Exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial of shared care development for long-term mental illness. Patient-held shared care records for individuals with mental illness. Randomised controlled evaluation. The effects of a shared decision-making intervention in primary care of depression: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Contextual factors in shared decision making: a randomised controlled trial in women with a strong suspicion of breast cancer. Shared decision making and long-term outcome in schizophrenia treatment. Effectiveness of an intervention led by lay health counsellors for depressive and anxiety disorders in primary care in Goa, India (MANAS): a cluster randomised controlled trial. Assertive community treatment for people with severe mental illness: the effect on hospital use and costs. Randomised controlled trial of a collaborative care model with psychiatric consultation for persistent medically unexplained symptoms in general practice. Cluster randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of primary care mental health workers.
Primary care clinicians have a considerable amount of contact with patients suffering from long-term mental illness. The United Kingdom's National Health Service now requires general practices to contribute more systematically to care for this group of patients.
                To determine the effects of Mental Health Link, a facilitation-based quality improvement programme designed to improve communication between the teams and systems of care within general practice. Design of study: Exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial.
                Twenty-three urban general practices and associated community mental health teams.
                Practices were randomised to service development as usual or to the Mental Health Link programme. Questionnaires and an audit of notes assessed 335 patients' satisfaction, unmet need, mental health status, processes of mental and physical care, and general practitioners' satisfaction with services and beliefs about service development. Service use and intervention costs were also measured.
                There were no significant differences in patients' perception of their unmet need, satisfaction or general health. Intervention patients had fewer psychiatric relapses than control patients (mean = 0.39 versus 0.71, respectively, P = 0.02) but there were no differences in documented processes of care. Intervention practitioners were more satisfied and services improved significantly for intervention practices. There was an additional mean direct cost of pound 63 per patient with long-term mental illness for the intervention compared with the control.
                Significant differences were seen in relapse rates and practitioner satisfaction. Improvements in service development did not translate into documented improvements in care. This could be explained by the intervention working via the improvements in informal shared care developed through better link working. This type of facilitated intervention tailored to context has the potential to improve care and interface working. Few formalized shared care schemes exist within psychiatry and the evidence base for sharing psychiatric care is weak.
                To evaluate the utility of patient-held shared care records for individuals with long-term mental illness.
                Cluster-randomised controlled parallel-group 12-month trial involving 90 patients with long-term mental illness drawn from 28 general practices.
                Carrying a shared care record had no significant effect on mental state or satisfaction with psychiatric services. Compared with controls, patients in the shared care group were no more likely to be admitted (relative risk 1.2, 95% CI 0.86-1.67) and attend clinic (relative risk 0.96, 95% CI 0.67-1.36) over the study period. Uptake of the shared care scheme was low by patients and professionals alike. Subjects with psychotic illness were significantly less likely to use their records (relative risk 0.51, 95% CI 0.27-0.99).
                Patient-held records may not be helpful for patients with long-term mental illness. Patient-centred depression care approaches should better address barriers of insufficient patient information and involvement in the treatment decision process. Additional research is needed to test the effect of increased patient participation on outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess, if patient participation in decision-making via a shared decision-making intervention leads to improved treatment adherence, satisfaction, and clinical outcome without increasing consultation time.
                Cluster-randomized controlled intervention study based on physician training and patient-centered decision aid compared to usual care in primary care settings in Südbaden region of Germany. Twenty-three primary care physicians treating 405 patients with newly diagnosed depression were enrolled. Patient involvement was measured with the patient perceived involvement in care scale (PICS) and a patient participation scale (MSH-scale). Patient satisfaction was measured by the CSQ-8 questionnaire. Treatment adherence was evaluated by patient and provider self-report. Depression severity and remission outcomes were assessed with the Brief PHQ-D.
                Physician facilitation of patient participation improved significantly and to a greater extent in the intervention compared to the control group. There was no intervention effect for depression severity reduction. Doctor facilitation of patient participation, patient-rated involvement, and physician assessment of adherence improved only in the intervention group. Patient satisfaction at post-intervention was higher in the intervention group compared to the control group. The consultation time did not differ between groups.
                A shared decision-making intervention was better than usual care for improving patient participation in treatment decision-making, and patient satisfaction without increasing consultation time. Additional research is needed to model causal linkages in the decision-making process in regard to outcomes.
                The study results encourage the implementation of patient participation in primary care of depression. Decision aids in North American breast cancer outpatients have been shown to assist with treatment decision making and reduce decisional conflict. To date, appropriate delivery formats to effectively increase patient participation in newly diagnosed breast cancer inpatients have not been investigated in the context of German health care provision. The impact of a decision aid intervention was studied in patients (n=111) with a strong suspicion of breast cancer in a randomised controlled trial. The primary outcome variable was decisional conflict. Participants were followed up 1 week post-intervention with a retention rate of 92%. Analyses revealed that the intervention group felt better informed (eta(p)(2)=0.06) but did not experience an overall reduction in decisional conflict as compared with the control group. The intervention had no effect on uptake rates of treatment options, length of consultation with the surgeon, time point of treatment decision making, perceived involvement in decision making, neither decision related nor general patient satisfaction. Patients who received the decision aid intervention experienced a small benefit with regards to how informed they felt about advantages and disadvantages of relevant treatment options. Results are discussed in terms of contextual factors and individual differences as moderators of treatment decision aid effectiveness. Compliance with antipsychotic medication is a major issue in schizophrenia treatment, and noncompliance with antipsychotic treatment is closely related to relapse and rehospitalization. An enhanced involvement of patients with schizophrenia in treatment decisions ("shared decision making") is expected to improve long-term compliance and reduce rehospitalizations. The aim of the present analysis was to study whether shared decision making (SDM) in antipsychotic drug choice would influence long-term outcome.
                From February 2003 to January 2004, psychiatric state hospital inpatients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia (ICD-10; N = 107) were recruited for the trial using a cluster-randomized controlled design. An SDM program on antipsychotic drug choice consisting of a decision aid and a planning talk between patient and physician was compared with routine care with respect to long-term compliance and rehospitalizations (6-month and 18-month follow-up).
                On the whole, we found high rates of noncompliance and rehospitalization. There were no differences between intervention and control groups in the univariate analyses. However, when controlling for confounding factors in a multivariate analysis, there was a positive trend (p = .08) that patients in the SDM intervention had fewer rehospitalizations. Additionally, a higher desire of the patient for autonomy and better knowledge at discharge were associated with higher hospitalization rates.
                The intervention studied showed a positive trend but no clear beneficial effect on long-term outcomes. A more thorough implementation of SDM (e.g., iterative administration of decision aid) might yield larger effects. Those patients with higher participation preferences are at higher risk for poor treatment outcomes and therefore require special attention. Strategies to match these patients' needs might improve compliance and long-term outcomes. Depression and anxiety disorders are common mental disorders worldwide. The MANAS trial aimed to test the effectiveness of an intervention led by lay health counsellors in primary care settings to improve outcomes of people with these disorders.
                In this cluster randomised trial, primary care facilities in Goa, India, were assigned (1:1) by computer-generated randomised sequence to intervention or control (enhanced usual care) groups. All adults who screened positive for common mental disorders were eligible. The collaborative stepped-care intervention offered case management and psychosocial interventions, provided by a trained lay health counsellor, supplemented by antidepressant drugs by the primary care physician and supervision by a mental health specialist. The research assessor was masked. The primary outcome was recovery from common mental disorders as defined by the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10th revision (ICD-10) at 6 months. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00446407.
                24 study clusters, with an equal proportion of public and private facilities, were randomised equally between groups. 1160 of 1360 (85%) patients in the intervention group and 1269 of 1436 (88%) in the control group completed the outcome assessment. Patients with ICD-10-confirmed common mental disorders in the intervention group were more likely to have recovered at 6 months than were those in the control group (n=620 [65·0%] vs 553 [52·9%]; risk ratio 1·22, 95% CI 1·00-1·47; risk difference=12·1%, 95% CI 1·6%-22·5%). The intervention had strong evidence of an effect in public facility attenders (369 [65·9%] vs 267 [42·5%], risk ratio 1·55, 95% CI 1·02-2·35) but no evidence for an effect in private facility attenders (251 [64·1%] vs 286 [65·9%], risk ratio 0·95, 0·74-1·22). There were three deaths and four suicide attempts in the collaborative stepped-care group and six deaths and six suicide attempts in the enhanced usual care group. None of the deaths were from suicide.
                A trained lay counsellor-led collaborative care intervention can lead to an improvement in recovery from CMD among patients attending public primary care facilities.
                The Wellcome Trust.
                Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. To determine the effect of the Program for Assertive Community Treatment (PACT) model on psychiatric inpatient service use in a population of non-emergency psychiatric patients with severe chronic mental illness, and to test for variations in this effect with program staffing levels and patient characteristics such as race and age.
                Data are taken from a randomized trial of PACT in Charleston, South Carolina for 144 patients recruited from August 1989 through July 1991.
                Subjects were randomly assigned either to one of two PACT programs or to usual care at a local mental health center. Effects on hospital use were measured over an 18-month follow-up period via multiple regression analysis.
                Data were obtained from Medicaid claims, chart reviews, subject, case manager, and family interviews; searches of the computerized patient and financial databases of the South Carolina Department of Mental Health and relevant hospitals; and searches of the hard copy and computerized financial databases of the two major local hospitals providing inpatient psychiatric care.
                PACT participants were about 40 percent less likely to be hospitalized during the follow-up period. The effect was stronger for older patients. Lower PACT client/staff ratios also reduced the risk of hospitalization. No evidence of differential race effects was found. Given some hospital use, PACT did not influence the number of days of use.
                Controlling for other covariates, PACT significantly reduces hospitalizations but the size of this effect varies with patient and program characteristics. This study shows that previous results on PACT can be applied to non-emergency patients even when the control condition is an up-to-date CMHC office-based case management program. Patients with persistent medically unexplained symptoms often exhibit general dysfunction and psychiatric comorbidity and frequently resist psychiatric referral. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a collaborative care model including training for general practitioners (GPs) and a psychiatric consultation model for patients with persistent medically unexplained symptoms in general practice.
                Randomised controlled trial. Cluster randomisation at GP practices and multilevel analysis were performed. A total of 81 patients from 36 general practices completed the study. A collaborative care model of training and psychiatric consultation in general practice in the presence of the GP was compared with training plus care as usual by the GP. Outcome assessment on the patients' well-being, functioning and utilisation of health care services was performed 6 weeks and 6 months later.
                All the patients had somatoform disorders (Whitely Index 7.46), and 86% had comorbid psychiatric disorders. In the intervention group, the severity of the main medically unexplained symptoms decreased by 58%. The patients' social functioning improved. The utilization of health care was lower than in the care as usual group.
                A collaborative care model combining training with psychiatric consultation in the general practice setting is an effective intervention in the treatment of persistent medically unexplained symptoms. Anxiety and depressive disorders are highly comorbid in this group. The findings warrant a larger study. Mental health issues are a core part of the work of primary care and are the second most common reason for consultations. There is some evidence that the quality of primary care mental health provision is variable.
                To evaluate the effectiveness of primary care mental health workers with regards to satisfaction with care, mental health symptoms, use of the voluntary sector, and cost effectiveness of care.
                Cluster randomised controlled trial.
                Practices in the Heart of Birmingham Primary Care Trust, Birmingham, England.
                Nineteen practices and 368 patients (18 to 65 years of age) with a diagnosis of a new or ongoing common mental health problem were recruited. Sixteen practices and 284 patients completed the trial.
                Patients in intervention practices had a higher mean level of general satisfaction than those in control practices (difference between group scores of 8.3, 95% confidence interval = 1.3 to 15.3, P = 0.023). The two groups did not differ in mental health symptom scores or use of the voluntary sector.
                For patients with common mental health problems, primary care mental health workers may be effective at increasing satisfaction with an episode of care.
No firm conclusions can be drawn at present about the effects of shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions. There is no evidence of harm, but there is an urgent need for further research in this area.