Collaborative care for depression: A cumulative meta-analysis and review of longer-term outcomes

Janine Archer, Simon Gilbody, Peter Bower, Janine Fletcher, David Richards, Alex J. Sutton

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    Background: Depression is common in primary care but is suboptimally managed. Collaborative care, that is, structured care involving a greater role of nonmedical specialists to augment primary care, has emerged as a potentially effective candidate intervention to improve quality of primary care and patient outcomes. Methods: To quantify the short-term and longer-term effectiveness of collaborative care compared with standard care and to understand mechanisms of action by exploring between-study heterogeneity, we conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials that compared collaborative care with usual primary care in patients with depression. We searched MEDLINE (from the beginning of 1966), EMBASE (from the beginning of 1980), CINAHL (from the beginning of 1980), PsycINFO (from the beginning of 1980), the Cochrane Library (from the beginning of 1966), and DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness) (from the beginning of 1985) databases from study inception to February 6, 2006. Results: We found 37 randomized studies including 12 355 patients with depression receiving primary care. Random effects meta-analysis showed that depression outcomes were improved at 6 months (standardized mean difference, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.32), and evidence of longer-term benefit was found for up to 5 years (standardized mean difference, 0.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.001-0.31). When exploring determinants of effectiveness, effect size was directly related to medication compliance and to the professional background and method of supervision of case managers. The addition of brief psychotherapy did not substantially improve outcome, nor did increased numbers of sessions. Cumulative meta-analysis showed that sufficient evidence had emerged by 2000 to demonstrate the statistically significant benefit of collaborative care. Conclusions: Collaborative care is more effective than standard care in improving depression outcomes in the short and longer terms. Future research needs to address the implementation of collaborative care, particularly in settings other than the United States. ©2006 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)2314-2321
    Number of pages7
    JournalArchives of internal medicine
    Volume166
    Issue number21
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 27 Nov 2006

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Collaborative care for depression: A cumulative meta-analysis and review of longer-term outcomes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this