Division of Mental Health & Neurosciences, St John's Research Institute, Bangalore, India.
Department of Psychiatry, St John's Medical College, Bangalore, India.
BMC Psychiatry. 2022 Jun 13;22(1):394. doi: 10.1186/s12888-022-04000-3.
Depression is common among primary care patients in LMIC but treatments are largely ineffective. In this cluster-randomized controlled trial, we tested whether depression outcomes are different among recipients of a collaborative care model compared to enhanced standard treatment in patients with co-morbid chronic medical conditions.
We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial among participants 30 years or older seeking care at 49 primary health centers (PHCs) in rural Karnataka, diagnosed with major depressive disorder, dysthymia, generalized anxiety disorder, or panic disorder on the MINI-International Neuropsychiatric Interview plus either hypertension, diabetes, or ischemic heart disease. From a list of all PHCs in the district, 24 PHCs were randomized a priori to deliver collaborative care and 25 PHCs enhanced standard treatment. The collaborative care model consisted of a clinic-based and a community-based component. Study assessment staff was blinded to treatment arm allocation. The primary outcome was the individual-level PHQ-9 score over time.
Between May 2015 and Nov 2018, 2486 participants were enrolled, 1264 in the control arm, and 1222 in the intervention arm. They were assessed at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. The mean PHQ-9 depression score was around 8.5 at baseline. At each follow-up PHQ-9 scores were significantly lower in the intervention (5.24, 4.81 and 4.22 at respective follow-ups) than in the control group (6.69, 6.13, 5.23, respectively). A significant time-by-treatment interaction (p < 0.001) in a multi-level model over all waves, nested within individuals who were nested within PHCs, confirmed that the decrease in depression score from baseline was larger for collaborative care than enhanced standard care throughout follow-up.
The collaborative care intervention resulted in significantly lower depression scores compared to enhanced standard care among participants with co-morbid physical conditions. The findings have potential implications for integrating mental health and chronic disease treatment in resource constrained settings.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02310932 , registered on December 8, 2014, and Clinical Trials Registry India CTRI/2018/04/013001 , registered on April 4, 2018. Retrospectively registered.
在中低收入国家的初级保健患者中,抑郁症很常见,但治疗效果大多不佳。在这项整群随机对照试验中,我们测试了在患有共病慢性疾病的患者中,与强化标准治疗相比,接受协作式护理模式的患者的抑郁结局是否不同。
我们在卡纳塔克邦农村地区的 49 个初级保健中心(PHC)中,对年龄在 30 岁或以上的参与者进行了一项整群随机对照试验,这些参与者被诊断患有重性抑郁障碍、心境恶劣障碍、广泛性焦虑障碍或惊恐障碍,并在 MINI-国际神经精神访谈的基础上加上高血压、糖尿病或缺血性心脏病。在该地区所有 PHC 的清单中,有 24 个 PHC 被预先随机分配为提供协作式护理,25 个 PHC 提供强化标准治疗。协作式护理模式由一个基于诊所的和一个基于社区的组成部分组成。研究评估人员对治疗手臂的分配情况不知情。主要结局是个体水平的 PHQ-9 评分随时间的变化。
2015 年 5 月至 2018 年 11 月,共招募了 2486 名参与者,其中对照组 1264 名,干预组 1222 名。他们在基线、3、6 和 12 个月时进行了评估。平均 PHQ-9 抑郁评分在基线时约为 8.5。在每次随访时,干预组(分别为 5.24、4.81 和 4.22)的 PHQ-9 评分均显著低于对照组(分别为 6.69、6.13、5.23)。多水平模型嵌套在个体内,嵌套在 PHC 内,在所有波次上均显示出时间与治疗的显著交互作用(p<0.001),这表明在整个随访过程中,协作式护理的抑郁评分下降幅度大于强化标准护理。
与强化标准护理相比,协作式护理干预在患有共病躯体疾病的参与者中,抑郁评分显著降低。这些发现对在资源有限的环境中整合心理健康和慢性疾病治疗具有潜在意义。
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02310932,于 2014 年 12 月 8 日注册;ClinicalTrials Registry India CTRI/2018/04/013001,于 2018 年 4 月 4 日注册。为回顾性注册。