Literature Collection

AIMS AND METHOD: This systematic review examines the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of behavioural health integration into primary healthcare in the management of depression and unhealthy alcohol use in low- and middle-income countries. Following PRISMA guidelines, this review included research that studied patients aged ≥18 years with unhealthy alcohol use and/or depression of any clinical severity. An exploration of the models of integration was used to characterise a typology of behavioural health integration specific for low- and middle-income countries. RESULTS: Fifty-eight articles met inclusion criteria. Studies evidenced increased effectiveness of integrated care over treatment as usual for both conditions. The economic evaluations found increased direct health costs but cost-effective estimates. The included studies used six distinct behavioural health integration models. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Behavioural health integration may yield improved health outcomes, although it may require additional resources. The proposed typology can assist decision-makers to advance the implementation of integrated models.

BACKGROUND: Individuals living with severe mental illness can have significant emotional, physical and social challenges. Collaborative care combines clinical and organisational components. AIMS: We tested whether a primary care-based collaborative care model (PARTNERS) would improve quality of life for people with diagnoses of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or other psychoses, compared with usual care. METHOD: We conducted a general practice-based, cluster randomised controlled superiority trial. Practices were recruited from four English regions and allocated (1:1) to intervention or control. Individuals receiving limited input in secondary care or who were under primary care only were eligible. The 12-month PARTNERS intervention incorporated person-centred coaching support and liaison work. The primary outcome was quality of life as measured by the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life (MANSA). RESULTS: We allocated 39 general practices, with 198 participants, to the PARTNERS intervention (20 practices, 116 participants) or control (19 practices, 82 participants). Primary outcome data were available for 99 (85.3%) intervention and 71 (86.6%) control participants. Mean change in overall MANSA score did not differ between the groups (intervention: 0.25, s.d. 0.73; control: 0.21, s.d. 0.86; estimated fully adjusted between-group difference 0.03, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.31; P = 0.819). Acute mental health episodes (safety outcome) included three crises in the intervention group and four in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of a difference in quality of life, as measured with the MANSA, between those receiving the PARTNERS intervention and usual care. Shifting care to primary care was not associated with increased adverse outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Low-intensity psychological interventions may be a cost-effective, accessible solution for treating depression and anxiety in patients with long-term conditions, but evidence from real-world service settings is lacking. This study examined the effectiveness of low-intensity psychological interventions provided in the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies programme in England for patients with and without long-term conditions. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients (total N = 21,051, long-term conditions n = 4024) enrolled in three low-intensity psychological interventions, i.e. Internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT), guided self-help (GSH), and psychoeducational group therapy (PGT) within a Talking Therapies service from 2016 to 2020. Primary outcomes included pre-post-treatment changes in depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9) and anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7). RESULTS: Overall, both cohorts significantly improved on all outcomes post-treatment, with large effect sizes. Patients with long-term conditions experienced a greater reduction in depression while those without experienced a greater reduction in anxiety, but these differences were marginal (< 1 score difference on both measures). No difference between the cohorts was shown when comparing the differential effectiveness across interventions, but those engaging in iCBT showed greater reduction in depression and anxiety than those in GSH and PGT, while those in GSH improved more than PGT. CONCLUSIONS: Low-intensity psychological interventions, particularly iCBT, were effective in treating depression and anxiety in patients with long-term conditions in a real-world service setting. Our large-scale study supports the continued and increased implementation of low-intensity psychological interventions for this subpopulation via integrated care.

INTRODUCTION: Food as Medicine is increasingly recognized as an important strategy for addressing the related challenges of food insecurity and nutrition-related chronic conditions. Food as Medicine refers to integration of food-based nutrition interventions into healthcare to prevent and treat disease. However, there is limited evidence to understand the effectiveness of Food as Medicine. METHODS: Recipe4Health (R4H), a comprehensive Food as Medicine program, was implemented in 4 Federally Qualified Health Centers in California for patients with food insecurity and/or nutrition-related chronic conditions. Patients were referred by a healthcare provider to a "Food Farmacy" (16 weekly produce home deliveries) alone or in combination with a "Behavioral Pharmacy" (16 weekly group visits). A quasi-experimental study with pre/post surveys (4 months) and propensity score matched controls for Electronic Health Record outcomes over 12 months was conducted. Participants were 2,643 R4H patients and 2,643 controls identified from 1/2020 to 12/2022; data were analyzed from 2023 to 2024. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in produce consumption from baseline to 4 months (0.41 servings/day [0.11, 0.72], p=0.007) in the Food Farmacy in combination with Behavioral Pharmacy. Compared to controls, there were improvements in non-HDL cholesterol for the Food Farmacy alone (-17.1 mg/dL [-26.9, -7.2], p<0.001) and in combination with Behavioral Pharmacy (-17 mg/dL [-28.3, -5.8], p=0.003) at 12 months. Compared to controls, HbA1c significantly decreased in the Food Farmacy alone at 12 months (-0.37%, 95% CI [-0.65, -0.08]; p=0.01), but not the Food Farmacy with Behavioral Pharmacy. CONCLUSIONS: R4H resulted in improvements in diet and multiple clinical health outcomes, such as non-HDL cholesterol and HbA1c.