5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Mental Health Specialist Video Consultations Versus Treatment-as-Usual for Patients With Depression or Anxiety Disorders in Primary Care: Randomized Controlled Feasibility Trial

      research-article
      , BA, MSc 1 , , Dipl-Psych 1 , , Prof Dr 2 , , Prof Dr 2 , , Prof Dr 2 , , MSc, Dr sc hum 3 , , MSc 3 , , Dr rer pol 4 , , Prof Dr 4 , , Prof Dr 1 , , BSc, MSc, MD 1 ,
      (Reviewer), (Reviewer), (Reviewer), (Reviewer), (Reviewer), (Reviewer)
      JMIR Mental Health
      JMIR Publications
      primary care, integrated care, telepsychiatry, videoconferencing, depression, anxiety, recovery, randomized controlled trial

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Most people affected by depression or anxiety disorders are treated solely by their primary care physician. Access to specialized mental health care is impeded by patients’ comorbidity and immobility in aging societies and long waiting times at the providers’ end. Video-based integrated care models may leverage limited resources more efficiently and provide timely specialized care in primary care settings.

          Objective

          The study aims to evaluate the feasibility of mental health specialist video consultations with primary care patients with depression or anxiety disorders.

          Methods

          Participants were recruited by their primary care physicians during regular practice visits. Patients who had experienced at least moderate symptoms of depression and/or anxiety disorders were considered eligible for the study. Patients were randomized into 2 groups receiving either treatment-as-usual as provided by their general practitioner or up to 5 video consultations conducted by a mental health specialist. Video consultations focused on systematic diagnosis and proactive monitoring using validated clinical rating scales, the establishment of an effective working alliance, and a stepped-care algorithm within integrated care adjusting treatments based on clinical outcomes. Feasibility outcomes were recruitment, rate of loss to follow-up, acceptability of treatment, and attendance at sessions. Effectiveness outcomes included depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), burden of specific somatic complaints (Somatic Symptom Disorder-B Criteria Scale-12), recovery (Recovery Assessment Scale-German [RAS-G]), and perception of chronic illness care (Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care), which were measured at baseline and 16 weeks postallocation by assessors blinded to the group allocation.

          Results

          A total of 50 patients with depression and/or anxiety disorders were randomized, 23 in the intervention group and 27 in the treatment-as-usual group. The recruitment yield (number randomized per number screened) and the consent rate (number randomized per number eligible) were 69% (50/73) and 86% (50/58), respectively. Regarding acceptability, 87% (20/23) of the participants in the intervention group completed the intervention. Of the 108 planned video consultations, 102 (94.4%) were delivered. Follow-up rates were 96% (22/23) and 85% (23/27) for the intervention and control groups, respectively. The change from baseline scores at postmeasurement for the No Domination by Symptoms domain of recovery (RAS-G) was somewhat higher in the intervention group than in the control group (Mann-Whitney U test: rank-biserial r=0.19; 95% CI −0.09 to 0.46; P=.18). We did not detect any notable differences between the intervention and control groups in terms of other effectiveness outcomes. We did not observe any serious adverse events related to the trial.

          Conclusions

          The intervention and study procedures were found to be feasible for patients, primary care practice staff, and mental health specialists. A sufficiently powered pragmatic trial on mental health specialist video consultations should be conducted to investigate their effectiveness in routine care.

          Trial Registration

          German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00015812; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00015812.

          Related collections

          Most cited references73

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide

          Without a complete published description of interventions, clinicians and patients cannot reliably implement interventions that are shown to be useful, and other researchers cannot replicate or build on research findings. The quality of description of interventions in publications, however, is remarkably poor. To improve the completeness of reporting, and ultimately the replicability, of interventions, an international group of experts and stakeholders developed the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. The process involved a literature review for relevant checklists and research, a Delphi survey of an international panel of experts to guide item selection, and a face to face panel meeting. The resultant 12 item TIDieR checklist (brief name, why, what (materials), what (procedure), who provided, how, where, when and how much, tailoring, modifications, how well (planned), how well (actual)) is an extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement (item 5) and the SPIRIT 2013 statement (item 11). While the emphasis of the checklist is on trials, the guidance is intended to apply across all evaluative study designs. This paper presents the TIDieR checklist and guide, with an explanation and elaboration for each item, and examples of good reporting. The TIDieR checklist and guide should improve the reporting of interventions and make it easier for authors to structure accounts of their interventions, reviewers and editors to assess the descriptions, and readers to use the information.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Outcomes for Implementation Research: Conceptual Distinctions, Measurement Challenges, and Research Agenda

            An unresolved issue in the field of implementation research is how to conceptualize and evaluate successful implementation. This paper advances the concept of “implementation outcomes” distinct from service system and clinical treatment outcomes. This paper proposes a heuristic, working “taxonomy” of eight conceptually distinct implementation outcomes—acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, implementation cost, penetration, and sustainability—along with their nominal definitions. We propose a two-pronged agenda for research on implementation outcomes. Conceptualizing and measuring implementation outcomes will advance understanding of implementation processes, enhance efficiency in implementation research, and pave the way for studies of the comparative effectiveness of implementation strategies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Global burden of disease attributable to mental and substance use disorders: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010

              The Lancet, 382(9904), 1575-1586
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JMIR Ment Health
                JMIR Ment Health
                JMH
                JMIR Mental Health
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                2368-7959
                March 2021
                12 March 2021
                : 8
                : 3
                : e22569
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of General Internal Medicine and Psychosomatics Heidelberg University Heidelberg Germany
                [2 ] Department of General Practice and Health Services Research Heidelberg University Heidelberg Germany
                [3 ] Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics Heidelberg University Heidelberg Germany
                [4 ] Institute for Health Services Research and Health Economics Centre for Health and Society Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf Düsseldorf Germany
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Markus W Haun markus.haun@ 123456med.uni-heidelberg.de
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0308-8226
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9329-1104
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6569-8137
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4483-0028
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3834-9588
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5731-173X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4850-9116
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2714-6371
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4882-969X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4344-8959
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1851-3747
                Article
                v8i3e22569
                10.2196/22569
                7998325
                33709931
                ed948750-75fa-4fe5-9984-030fbb63fddc
                ©Justus Tönnies, Mechthild Hartmann, Michel Wensing, Joachim Szecsenyi, Frank Peters-Klimm, Regina Brinster, Dorothea Weber, Markus Vomhof, Andrea Icks, Hans-Christoph Friederich, Markus W Haun. Originally published in JMIR Mental Health (http://mental.jmir.org), 12.03.2021.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Mental Health, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://mental.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 16 July 2020
                : 7 October 2020
                : 13 November 2020
                : 29 January 2021
                Categories
                Original Paper
                Original Paper

                primary care,integrated care,telepsychiatry,videoconferencing,depression,anxiety,recovery,randomized controlled trial

                Comments

                Comment on this article