Impact of Collaborative Care for Depression on Clinical, Functional, and Work Outcomes: A Practice-Based Evaluation

Impact of socioeconomic status on depression clinical outcomes at six months in a Midwestern, United States community

INTRODUCTION

Lower socioeconomic status (SES) has been associated with poor healthcare outcomes in depression. However, reliable individual-level SES data rarely exists for clinical research. The HOUSES index relies on publicly available data allowing for evaluation of individual-level SES on patient outcomes.

HYPOTHESIS

Primary care patients with depression within the lower SES quartile (Quartile 1 vs. Quartile 4, of the HOUSES index) would experience worse clinical outcomes of their symptoms six months after diagnosis.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study which followed 4313 adult primary care patients that were diagnosed with depression during the study period of 2008-2015. The outcome measures were the six month PHQ-9 scores.

RESULTS

At six months, a higher HOUSES quartile was associated with greater odds of remission of depressive symptoms (RDS) and lower odds of persistent depressive symptoms (PDS), after controlling for covariates. Patients in Quartile 4 had 27% more likelihood of RDS and a 24% lower likelihood of PDS at six months compared to a Quartile 1 patient.

LIMITATIONS

As a retrospective study only can observe associations but not causation. Only one institution participated and not all treatments were readily available, limiting the generalizability of these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower SES as demonstrated by a lower HOUSES quartile (Quartile 1 versus 4) was associated with lower odds of RDS and increased odds of PDS at six months. HOUSES index is a useful tool for identifying patients at risk for worse clinical outcomes and may help health care systems plan resource allocation for depression care.

A case management occupational health model to facilitate earlier return to work of NHS staff with common mental health disorders: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

The NHS is the biggest employer in the UK. Depression and anxiety are common reasons for sickness absence among staff. Evidence suggests that an intervention based on a case management model using a biopsychosocial approach could be cost-effective and lead to earlier return to work for staff with common mental health disorders.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an early occupational health referral and case management intervention to facilitate the return to work of NHS staff on sick leave with any common mental health disorder (e.g. depression or anxiety).

DESIGN

A multicentre mixed-methods feasibility study with embedded process evaluation and economic analyses. The study comprised an updated systematic review, survey of care as usual, and development of an intervention in consultation with key stakeholders. Although this was not a randomised controlled trial, the study design comprised two arms where participants received either the intervention or care as usual.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were NHS staff on sick leave for 7 or more consecutive days but less than 90 consecutive days, with a common mental health disorder.

INTERVENTION

The intervention involved early referral to occupational health combined with standardised work-focused case management.

CONTROL/COMPARATOR

Participants in the control arm received care as usual.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

The primary outcome was the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, study processes (including methods of recruiting participants) and data collection tools to measure return to work, episodes of sickness absence, workability (a worker's functional ability to perform their job), occupational functioning, symptomatology and cost-effectiveness proposed for use in a main trial.

RESULTS

Forty articles and two guidelines were included in an updated systematic review. A total of 49 of the 126 (39%) occupational health providers who were approached participated in a national survey of care as usual. Selected multidisciplinary stakeholders contributed to the development of the work-focused case management intervention (including a training workshop). Six NHS trusts (occupational health departments) agreed to take part in the study, although one trust withdrew prior to participant recruitment, citing staff shortages. At mixed intervention sites, participants were sequentially allocated to each arm, where possible. Approximately 1938 (3.9%) NHS staff from the participating sites were on sick leave with a common mental health disorder during the study period. Forty-two sick-listed NHS staff were screened for eligibility on receipt of occupational health management referrals. Twenty-four (57%) participants were consented: 11 (46%) received the case management intervention and 13 (54%) received care as usual. Follow-up data were collected from 11 out of 24 (46%) participants at 3 months and 10 out of 24 (42%) participants at 6 months. The case management intervention and case manager training were found to be acceptable and inexpensive to deliver. Possible contamination issues are likely in a future trial if participants are individually randomised at mixed intervention sites.

HARMS

No adverse events were reported.

LIMITATIONS

The method of identification and recruitment of eligible sick-listed staff was ineffective in practice because uptake of referral to occupational health was low, but a new targeted method has been devised.

CONCLUSION

All study questions were addressed. Difficulties raising organisational awareness of the study coupled with a lack of change in occupational health referral practices by line managers affected the identification and recruitment of participants. Strategies to overcome these barriers in a main trial were identified. The case management intervention was fit for purpose and acceptable to deliver in the NHS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14621901.

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. 25, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Depression Outcomes in Smokers and Nonsmokers: Comparison of Collaborative Care Management Versus Usual Care

Background: Depression is common in the primary care setting and tobacco use is more prevalent among individuals with depression. Recent research has linked smoking to poorer outcomes of depression treatment. We hypothesized that in adult primary care patients with the diagnosis of depression, current smoking would have a negative impact on clinical outcomes, regardless of treatment type (usual primary care [UC] vs collaborative care management [CCM]). Methods: A retrospective chart review study of 5155 adult primary care patients with depression in a primary care practice in southeast Minnesota was completed. Variables obtained included age, gender, marital status, race, smoking status, initial Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), and 6-month PHQ-9. Clinical remission (CR) was defined as 6-month PHQ-9 <5. Persistent depressive symptoms (PDS) were defined as PHQ-9 ≥10 at 6 months. Treatment in both CCM and UC were compared. Results: Using intention to treat analysis, depressed smokers treated with CCM were 4.60 times as likely (95% CI 3.24-6.52, P < .001) to reach CR and were significantly less likely to have PDS at 6 months (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.19, 95% CI 0.14-0.25, P < .001) compared with smokers in UC. After a 6-month follow-up, depressed smokers treated with CCM were 1.75 times as likely (95% CI 1.18-2.59, P = .006) to reach CR and were significantly less likely to have PDS (AOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.31-0.64, P < .001) compared with smokers in UC. Conclusions: CCM significantly improved depression outcomes for smokers at 6 months compared with UC. However, in the UC group, smoking outcomes were not statistically different at 6 months for either remission or PDS. Also, nonsmokers in CCM had the best clinical outcomes at 6 months in both achieving clinical remission and reduction of PDS when compared with smokers in UC as the reference group.

Impact of Collaborative Care on Absenteeism for Depressed Employees Seen in Primary Care Practices: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The impact of "real world" collaborative care on depression and absenteeism for depressed employees seen in primary care practices using objective employer absence data.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study comparing depressed employees seen in primary care practices who enrolled for a "real world" collaborative care program to practice as usual (PAU) on objective absence days and depression response and remission at 6, and 12-month time periods.

RESULTS

Absence days were more in the collaborative care group compared with the PAU group at 3 and 6 months but at 12 months the difference was no longer statistically significant. Collaborative care led to better response and remission depression scores compared with PAU at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaborative care led to faster improvement in depression symptoms but did not translate to less time away from work.

Stratégies de retour au travail d’employés ayant fait l’expérience d’une dépression : perspectives des employeurs et des cadres des ressources humaines

La dépression majeure est l’une des premières causes d’incapacité au travail dans le monde et a de nombreuses conséquences tant sur l’employé concerné qu’auprès des acteurs du milieu de travail.

ObjectifNous visons à documenter, selon la perspective des employeurs et des cadres des ressources humaines, les stratégies que ces acteurs préconisent dans leur organisation pour faciliter le retour au travail (RaT) d’employés en absence maladie due à une dépression.

MéthodeDeux cent dix-neuf employeurs et cadres de ressources humaines (n = 219) ont accepté de répondre à une entrevue semi-structurée téléphonique. La question abordée dans cet article était : « Selon vous, quelles sont les stratégies les plus efficaces pour aider un employé ayant reçu un diagnostic de dépression à retourner au travail ? » La codification duverbatima été effectuée à partir d’études empiriques et de théories existantes.

RésultatsTrente-quatre (34) stratégies réparties sur six grands principes ont émergé : 1) Contact avec l’employé en absence maladie (10 stratégies) ; 2) Évaluation et planification du RaT sans précipitation (6) ; 3) Formation des gestionnaires et du collectif de travail à la problématique de la santé mentale au travail (4) ; 4) Concertation des acteurs clés du RaT (4) ; 5) RaT progressif avec aménagements (4) ; 6) Suivi de la santé de l’employé et de son travail (6).

ConclusionCes principes articulés autour de 34 stratégies du RaT vont au-delà d’un processus étapiste de nature chronologique. Articulés dans un programme de RaT, ils devront être testés afin d’évaluer leurs retombées dans les organisations, notamment sur la gestion de l’incapacité au travail.

Care of the dialysis patient: Primary provider involvement and resource utilization patterns - a cohort study

Background

Efficient and safe delivery of care to dialysis patients is essential. Concerns have been raised regarding the ability of accountable care organizations to adequately serve this high-risk population. Little is known about primary care involvement in the care of dialysis patients. This study sought to describe the extent of primary care provider (PCP) involvement in the care of hemodialysis patients and the outcomes associated with that involvement.

Methods

In a retrospective cohort study, patients accessing a Midwestern dialysis network from 2001 to 2010 linked to United States Renal Database System and with >90 days follow up were identified (n = 2985). Outpatient visits were identified using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT)-4 codes, provider specialty, and grouped into quartiles-based on proportion of PCP visits per person-year (ppy). Top and bottom quartiles represented patients with high primary care (HPC) or low primary care (LPC), respectively. Patient characteristics and health care utilization were measured and compared across patient groups.

Results

Dialysis patients had an overall average of 4.5 PCP visits ppy, ranging from 0.6 in the LPC group to 6.9 in the HPC group. HPC patients were more likely female (43.4% vs. 35.3%), older (64.0 yrs. vs. 60.0 yrs), and with more comorbidities (Charlson 7.0 vs 6.0). HPC patients had higher utilization (hospitalizations 2.2 vs. 1.8 ppy; emergency department visits 1.6 vs 1.2 ppy) and worse survival (3.9 vs 4.3 yrs) and transplant rates (16.3 vs. 31.5).

Conclusions

PCPs are significantly involved in the care of hemodialysis patients. Patients with HPC are older, sicker, and utilize more resources than those managed primarily by nephrologists. After adjusting for confounders, there is no difference in outcomes between the groups. Further studies are needed to better understand whether there is causal impact of primary care involvement on patient survival.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12882-017-0728-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Six-Month Outcomes for Collaborative Care Management of Depression Among Smoking and Nonsmoking Patients

Background:

Collaborative care management (CCM) is an evidence-based model that contributes to better outcomes for depression treatment in the primary care setting. Tobacco use increases overall economic costs, morbidity, and mortality and has been shown to impact behavioral health outcomes. Our study aims to observe clinical outcomes for depression treatment for patients with comorbid tobacco use and depression within the CCM model.

Methods:

A retrospective chart review study of 2826 adult patients with depression enrolled in CCM was performed to determine the association between regular tobacco use and depression outcomes. Baseline intake data consisting of clinical and demographic variables along with 6-month follow-up of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) scores for smokers (n = 727, 25.7%) and nonsmokers (n = 2099, 74.3%) were obtained. Depression remission was defined as a PHQ-9 score <5 and persistent depressive symptoms (PDS) as a PHQ-9 score ≥10 at 6 months.

Results:

Using an intention-to-treat analysis, the multivariate modeling demonstrated that smokers, at 6 months, had an increased adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for PDS: 1.624 (95% CI: 1.353-1.949). Furthermore, smokers had a lower AOR of depression remission: 0.603 (95% CI: 0.492-0.739). Patient adherence to treatment was also lower in smokers with an AOR of 0.666 (95% CI: 0.553-0.802).

Conclusions:

Smokers enrolled in CCM were associated with reduced treatment adherence and worse outcomes for depression treatment at 6 months compared to nonsmokers, even when baseline clinical and demographic variables were controlled. Thus, new tailored practices may be warranted within the CCM model to treat comorbid depression and tobacco use disorders.

Personality Disorders in Primary Care: Impact on Depression Outcomes Within Collaborative Care

Background:Individuals with personality disorders (PDs) are high utilizers of primary care and mental health services; however, they struggle to utilize the care effectively and studies have shown a strong association between having a PD and higher impairment in social role functioning. This is especially important because PDs are highly comorbid with a wide range of other mental health disorders. The collaborative care model (CCM) for depression was developed with an emphasis on patient engagement and aimed to reduce health care utilization, while improving treatment outcomes in primary care. We hypothesized that the diagnosis of a personality disorder in primary care patients will negatively affect 6-month depression outcomes after enrollment into a CCM. Methods: This retrospective chart review study was conducted on patients enrolled into CCM over a period of 7 years with collection of 6-month follow-up data. A total of 2826 patients were enrolled into CCM with a clinical diagnosis of depression and a baseline Patient Health Questionnaire–9 (PHQ-9) ≥10 were included in the study cohort. Using the depression database, baseline and 6-month follow-up data were obtained. Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) were determined for both remission and persistent depressive symptoms using logistic regression modeling for the 6-month PHQ-9 outcome; while retaining all the study variables. Results: Of the 2826 CCM patients with depression in our study, 216 (7.6%) were found to have a PD. Patients with PD were younger (37.7 vs 42.5 years, P < .001) and more likely to be unmarried (36.1% vs 55.6%, P < .001) than patients without a PD. While age, marital status, clinical diagnosis, and Mood Disorders Questionnaire (MDQ) score were significant predictors of remission; anxiety symptoms, gender, and race were not. The presence of a PD diagnosis was associated with a 60% lower likelihood of remission at 6 months (AOR = 0.39; 95% CI 0.28-0.54). Conversely, patients without a PD were 2.5 times as likely to experience remission at 6-month remission compared to patients with PD (AOR =2.57; 95% CI 1.85-3.56). Conclusion: Patients with a personality disorder were more likely to have a recurrent depressive disorder diagnosis, an abnormal MDQ score, increased anxiety symptoms, and higher baseline PHQ-9 score. Patients with PD had worse CCM outcomes at 6 months with only 25.0% able to achieve remission versus 54.3% (P < .001) without a PD. The presence of a PD with depression was associated with poor outcomes (reduced remission rates and increased persistent depressive symptoms rates) in comparison to patients without a diagnosis of PD, while treated within CCM.

Using Statewide Data on Health Care Quality to Assess the Effect of a Patient-Centered Medical Home Initiative on Quality of Care

Patient-centered medical homes comprise a large portion of modern health care redesign. However, most efforts have reflected rigid, limited models of transformation. In addition, evaluations of their impact on quality of care have relied on data designed for other purposes. Minnesota's Health Care Home (HCH) initiative is a statewide medical home model relying on state-run, adaptive certification and supportive data infrastructure. This longitudinal study leverages a unique statewide system of clinic-reported, patient-level quality data (2010-2013) to assess the effect of being in a HCH clinic on health care quality. Measures included optimal quality (meeting all targets) and average quality (number of targets met) for asthma, vascular, and diabetes care; colorectal cancer screening; depression follow-up; and depression remission. Depending on measure and year, the analytic sample included 246,023 - 3,335,994 child and adult patients in 404-651 clinics. Using endogenous treatment effects models to address endogeneity, and including patient- and clinic-level covariates and clinic-level selection bias corrections, the authors produced potential outcomes means and average treatment effects (ATEs). HCH patients received better quality versus non-HCH patients for most outcomes. For example, the adjusted rate receiving optimal diabetes care was 453.7/1000 adult HCH patients versus 327.2/1000 non-HCH adult patients (ATE = 126.5; P < .001). By contrast, depression remission showed no HCH-related benefit. Findings on average care quality generally echoed optimal care findings. These findings indicate the usefulness of statewide quality data and support the effectiveness of adaptive, state-run medical home programs. Additional integration of services may be needed for mental health conditions.

A stepped-wedge evaluation of an initiative to spread the collaborative care model for depression in primary care

PURPOSE

Scale-up and spread of evidence-based practices is one of the most important challenges facing health care. We tested whether a statewide initiative, Depression Improvement Across Minnesota-Offering a New Direction (DIAMOND), to implement the collaborative care model for depression in 75 primary care clinics resulted in patient outcome improvements corresponding to those reported in randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Health plans provided a new monthly payment to participating clinics after a 6-month intensive training program with ongoing data submission, networking, and consultation. Implementation was staggered, with 5 sequences of 10 to 40 clinics every 6 months. Payers provided weekly contact information for members from participating clinics who were filling antidepressant prescriptions, and we conducted baseline and 6-month surveys of 1,578 patients about their care and outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 466 patients in DIAMOND clinics who received usual care before implementation (UCB), 559 who received usual care in DIAMOND clinics after implementation (UCA), 245 who received DIAMOND care after implementation (DCA), and 308 who received usual care in comparison clinics (UC). Patients who received DIAMOND care after implementation reported more collaborative care depression services than the 3 comparison groups (10.9 vs 6.4-6.7, on a scale of 0 of 14, where higher numbers indicate more services; P <.001) and more satisfaction with their care (4.0 vs 3.4 on a scale 1 to 5, in which higher scores indicate higher satisfaction; P ≤.001). Depression remission rates, however, were not significantly different among the 4 groups (36.4% DCA vs 35.8% UCB, 35.0% UCA, 33.9% UC; P = .94).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the incentive of a supporting payment change and intensive training and support for clinics volunteering to participate, no difference in depression outcomes was documented. Specific unmeasured actions present in trials but not present in these clinics may be critical for successful outcome improvement.

Baseline screening tools as indicators for symptom outcomes and health services utilization in a collaborative care model for depression in primary care: a practice-based observational study

OBJECTIVE

Within a practice-based collaborative care program for depression, we examined associations between positive baseline screens for comorbid mental and behavioral health problems, depression remission and utilization after 1 year.

METHODS

This observational study of 1507 depressed adults examined baseline screens for hazardous drinking (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test score ≥ 8), severe anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item score ≥ 15) and bipolar disorder [Mood Disorders Questionnaire (MDQ) positive screen]; 6-month depression remission; primary care, psychiatric, emergency department (ED) and inpatient visits 1 year postbaseline; and multiple covariates. Analyses included logistic and zero-inflated negative binomial regression.

RESULTS

At unadjusted baseline, 60.7% had no positive screens beyond depression, 31.5% had one (mostly severe anxiety), 6.6% had two and 1.2% had all three. In multivariate models, positive screens reduced odds of remission versus no positive screens [e.g., one screen odds ratio (OR) = 0.608, p = .000; all three OR = 0.152, p = .018]. Screening positive for severe anxiety predicted more postbaseline visits of all types; severe anxiety plus hazardous drinking predicted greater primary care, ED and inpatient; severe anxiety plus MDQ and the combination of all three positive screens both predicted greater psychiatric visits (all p < .05). Regression-adjusted utilization patterns varied across combinations of positive screens.

CONCLUSIONS

Positive screens predicted lower remission. Severe anxiety and its combinations with other positive screens were common and generally predicted greater utilization. Practices may benefit from assessing collaborative care patients presenting with these screening patterns to determine resource allocation.

Impact of symptom remission on outpatient visits in depressed primary care patients treated with collaborative care management and usual care

Depression symptoms contribute to significant morbidity and health care utilization. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of symptom improvement (to remission) on outpatient clinical visits by depressed primary care patients. This study was a retrospective chart review analysis of 1733 primary care patients enrolled into collaborative care management (CCM) or usual care (UC) with 6-month follow-up data. Baseline data (including demographic information, clinical diagnosis, and depression severity) and 6-month follow-up data (Patient Health Questionnaire scores and the number of outpatient visits utilized) were included in the data set. To control for individual patient complexity and pattern of usage, the number of outpatient visits for 6 months prior to enrollment also was measured as was the presence of medical comorbidities. Multiple logistic regression analysis demonstrated that clinical remission at 6 months was an independent predictor of outpatient visit outlier status (>8 visits) (odds ratio [OR] 0.609, confidence interval (CI) 0.460-0.805, P<0.01) when controlling for all other independent variables including enrollment into CCM or UC. The OR of those patients not in remission at 6 months having outpatient visit outlier status was the inverse of this at 1.643 (CI 1.243-2.173). The most predictive variable for determining increased outpatient visit counts after diagnosis of depression was increased outpatient visits prior to diagnosis (OR 4.892, CI 3.655-6.548, P<0.01). In primary care patients treated for depression, successful treatment to remission at 6 months decreased the likelihood of the patient having more than 8 visits during the 6 months after diagnosis.