King's College London, Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, De Crespigny Park, London, United Kingdom.
NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Centre for Primary Care and Centre for Health Informatics, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2019 Jun 14;14(6):e0217948. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0217948. eCollection 2019.
The health service delivery framework collaborative care is an effective intervention for depression. However, uncertainties remain about how to optimise its delivery at scale. Structured case management is a core component of collaborative care; its delivery via the telephone may improve access.
To examine using meta-regression if telephone delivered case management diminishes the clinical effectiveness of collaborative care on depressive symptoms and anti-depressant use relative to face-to-face delivery methods.
Randomised controlled trials were eligible if they included collaborative care interventions for adults with depression identified using self-report measures or diagnostic interviews and reported depression outcomes. Sociodemographics, intervention characteristics, depressive symptoms, and anti-depressant use were extracted. Random effects univariable and multivariable meta-regression analyses were used to examine the moderating effect of telephone delivered case-management on outcomes.
Ninety-four trials were identified comprising of 103 comparisons across 24, 132 participants with depression outcomes and 67 comparisons from 15,367 participants with anti-depressant use outcomes. Telephone delivered case management did not diminish the effects of collaborative care on depressive symptoms (β = -0.01, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.10; p = 0.86). Telephone delivered case management decreased anti-depressant medication use (relative risk 0.76, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.92; p = 0.005); this effect remained when assessed simultaneously alongside other study-level moderators of collaborative care.
Using remote platforms such as the telephone to deliver case management may be a feasible way to implement collaborative care with no loss of effectiveness on depressive symptoms. However, adherence to anti-depressant medication may decrease when telephone case management is used.
医疗服务提供框架协作式护理是治疗抑郁症的有效干预措施。然而,如何大规模优化其实施仍存在不确定性。结构化病例管理是协作式护理的核心组成部分;通过电话提供可能会改善获取途径。
通过元回归分析,考察电话提供的病例管理是否会降低协作式护理对抑郁症状和抗抑郁药物使用的临床效果,与面对面的提供方式相比。
如果协作式护理干预措施包括使用自我报告措施或诊断访谈识别的成人抑郁症,并报告抑郁结果,则符合纳入标准。提取社会人口统计学特征、干预特征、抑郁症状和抗抑郁药物使用情况。使用随机效应单变量和多变量元回归分析来检验电话提供病例管理对结果的调节作用。
共确定了 94 项试验,包括 24 项研究共 132 名参与者的抑郁结果和 67 项研究共 15367 名参与者的抗抑郁药物使用结果的 103 项比较。电话提供的病例管理并未降低协作式护理对抑郁症状的影响(β=-0.01,95%CI-0.12 至 0.10;p=0.86)。电话提供的病例管理减少了抗抑郁药物的使用(相对风险 0.76,95%CI0.63 至 0.92;p=0.005);当同时评估协作式护理的其他研究水平调节因素时,这种效果仍然存在。
使用远程平台(如电话)提供病例管理可能是实施协作式护理的一种可行方法,对抑郁症状没有效果损失。然而,当使用电话病例管理时,抗抑郁药物的依从性可能会降低。