Collaborative care for depression and anxiety disorders: results and lessons learned from the Danish cluster-randomized Collabri trials

Abstract

Background Meta-analyses suggest that collaborative care (CC) improves symptoms of depression and anxiety. In CC, a care manager collaborates with a general practitioner (GP) to provide evidence-based care. Most CC research is from the US, focusing on depression. As research results may not transfer to other settings, we developed and tested a Danish CC-model (the Collabri-model) for depression, panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and social anxiety disorder in general practice. Methods Four cluster-randomized superiority trials evaluated the effects of CC. The overall aim was to explore if CC significantly improved depression and anxiety symptoms compared to treatment-as-usual at 6-months’ follow-up. The Collabri-model was founded on a multi-professional collaboration between a team of mental-health specialists (psychiatrists and care managers) and GPs. In collaboration with GPs, care managers provided treatment according to a structured plan, including regular reassessments and follow-up. Treatment modalities (cognitive behavioral therapy, psychoeducation, and medication) were offered based on stepped care algorithms. Face-to-face meetings between GPs and care managers took place regularly, and a psychiatrist provided supervision. The control group received treatment-as-usual. Primary outcomes were symptoms of depression (BDI-II) and anxiety (BAI) at 6-months’ follow-up. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated based on 6-months’ follow-up. Results Despite various attempts to improve inclusion rates, the necessary number of participants was not recruited. Seven hundred thirty-one participants were included: 325 in the depression trial and 406 in the anxiety trials. The Collabri-model was implemented, demonstrating good fidelity to core model elements. In favor of CC, we found a statistically significant difference between depression scores at 6-months’ follow-up in the depression trial. The difference was not significant at 15-months’ follow-up. The anxiety trials were pooled for data analysis due to inadequate sample sizes. At 6- and 15-months’ follow-up, there was a difference in anxiety symptoms favoring CC. These differences were not statistically significant. The ICER was 58,280 Euro per QALY. Conclusions At 6 months, a significant difference between groups was found in the depression trial, but not in the pooled anxiety trial. However, these results should be cautiously interpreted as there is a risk of selection bias and lacking statistical power. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02678624 and NCT02678845. Retrospectively registered on 7 February 2016.

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

“…We found no studies with a shared or collaborative care approach between mental health services and primary care for patients who had been hospitalized with MDD. Different studies showed effect of collaborative care for patients treated for depression in primary care [ 27 , 30 , 112 ]. However, there is a lack of studies, extending this collaborative care approach to patients in the time-period after discharge from outpatient mental health services to ensure maintenance and follow-up of the treatment and prevent relapse.…”

Effectiveness of Agreement Criteria and Flows of Collaborative Care in Primary Mental Health Care in Brazil

“…The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) is a well-known strategy, based on evidence, grounded on a Chronical Care Model (CCM), and was originally made to describe complex evidence related to the care level to (i) accomplish a multiprofessional approach; (ii) improve interprofessional communication; (iii) enhance programmed health follow-ups; and (iv) make the structured management plan [ 13 , 14 , 15 ]. Regarding health care procedures, those apply the care management approach by systematic monitoring and links between primary care and mental health professionals, offering patients: (1) mental health exams; (2) interventions; (3) care facilitations; and (4) follow-ups [ 16 ].…”

Development of a model for shared care between general practice and mental healthcare: a protocol for a co-production study

“…13 Several logistic and organisational challenges affect the collaboration, for example, inadequate referral procedures and increased workload for general practitioners (GPs). [14][15][16] Møller et…”

“…Even though shared care between general practice and mental health service was initiated in Denmark more than 10 years ago,12 the collaboration between the two sectors continues to be challenged 13. Several logistic and organisational challenges affect the collaboration, for example, inadequate referral procedures and increased workload for general practitioners (GPs) 14–16. Møller et al also emphasise that GPs and patients should be key in the development of future collaborative care models 14.…”