Written plans: an overlooked mechanism to develop recovery-oriented primary care for depression?

Interventions promoting recovery from depression for patients transitioning from outpatient mental health services to primary care: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is one of the most prevalent mental disorders worldwide with significant personal and public health consequences. After an episode of MDD, the likelihood of relapse is high. Therefore, there is a need for interventions that prevent relapse of depression when outpatient mental health care treatment has ended. This scoping review aimed to systematically map the evidence and identify knowledge gaps in interventions that aimed to promote recovery from MDD for patients transitioning from outpatient mental health services to primary care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We followed the guidance by Joanna Briggs Institute in tandem with the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. Four electronic databases were systematically searched using controlled index-or thesaurus terms and free text terms, as well as backward and forward citation tracking of included studies. The search strategy was based on the identification of any type of intervention, whether simple, multicomponent, or complex. Three authors independently screened for eligibility and extracted data.

RESULTS

18 studies were included for review. The studies had high heterogeneity in design, methods, sample size, recovery rating scales, and type of interventions. All studies used several elements in their interventions; however, the majority used cognitive behavioural therapy conducted in outpatient mental health services. No studies addressed the transitioning phase from outpatient mental health services to primary care. Most studies included patients during their outpatient mental health care treatment of MDD.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified several knowledge gaps. Recovery interventions for patients with MDD transitioning from outpatient mental health services to primary care are understudied. No studies addressed interventions in this transitioning phase or the patient's experience of the transitioning process. Research is needed to bridge this gap, both regarding interventions for patients transitioning from secondary to primary care, and patients' and health care professionals' experiences of the interventions and of what promotes recovery.

REGISTRATION

A protocol was prepared in advance and registered in Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/ah3sv), published in the medRxiv server (https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.10.06.22280499) and in PLOS ONE (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0291559).

The CORE study-An adapted mental health experience codesign intervention to improve psychosocial recovery for people with severe mental illness: A stepped wedge cluster randomized-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Mental health policies outline the need for codesign of services and quality improvement in partnership with service users and staff (and sometimes carers), and yet, evidence of systematic implementation and the impacts on healthcare outcomes is limited.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to test whether an adapted mental health experience codesign intervention to improve recovery-orientation of services led to greater psychosocial recovery outcomes for service users.

DESIGN

A stepped wedge cluster randomized-controlled trial was conducted.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Four Mental Health Community Support Services providers, 287 people living with severe mental illnesses, 61 carers and 120 staff were recruited across Victoria, Australia.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The 24-item Revised Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS-R) measured individual psychosocial recovery.

RESULTS

A total of 841 observations were completed with 287 service users. The intention-to-treat analysis found RAS-R scores to be similar between the intervention (mean = 84.7, SD= 15.6) and control (mean = 86.5, SD= 15.3) phases; the adjusted estimated difference in the mean RAS-R score was -1.70 (95% confidence interval: -3.81 to 0.40; p = .11).

DISCUSSION

This first trial of an adapted mental health experience codesign intervention for psychosocial recovery outcomes found no difference between the intervention and control arms.

CONCLUSIONS

More attention to the conditions that are required for eight essential mechanisms of change to support codesign processes and implementation is needed.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

The State consumer (Victorian Mental Illness Awareness Council) and carer peak bodies (Tandem representing mental health carers) codeveloped the intervention. The adapted intervention was facilitated by coinvestigators with lived-experiences who were coauthors for the trial and process evaluation protocols, the engagement model and explanatory model of change for the trial.

Implementing work-related Mental health guidelines in general PRacticE (IMPRovE): a protocol for a hybrid III parallel cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Work-related Mental Health Conditions in General Practice (the Guideline) was published in 2019. The objective of this trial is to implement the Guideline in general practice.

TRIAL DESIGN

Implementing work-related Mental health conditions in general PRacticE is a hybrid III, parallel cluster randomised controlled trial undertaken in Australia. Its primary aim is to assess the effectiveness of a complex intervention on the implementation of the Guideline in general practice. Secondary aims are to assess patient health and work outcomes, to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the trial, and to develop a plan for sustainability.

METHODS

A total of 86 GP clusters will be randomly allocated either to the intervention arm, where they will receive a complex intervention comprising academic detailing, enrolment in a community of practice and resources, or to the control arm, where they will not receive the intervention. GP guideline concordance will be assessed at baseline and 9 months using virtual simulated patient scenarios. Patients who meet the eligibility criteria (>18years, employed, and receiving care from a participating GP for a suspected or confirmed work-related mental health condition) will be invited to complete surveys about their health and work participation and provide access to their health service use data. Data on health service use and work participation compensation claim data will be combined with measures of guideline concordance and patient outcomes to inform an economic evaluation. A realist evaluation will be conducted to inform the development of a plan for sustainability.

RESULTS

We anticipate that GPs who receive the intervention will have higher guideline concordance than GPs in the control group. We also anticipate that higher concordance will translate to better health and return-to-work outcomes for patients, as well as cost-savings to society.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial builds on a body of work defining the role of GPs in compensable injury, exploring their concerns, and developing evidence-based guidelines to address them. Implementation of these guidelines has the potential to deliver improvements in GP care, patient health, and return-to-work outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12620001163998 , November 2020.

REFOCUS-PULSAR Recovery-Oriented Practice Training in Adult Primary Mental Health Care: Exploratory Findings Including From a Pretest-Posttest Evaluation

Objectives: Australian general practitioners (GPs) are pivotal in mental health care. The REFOCUS-PULSAR (Principles Unite Local Services Assisting Recovery) primary care study aimed to improve personal recovery outcomes in adults with mental health problems consulting GPs. Design: Modified from an intended stepped-wedge cluster study, an exploratory (pre- and post-intervention) design employed cross-sectional surveys of patients consulting GPs. Setting: Eighteen primary care sites (clusters) in Victoria, Australia in 2013-2017. Participants: From 30 GPs recruited, 23 participated (76%), with 235 patient surveys returned from adults aged <75 years receiving mental health care. Intervention: A co-delivered face-to-face training intervention for GPs in recovery-oriented practice (ROP), with personal recovery a key focus, used multimedia, mnemonics, and targeted interview schedules to encourage ROP-with availability of support sessions for 1 year. Outcome Measures: Primary: the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery full-scale score (outcome). Secondary: INSPIRE (experience), Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) and Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) (outcomes). Other: General-practice-Users Perceived-need Inventory (experience). Results: Small positive significant effects indicated primary-outcome post-intervention improvements [t-test (233) = -2.23, p = 0.01], also improvement in two secondary outcomes (WEMWBS t(233) = -2.12, p = 0.02 and K10 t(233) = 2.44, p = 0.01). More patients post-intervention reported "no need" for further help from their GP; but in those reporting needs, there was greater unmet need for counseling. Conclusions: ROP implementation, internationally influential in specialist mental health care, here is explored in primary care where it has had less attention. These exploratory findings suggest better patient outcomes followed introducing GPs to ROP in routine practice conditions. Higher unmet need for counseling post-intervention reported by patients might be a sign of limited supply despite ROP facilitating better identification of needs. Challenges in project implementation means that these findings carry risks of bias and flag the importance establishing research infrastructure in primary care. Clinical Trial Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov/, The Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry Identifier: ACTRN12614001312639.

Creation of consensus recommendations for collaborative practice in the Malaysian psychiatric system: a modified Delphi study

BACKGROUND

There is strong evidence that collaborative practice in mental healthcare improves outcomes for patients. The concept of collaborative practice can include collaboration between healthcare workers of different professional backgrounds and collaboration with patients, families and communities. Most models of collaborative practice were developed in Western and high-income countries and are not easily translatable to settings which are culturally diverse and lower in resources. This project aimed to develop a set of recommendations to improve collaborative practice in Malaysia.

METHODS

In the first phase, qualitative research was conducted to better understand collaboration in a psychiatric hospital (previously published). In the second phase a local hospital level committee from the same hospital was created to act on the qualitative research and create a set of recommendations to improve collaborative practice at the hospital for the hospital. Some of these recommendations were implemented, where feasible and the outcomes discussed. These recommendations were then sent to a nationwide Delphi panel. These committees consisted of healthcare staff of various professions, patients and carers.

RESULTS

The Delphi panel reached consensus after three rounds. The recommendations include ways to improve collaborative problem solving and decision making in the hospital, ways to improve the autonomy and relatedness of patients, carers and staff and ways to improve the levels of resources (e.g. skills training in staff, allowing people with lived experience of mental disorder to contribute).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that the Delphi method is a feasible method of developing recommendations and guidelines in Malaysia and allowed a wider range of stakeholders to contribute than traditional methods of developing guidelines and recommendations.Trial registration Registered in the National Medical Research Register, Malaysia, NMRR-13-308-14792.