annual difference in adjusted QALYs of 0.044, 95% bias-corrected CI 0.015 to 0.072; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative care has been shown to be clinically effective and cost-effective for older adults with subthreshold depression and to reduce the proportion of people who go on to develop case-level depression at 12 months. This intervention could feasibly be delivered in the NHS at an acceptable cost-benefit ratio. Important future work would include investigating the longer-term effect of collaborative care on the CASPER population, which could be conducted by introducing an extension to follow-up, and investigating the impact of collaborative care on managing multimorbidities in people with subthreshold depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN02202951. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Topic(s):
Education & Workforce
See topic collection
, Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection
, Healthcare Disparities
See topic collection
2126
Collaborative care clinician perceptions of computerized cognitive behavioral therapy for depression in primary care
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2020
Publication Place: England
Abstract:
In Veterans Health Administration's (VA) Primary Care-Mental Health Integration (PC-MHI) models, primary care providers, care managers, and mental health clinicians collaboratively provide depression care. Primary care patients, however, still lack timely, sufficient access to psychotherapy treatment. Adapting PC-MHI collaborative care to improve uptake of evidence-based computerized cognitive behavioral therapy (cCBT) may be a potential solution. Understanding primary care-based mental health clinician perspectives is crucial for facilitating adoption of cCBT as part of collaborative depression care. We examined PC-MHI mental health clinicians' perspectives on adapting collaborative care models to support cCBT for VA primary care patients. We conducted 16 semi-structured interviews with PC-MHI nurse care managers, licensed social workers, psychologists, and psychiatrists in one VA health-care system. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded using the constant comparative method, and analyzed for overarching themes. Although cCBT awareness and knowledge were not widespread, participants were highly accepting of enhancing PC-MHI models with cCBT for depression treatment. Participants supported cCBT delivery by a PC-MHI care manager or clinician and saw it as an additional tool to engage patients, particularly younger Veterans, in mental health treatment. They commented that current VA PC-MHI models did not facilitate, and had barriers to, use of online and mobile treatments. If effectively implemented, however, respondents thought it had potential to increase the number of patients they could treat. There is widespread interest in modernizing health systems. VA PC-MHI mental health clinicians appear open to adapting collaborative care to increase uptake of cCBT to improve psychotherapy access.
Topic(s):
Education & Workforce
See topic collection
, Healthcare Disparities
See topic collection
Reference Links:
View the DOI record for Collaborative care clinician perceptions of computerized cognitive behavioral therapy for depression in primary care
View DOI Record
View the PubMed citation for Collaborative care clinician perceptions of computerized cognitive behavioral therapy for depression in primary care2130
Collaborative care for bipolar disorder: Part I. Intervention and implementation in a randomized effectiveness trial
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2006
Publication Place: United States
Abstract: 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.
Topic(s):
Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection
Reference Links:
View the DOI record for Collaborative care for bipolar disorder: Part I. Intervention and implementation in a randomized effectiveness trial
View DOI Record
View the PubMed citation for Collaborative care for bipolar disorder: Part I. Intervention and implementation in a randomized effectiveness trial2131
Collaborative care for children with ADHD symptoms: A randomized comparative effectiveness trial
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2015
Publication Place: United States
Topic(s):
Healthcare Disparities
See topic collection
, Education & Workforce
See topic collection
Reference Links:
View the DOI record for Collaborative care for children with ADHD symptoms: A randomized comparative effectiveness trial
View DOI Record
View the PubMed citation for Collaborative care for children with ADHD symptoms: A randomized comparative effectiveness trial2132
Collaborative care for comorbid depression and diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2014
Publication Place: England
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The collaborative care model is recommended for depression in adults with a chronic physical health problem like diabetes. We sought to systematically assess the effect of collaborative care on depression and glycaemia in adults with comorbid depression and diabetes to inform guidelines and practice. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Health Source Nursing, MEDLINE, PsychINFO and reference lists of retrieved articles published before August 2013. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on collaborative care (ie, coordinated multidisciplinary model of care) for depression that reported the effects on depression and glycaemic outcomes in adults with comorbid clinically relevant depression and diabetes were eligible. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Data on the mean difference in depression and glycaemic outcomes were extracted and pooled using random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Seven RCTs included for review reported effects on depression outcomes in 1895 participants, and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level in 1556 participants. Collaborative care significantly improved the depression score (standardised mean difference was -0.32 (95% CI -0.53 to -0.11); I(2)=79%) and HbA1c level (weighted mean difference was -0.33% (95% CI -0.66% to -0.00%); I(2)=72.9%) compared with control conditions. Depression remission did not predict better glycaemic control across studies. CONCLUSIONS: Limited evidence from short-to-medium term RCTs predominantly conducted in the USA suggests that collaborative care for depression significantly improves both depression and glycaemia outcomes, independently, in people with comorbid depression and diabetes.
Topic(s):
General Literature
See topic collection
Reference Links:
View the DOI record for Collaborative care for comorbid depression and diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
View DOI Record
View the PubMed citation for Collaborative care for comorbid depression and diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis2133
Collaborative care for depressed patients with chronic medical conditions: a randomized trial in Puerto Rico
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2010
Publication Place: United States
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.
Topic(s):
General Literature
See topic collection
Reference Links:
View the DOI record for Collaborative care for depressed patients with chronic medical conditions: a randomized trial in Puerto Rico
View DOI Record
View the PubMed citation for Collaborative care for depressed patients with chronic medical conditions: a randomized trial in Puerto Rico2134
Collaborative Care for Depression among Patients with Limited English Proficiency: a Systematic Review
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2018
Publication Place: United States
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) have high rates of depression, yet face challenges accessing effective care in outpatient settings. We undertook a systematic review to investigate the effectiveness of the collaborative care model for depression for LEP patients in primary care. METHODS: We queried online PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EMBASE databases (January 1, 2000, to June 10, 2017) for quantitative studies comparing collaborative care to usual care to treat depression in adults with LEP in primary care. We evaluated the impact of collaborative care on depressive symptoms or on depression treatment. Two reviewers independently extracted key data from the studies and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane bias and quality assessment tool (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (non-RCTs). RESULTS: Of 86 titles identified, 15 were included (representing 9 studies: 5 RCTs, 3 cohort studies, and 1 case-control study). Studies included 4859 participants; 2679 (55%) reported LEP. The majority spoke Spanish (93%). The wide variability in study design and outcome definitions precluded performing a meta-analysis. Follow-up ranged from 3 months to 2 years. Three of four high-quality RCTs reported that 13-25% more patients had improved depressive symptoms when treated with culturally tailored collaborative care compared to usual care; the last had high treatment in the control arm and found equal improvement. Two non-RCT studies suggest that Spanish-speaking patients may benefit as much as, if not more than, English-speaking patients treated with collaborative care. The remaining studies reported increased receipt of preferred depression treatment (therapy vs. antidepressants) in the intervention groups. Eight of nine studies used bilingual providers to deliver the intervention. DISCUSSION: While limited by the number and variability of studies, the available research suggests that collaborative care for depression delivered by bilingual providers may be more effective than usual care among patients with LEP. Implementation studies of collaborative care, particularly among Asian and non-Spanish-speakers, are needed.
Topic(s):
Healthcare Disparities
See topic collection
Reference Links:
View the DOI record for Collaborative Care for Depression among Patients with Limited English Proficiency: a Systematic Review
View DOI Record
View the PubMed citation for Collaborative Care for Depression among Patients with Limited English Proficiency: a Systematic Review2135
Collaborative Care for Depression among Patients with Limited English Proficiency: a Systematic Review
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2018
Publication Place: United States
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) have high rates of depression, yet face challenges accessing effective care in outpatient settings. We undertook a systematic review to investigate the effectiveness of the collaborative care model for depression for LEP patients in primary care. METHODS: We queried online PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EMBASE databases (January 1, 2000, to June 10, 2017) for quantitative studies comparing collaborative care to usual care to treat depression in adults with LEP in primary care. We evaluated the impact of collaborative care on depressive symptoms or on depression treatment. Two reviewers independently extracted key data from the studies and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane bias and quality assessment tool (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (non-RCTs). RESULTS: Of 86 titles identified, 15 were included (representing 9 studies: 5 RCTs, 3 cohort studies, and 1 case-control study). Studies included 4859 participants; 2679 (55%) reported LEP. The majority spoke Spanish (93%). The wide variability in study design and outcome definitions precluded performing a meta-analysis. Follow-up ranged from 3 months to 2 years. Three of four high-quality RCTs reported that 13-25% more patients had improved depressive symptoms when treated with culturally tailored collaborative care compared to usual care; the last had high treatment in the control arm and found equal improvement. Two non-RCT studies suggest that Spanish-speaking patients may benefit as much as, if not more than, English-speaking patients treated with collaborative care. The remaining studies reported increased receipt of preferred depression treatment (therapy vs. antidepressants) in the intervention groups. Eight of nine studies used bilingual providers to deliver the intervention. DISCUSSION: While limited by the number and variability of studies, the available research suggests that collaborative care for depression delivered by bilingual providers may be more effective than usual care among patients with LEP. Implementation studies of collaborative care, particularly among Asian and non-Spanish-speakers, are needed.
Topic(s):
Healthcare Disparities
See topic collection
Reference Links:
View the DOI record for Collaborative Care for Depression among Patients with Limited English Proficiency: a Systematic Review
View DOI Record
View the PubMed citation for Collaborative Care for Depression among Patients with Limited English Proficiency: a Systematic Review2136
Collaborative care for depression and anxiety
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2014
Publication Place: United States
Topic(s):
General Literature
See topic collection
2137
Collaborative care for depression and anxiety problems
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2012
Publication Place: England
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Common mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety, are estimated to affect up to 15% of the UK population at any one time, and health care systems worldwide need to implement interventions to reduce the impact and burden of these conditions. Collaborative care is a complex intervention based on chronic disease management models that may be effective in the management of these common mental health problems. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of collaborative care for patients with depression or anxiety. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases to February 2012: The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDAN) trials registers (CCDANCTR-References and CCDANCTR-Studies) which include relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from MEDLINE (1950 to present), EMBASE (1974 to present), PsycINFO (1967 to present) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, all years); the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal (ICTRP); ClinicalTrials.gov; and CINAHL (to November 2010 only). We screened the reference lists of reports of all included studies and published systematic reviews for reports of additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of collaborative care for participants of all ages with depression or anxiety. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent researchers extracted data using a standardised data extraction sheet. Two independent researchers made 'Risk of bias' assessments using criteria from The Cochrane Collaboration. We combined continuous measures of outcome using standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We combined dichotomous measures using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the results. MAIN RESULTS: We included seventy-nine RCTs (including 90 relevant comparisons) involving 24,308 participants in the review. Studies varied in terms of risk of bias.The results of primary analyses demonstrated significantly greater improvement in depression outcomes for adults with depression treated with the collaborative care model in the short-term (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.27; RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.43), medium-term (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.15; RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.48), and long-term (SMD -0.35, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.24; RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.41). However, these significant benefits were not demonstrated into the very long-term (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.27).The results also demonstrated significantly greater improvement in anxiety outcomes for adults with anxiety treated with the collaborative care model in the short-term (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.17; RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.87), medium-term (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.19; RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.69), and long-term (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.06; RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.42). No comparisons examined the effects of the intervention on anxiety outcomes in the very long-term.There was evidence of benefit in secondary outcomes including medication use, mental health quality of life, and patient satisfaction, although there was less evidence of benefit in physical quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative care is associated with significant improvement in depression and anxiety outcomes compared with usual care, and represents a useful addition to clinical pathways for adult patients with depression and anxiety.
Topic(s):
General Literature
See topic collection
Reference Links: View the PubMed citation for Collaborative care for depression and anxiety problems
2140
Collaborative care for depression in European countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2014
Publication Place: England
Topic(s):
General Literature
See topic collection
Reference Links:
View the DOI record for Collaborative care for depression in European countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis
View DOI Record
View the PubMed citation for Collaborative care for depression in European countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis