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

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Collaborative care for depression and anxiety disorders : results and lessons learned from the Danish cluster-randomized Collabri trials. / Curth, Nadja Kehler; Brinck-Claussen, Ursula Ødum; Hjorthøj, Carsten; Davidsen, Annette Sofie; Mikkelsen, John Hagel; Lau, Marianne Engelbrecht; Lundsteen, Merete; Csillag, Claudio; Christensen, Kaj Sparle; Jakobsen, Marie; Bojesen, Anders Bo; Nordentoft, Merete; Eplov, Lene Falgaard.

In: BMC Family Practice, Vol. 21, 234, 2020.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Curth, NK, Brinck-Claussen, UØ, Hjorthøj, C, Davidsen, AS, Mikkelsen, JH, Lau, ME, Lundsteen, M, Csillag, C, Christensen, KS, Jakobsen, M, Bojesen, AB, Nordentoft, M & Eplov, LF 2020, 'Collaborative care for depression and anxiety disorders: results and lessons learned from the Danish cluster-randomized Collabri trials', BMC Family Practice, vol. 21, 234. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-020-01299-3

APA

Curth, N. K., Brinck-Claussen, U. Ø., Hjorthøj, C., Davidsen, A. S., Mikkelsen, J. H., Lau, M. E., Lundsteen, M., Csillag, C., Christensen, K. S., Jakobsen, M., Bojesen, A. B., Nordentoft, M., & Eplov, L. F. (2020). Collaborative care for depression and anxiety disorders: results and lessons learned from the Danish cluster-randomized Collabri trials. BMC Family Practice, 21, [234]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-020-01299-3

Vancouver

Curth NK, Brinck-Claussen UØ, Hjorthøj C, Davidsen AS, Mikkelsen JH, Lau ME et al. Collaborative care for depression and anxiety disorders: results and lessons learned from the Danish cluster-randomized Collabri trials. BMC Family Practice. 2020;21. 234. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-020-01299-3

Author

Curth, Nadja Kehler ; Brinck-Claussen, Ursula Ødum ; Hjorthøj, Carsten ; Davidsen, Annette Sofie ; Mikkelsen, John Hagel ; Lau, Marianne Engelbrecht ; Lundsteen, Merete ; Csillag, Claudio ; Christensen, Kaj Sparle ; Jakobsen, Marie ; Bojesen, Anders Bo ; Nordentoft, Merete ; Eplov, Lene Falgaard. / Collaborative care for depression and anxiety disorders : results and lessons learned from the Danish cluster-randomized Collabri trials. In: BMC Family Practice. 2020 ; Vol. 21.

Bibtex

@article{a5b3a601c13e40e599a2b1fc1b47e0ce,
title = "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{\textquoteright} 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{\textquoteright} follow-up. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated based on 6-months{\textquoteright} 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{\textquoteright} follow-up in the depression trial. The difference was not significant at 15-months{\textquoteright} follow-up. The anxiety trials were pooled for data analysis due to inadequate sample sizes. At 6- and 15-months{\textquoteright} 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.",
keywords = "Anxiety disorders, Collaborative care, Depression, General practice, Primary health care",
author = "Curth, {Nadja Kehler} and Brinck-Claussen, {Ursula {\O}dum} and Carsten Hjorth{\o}j and Davidsen, {Annette Sofie} and Mikkelsen, {John Hagel} and Lau, {Marianne Engelbrecht} and Merete Lundsteen and Claudio Csillag and Christensen, {Kaj Sparle} and Marie Jakobsen and Bojesen, {Anders Bo} and Merete Nordentoft and Eplov, {Lene Falgaard}",
year = "2020",
doi = "10.1186/s12875-020-01299-3",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
journal = "B M C Family Practice",
issn = "1471-2296",
publisher = "BioMed Central Ltd.",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Collaborative care for depression and anxiety disorders

T2 - results and lessons learned from the Danish cluster-randomized Collabri trials

AU - Curth, Nadja Kehler

AU - Brinck-Claussen, Ursula Ødum

AU - Hjorthøj, Carsten

AU - Davidsen, Annette Sofie

AU - Mikkelsen, John Hagel

AU - Lau, Marianne Engelbrecht

AU - Lundsteen, Merete

AU - Csillag, Claudio

AU - Christensen, Kaj Sparle

AU - Jakobsen, Marie

AU - Bojesen, Anders Bo

AU - Nordentoft, Merete

AU - Eplov, Lene Falgaard

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Anxiety disorders

KW - Collaborative care

KW - Depression

KW - General practice

KW - Primary health care

U2 - 10.1186/s12875-020-01299-3

DO - 10.1186/s12875-020-01299-3

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 33203365

AN - SCOPUS:85096122828

VL - 21

JO - B M C Family Practice

JF - B M C Family Practice

SN - 1471-2296

M1 - 234

ER -

ID: 252296830