Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
J Psychosom Res. 2014 Oct;77(4):247-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2014.08.006. Epub 2014 Aug 27.
This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of collaborative care compared to Primary Care Physician's (PCP's) usual care in the treatment of depression, focusing on European countries.
A systematic review of English and non-English articles, from inception to March 2014, was performed using database PubMed, British Nursing Index and Archive, Ovid Medline (R), PsychINFO, Books@Ovid, PsycARTICLES Full Text, EMBASE Classic+Embase, DARE (Database of Abstract of Reviews of Effectiveness) and the Cochrane Library electronic database. Search term included depression, collaborative care, physician family and allied health professional. RCTs comparing collaborative care to usual care for depression in primary care were included. Titles and abstracts were independently examined by two reviewers, who extracted from the included trials information on participants' characteristics, type of intervention, features of collaborative care and type of outcome measure.
The 17 papers included, regarding 15 RCTs, involved 3240 participants. Primary analyses showed that collaborative care models were associated with greater improvement in depression outcomes in the short term, within 3 months (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.19, 95% CI=-0.33; -0.05; p=0.006), medium term, between 4 and 11 months (SMD -0.24, 95% CI=-0.39; -0.09; p=0.001) and medium-long term, from 12 months and over (SMD -0.21, 95% CI=-0.37; -0.04; p=0.01), compared to usual care.
The present review, specifically focusing on European countries, shows that collaborative care is more effective than treatment as usual in improving depression outcomes.
本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在调查比较合作护理与初级保健医生(PCP)常规护理治疗抑郁症的效果,重点关注欧洲国家。
我们对从建立至 2014 年 3 月的英文和非英文文献进行了系统回顾,使用了数据库 PubMed、英国护理索引和档案、Ovid Medline(R)、PsychINFO、Books@Ovid、PsycARTICLES 全文、EMBASE Classic+Embase、DARE(疗效评价文摘数据库)和 Cochrane 图书馆电子数据库。检索词包括抑郁症、合作护理、医生家庭和联合健康专业人员。纳入的 RCT 比较了初级保健中合作护理与常规护理治疗抑郁症的效果。两位评审员独立检查了标题和摘要,并从纳入的试验中提取了参与者特征、干预类型、合作护理特点和结局测量类型等信息。
纳入的 17 篇论文涉及 15 项 RCT,共涉及 3240 名参与者。主要分析表明,在短期(3 个月内),合作护理模式与抑郁结局的改善更相关(标准化均数差(SMD)-0.19,95%CI=-0.33;-0.05;p=0.006),中期(4-11 个月)(SMD-0.24,95%CI=-0.39;-0.09;p=0.001)和中-长期(12 个月及以上)(SMD-0.21,95%CI=-0.37;-0.04;p=0.01),与常规护理相比,合作护理更有效。
本研究特别关注欧洲国家,表明与常规护理相比,合作护理在改善抑郁结局方面更有效。