Effect of a collaborative care model on anxiety symptoms among patients with depression and diabetes in India: The INDEPENDENT randomized clinical trial

Collaborative care for common mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) face high burden of common mental disorders (CMDs). Most of the evidence for the Collaborative Care (CC) model effectiveness comes from high-income countries (HICs) and may not generalise to LMICs. A systematic review was conducted to assess effectiveness of CC for CMDs in LMICs.

METHODS

We searched eight-databases, two trial registries (2011-November 2023). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults (≥18 years) with depression/anxiety diagnosis, reporting remission/change in symptom severity were eligible. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted for: short-(0-6 months), medium-(7-12 months), long-(13-24 months), and very long-term (≥25 months) follow-up. Quality was assessed with Cochrane RoB2 tool. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022380407.

RESULTS

Searches identified 7494 studies, 12 trials involving 13,531 participants were included; nine had low-risk of bias. CC was more effective than usual care for depression: dichotomous outcomes (short-term, 7 studies, relative risk (RR) 1.39, 95%CI 1.31, 1.48; medium-term, 6 studies, RR 1.35, 95%CI 1.28, 1.43); and continuous outcomes (short-term, 8 studies, standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.51, 95%CI -0.80, -0.23; medium-term, 8 studies, SMD -0.59, 95%CI -1.00, -0.17). CC was found to be effective at long-term (one study), but not at very long-term. Improvement in anxiety outcomes with CC (2 studies, 340 participants) reported up to 12-months; improvements in quality-of-life were not statistically significant (3 studies, 796 participants, SMD 0.62, 95%CI -0.10, 1.34).

LIMITATIONS

Pooled estimates showed high heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

In LMICs, CC was more effective than usual care for improving depression outcomes at short and medium-term follow-up. A similar improvement was found for anxiety outcomes, but evidence is limited.

Correlates of disability among primary care patients with common mental disorders and chronic medical conditions- a cross-sectional study from rural South India

PURPOSE

We examined the correlates of disability among people with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and comorbid common mental disorders (CMDs) from rural India.

METHODS

The sample comprised 2,486 participants enrolled in a cluster randomized trial (cRCT), Healthier OPtions through Empowerment (HOPE). Participants were 30 years or older, with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder, dysthymia, generalized anxiety disorder, and/or panic disorder on the MINI-International Neuropsychiatric Interview, with hypertension, diabetes, dsylipidemia and/ or ischemic heart disease. Disability was measured with the 12-item version of WHODAS 2.0. The severity of depression and anxiety was measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7), respectively. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to examine associations.

RESULTS

The mean age was 59 ± 10.0 years, three quarters (1864) of the participants were female, and 64.0% were married. More than half of the participants had no formal education (57.9%). Most of the participants had two or more chronic medical conditions (73.0%). The mean disability score was 24.3. The mean depression score was 8.5, and the mean anxiety score was 6.7. Higher levels of disability were reported by participants ≥ 60 years of age, those with moderate and severe depression, and moderate anxiety. Among female participants, being unmarried was associated with greater disability. Male participants without formal education reported greater levels of disability.

CONCLUSION

Higher severity of CMDs is significantly associated with higher levels of disability. For women, being unmarried and for men having no formal education was associated with higher levels of disability.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02310932 [URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT02310932 ] registered on December 8, 2014, and Clinical Trials Registry India CTRI/2018/04/013001, registered on April 4, 2018. Retrospectively registered.

Association of collaborative care intervention features with depression and metabolic outcomes in the INDEPENDENT study: A mixed methods study

AIMS

The INtegrating DEPrEssioN and Diabetes treatmENT (INDEPENDENT) trial tested a collaborative care model including electronic clinical decision support (CDS) for treating diabetes and depression in India. We aimed to assess which features of this clinically and cost-effective intervention were associated with improvements in diabetes and depression measures.

METHODS

Post-hoc analysis of the INDEPENDENT trial data (189 intervention participants) was conducted to determine each intervention feature's effect: 1. Collaborative case reviews between expert psychiatrists and the care team; 2. Patient care-coordinator contacts; and 3. Clinicians' CDS prompt modifications. Primary outcome was baseline-to-12-months improvements in diabetes control, blood pressure, cholesterol, and depression. Implementer interviews revealed barriers and facilitators of intervention success. Joint displays integrated mixed methods' results.

RESULTS

High baseline HbA1c≥ 74.9 mmol/mol (9%) was associated with 5.72 fewer care-coordinator contacts than those with better baseline HbA1c (76.8 mmol/mol, 9.18%, p < 0.001). Prompt modification proportions varied from 38.3% (diabetes) to 1.3% (LDL). Interviews found that providers' and participants' visit frequencies were preference dependent. Qualitative data elucidated patient-level factors that influenced number of clinical contacts and prompt modifications explaining their lack of association with clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Our mixed methods approach underlines the importance of the complementarity of different intervention features. Qualitative findings further illuminate reasons for variations in fidelity from the core model.

Alcohol use disorder in alcohol-associated liver disease: Two sides of the same coin

Alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) has emerged as the leading indication for liver transplantation (LT) worldwide, with 40% of LTs in the United States performed for ALD in 2019. The ALD-related health care burden accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in young individuals. Alcohol use disorder (AUD), which focuses on the negative effects of alcohol on psychosocial, physical, and mental health, is present in the majority of patients with ALD, with moderate to severe AUD in 75%-80%. During the last decade, early liver transplantation (eLT) has emerged as a lifesaving treatment for selected patients with alcohol-associated hepatitis; these patients may have a higher risk of using alcohol after LT. The risk of alcohol use recurrence may be reduced during the pretransplant or post-transplant period with AUD treatment using behavioral and/or pharmacological therapies and with regular monitoring for alcohol use (self-reported and complemented with biomarkers like phosphatidylethanol). However, AUD treatment in patients with ALD is challenging due to patient, clinician, and system barriers. An integrated model to provide AUD and ALD care by hepatologists and addiction experts in a colocated clinic starting from LT evaluation and selection to monitoring listed candidates and then to following up on recipients of LT should be promoted. However, the integration of addiction and hepatology teams in an LT program in the real world is often present only during evaluation and candidate selection for LT. Data are emerging to show that a multidisciplinary integrated AUD treatment within an LT program reduces recurrent alcohol use after LT. If we want to continue using early liver transplantation for patients with severe alcohol-associated hepatitis, LT programs should focus on building integrated multidisciplinary care teams for the integrated treatment of both AUD and ALD.

5. Facilitating Positive Health Behaviors and Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

The multidisciplinary team in diagnosing and treatment of patients with diabetes and comorbidities: A scoping review

Background

Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs) has been suggested as an intervention to overcome some of the complexities experienced by people with diabetes and comorbidities in terms of diagnosis and treatment. However, evidence concerning MDTs within the diabetes field remains sparse.

Objective

This review aims to identify and map available evidence on key characteristics of MDTs in the context of diagnosis and treatment in people with diabetes and comorbidities.

Methods

This review followed the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Databases PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL were systematically searched for studies assessing any type of MDT within the context of diagnosis and treatment in adult people (≥ 18 years) with diabetes and comorbidities/complications. Data extraction included details on study characteristics, MDT interventions, digital health solutions, and key findings.

Results

Overall, 19 studies were included. Generally, the MDTs were characterized by high heterogeneity. Four overall components characterized the MDTs: Both medical specialists and healthcare professionals (HCPs) of different team sizes were represented; interventions spanned elements of medication, assessment, nutrition, education, self-monitoring, and treatment adjustment; digital health solutions were integrated in 58% of the studies; MDTs were carried out in both primary and secondary healthcare settings with varying frequencies. Generally, the effectiveness of the MDTs was positive across different outcomes.

Conclusions

MDTs are characterized by high diversity in their outline yet seem to be effective and cost-effective in the context of diagnosis and treatment of people with diabetes and comorbidities. Future research should investigate the cross-sectorial collaboration to reduce care fragmentation and enhance care coordination.

Successful ingredients of effective Collaborative Care programs in low- and middle-income countries: A rapid review

Integrating mental health care in primary healthcare settings is a compelling strategy to address the mental health treatment gap in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Collaborative Care is the integrated care model with the most evidence supporting its effectiveness, but most research has been conducted in high-income countries. Efforts to implement this complex multi-component model at scale in LMICs will be enhanced by understanding the model components that have been effective in LMIC settings. Following Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group recommendations, we conducted a rapid review to identify studies of the effectiveness of Collaborative Care for priority adult mental disorders of mhGAP (mood and anxiety disorders, psychosis, substance use disorders and epilepsy) in outpatient medical settings in LMICs. Article screening and data extraction were performed using Covidence software. Data extraction by two authors utilized a checklist of key components of effective interventions. Information was aggregated to examine how frequently the components were applied. Our search yielded 25 articles describing 20 Collaborative Care models that treated depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, alcohol use disorder or epilepsy in nine different LMICs. Fourteen of these models demonstrated statistically significantly improved clinical outcomes compared to comparison groups. Successful models shared key structural and process-of-care elements: a multi-disciplinary care team with structured communication; standardized protocols for evidence-based treatments; systematic identification of mental disorders, and a stepped-care approach to treatment intensification. There was substantial heterogeneity across studies with respect to the specifics of model components, and clear evidence of the importance of tailoring the model to the local context. This review provides evidence that Collaborative Care is effective across a range of mental disorders in LMICs. More work is needed to demonstrate population-level and longer-term outcomes, and to identify strategies that will support successful and sustained implementation in routine clinical settings.

5. Facilitating Positive Health Behaviors and Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Effects of a lifestyle intervention on depression and anxiety among adults at risk for diabetes in India: A secondary analysis of the Kerala Diabetes Prevention Program

The impact of lifestyle interventions on diabetes and mental health conditions have been documented among people with diabetes. However, the mental health benefits of lifestyle interventions designed for diabetes prevention have not been systematically investigated among people at high risk of diabetes, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. We examined the effects of a 12-month peer support lifestyle intervention designed for diabetes prevention on depression and anxiety symptomology in the sample population of the Kerala Diabetes Prevention Program. Mixed-effects linear regression models were used to examine the effect of the intervention on depression and anxiety scores at 12 and 24 months in the total sample of 1007 adults at risk for diabetes and among those with mild-severe depressive or anxiety symptoms at baseline (n = 326 for depression; n = 203 for anxiety). Among all participants, the intervention group had a significantly higher reduction of depressive symptoms as compared to the control group at 12 months (mean diff score = -0.51; 95% CI: -0.95, -0.07; P = 0.02). This effect was not sustained at 24 months. There were no significant intervention effects for anxiety. Among those with mild-severe symptoms at baseline, the intervention group had a significantly higher reduction of depressive symptoms (mean diff score = -1.55; 95% CI -2.50, -0.6; P = 0.001) and anxiety symptoms (mean diff score = -1.64; 95% CI -2.76, -0.52; P = 0.004) at 12 months. The effect was sustained at 24 months for depression, but not anxiety. Lifestyle interventions designed for prevention of diabetes might improve depressive and anxiety symptoms in the short-term, particularly among those with mild-severe symptoms.

Severity of depressive but not anxiety symptoms impacts glucose metabolism among patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care

Background

Data from primary care regarding the prevalence of symptoms of depression and anxiety, and their effect on glycemic control among people with diabetes is lacking in Hungary. The recently introduced Patient Health Record (PHR) requires family doctors to screen for depressive symptoms.

Objectives

We aimed to investigate the prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms among patients with type 2 diabetes in the general practice, and the relationship between these affective disorders and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level.

Methods

We included 338 consecutive patients with type 2 diabetes from six primary care practices in this cross-sectional study. A self-administered questionnaire (patient history, anthropometric, socioeconomic, laboratory parameters), the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) were used.

Results

The mean age of the sample was 64.0 ± 11.5 (years ± SD), 61% of participants were female. The prevalence of depressive symptoms was 21%, mainly moderate/severe symptoms (13%). Anxiety symptoms were more common (35%). We found significant univariate association between the depressive symptoms and HbA1c (p = 0.001), suicide attempt (p < 0.001), anxiety (p < 0.001), micro- and macrovascular complication (p = 0.028 and p < 0.001), education (p = 0.001) and place of residence (p = 0.002). In multivariate analysis, however, only BDI score had significant (p = 0.03191) association with glycemic control.

Conclusion

Among primary care patients with type 2 diabetes, the prevalence of depressive symptoms was less frequent than anxiety symptoms. More severe depressive symptoms were associated with worse glycemic control.

Can the management of depression in type 2 diabetes be democratized?

Both type 2 diabetes and depression are common and are projected to increase. There is increasing evidence for a bidirectional relationship between the two. Diabetes is a risk factor for depression; contrariwise, individuals with depression are at greater risk of developing diabetes. They are a burden for both the individual and the society. Co-existent depression worsens diabetic control because of obesity, insulin resistance and the adverse metabolic effects of anti-diabetes medicines. In addition, compliance to lifestyle measures required for diabetes is also compromised such as following a specific diet, taking proper medications on time, getting metabolic parameters assessed and maintaining a sleep cycle. Depression occurs in many grades; mild depression is more common in diabetes than frank or full-blown depression leading to suicide. Unfortunately, there are not enough trained and accessible mental health professionals such as psychologists or psychiatrists to deal with the increasing burden of depression in diabetes. Therefore, alternate models for management of mild to moderate depression are required. There is evidence that a team-approach by employing health care assistants can lower the risk of cardiac risk factors. INtegrating DEPrEssioN and Diabetes treatmENT study was carried out to determine whether the team-approach using non-health care professionals could be effective in managing mild to moderate depression and to study its effects on metabolic parameters among subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The international study, carried out in four independent centers in India assessed the impact of a trained but not qualified non-psychiatrist in coordinating and forming a fulcrum between the patient, the family and the consultant endocrinologist/diabetologist. The interventions were fine-tuned to be culturally appropriate by qualitative interviews before they began. It was shown that the outcomes of both depression and diabetes could be improved by the employment of a clinical care coordinator. It is possible to scale up the studies to wider geographical areas and health-care organizations.