1 Division of Geriatric Psychiatry, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
2 Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Can J Psychiatry. 2017 Nov;62(11):761-771. doi: 10.1177/0706743717720869. Epub 2017 Jul 18.
To evaluate the mode of implementation, clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and the factors influencing uptake and sustainability of collaborative care for psychiatric disorders in older adults.
Systematic review.
Primary care, home health care, seniors' residence, medical inpatient and outpatient.
Studies with a mean sample age of 60 years and older.
Collaborative care for psychiatric disorders.
PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched up until October 2016. Individual randomized controlled trials and cohort, case-control, and health service evaluation studies were selected, and relevant data were extracted for qualitative synthesis.
Of the 552 records identified, 53 records (from 29 studies) were included. Very few studies evaluated psychiatric disorders other than depression. The mode of implementation differed based on the setting, with beneficial use of telemedicine. Clinical outcomes for depression were significantly better compared with usual care across settings. In depression, there is some evidence for cost-effectiveness. There is limited evidence for improved dementia care and outcomes using collaborative care. There is a lack of evidence for benefit in disorders other than depression or in settings such as home health care and general acute inpatients. Attitudes and skill of primary care staff, availability of resources, and organizational support are some of the factors influencing uptake and implementation.
Collaborative care for depressive disorders is feasible and beneficial among older adults in diverse settings. There is a paucity of studies on collaborative care in conditions other than depression or in settings other than primary care, indicating the need for further evaluation.
评估协作式护理在老年精神障碍患者中的实施模式、临床结局、成本效益,以及影响其采用和可持续性的因素。
系统评价。
初级保健、家庭保健、老年人住所、住院和门诊医疗。
研究对象平均年龄 60 岁及以上。
协作式护理用于精神障碍。
对 PubMed、MEDLINE、Embase 和 Cochrane 数据库进行检索,截至 2016 年 10 月。选择了个体随机对照试验和队列、病例对照和卫生服务评估研究,并提取了相关数据进行定性综合。
在 552 条记录中,有 53 条记录(来自 29 项研究)符合纳入标准。很少有研究评估了除抑郁症以外的其他精神障碍。实施模式因设置而异,远程医疗得到了有益的利用。与常规护理相比,各种环境下的抑郁临床结局均显著改善。在抑郁症中,有一些成本效益的证据。使用协作式护理可改善痴呆症护理和结局,但证据有限。在除抑郁症以外的其他疾病或家庭保健和一般急性住院患者等环境中,缺乏获益的证据。初级保健人员的态度和技能、资源的可用性以及组织支持是影响采用和实施的一些因素。
协作式护理在不同环境中对老年抑郁障碍患者是可行且有益的。除了初级保健以外的其他环境中以及除了抑郁症以外的其他疾病中协作式护理的研究很少,这表明需要进一步评估。