Appendix 1: Data Extraction Tables Integrated and Collaborative care Multi-disciplinary Source 1. Definitions 4. Population Group and Size 8. Outcomes assessed and effects 10. Resource 13. Key conclusions 5. Health Condition / on outcomes Implications 14. Recommendations for Country Problem 9. Components associated with 11. Enablers Practice, Policy, Education, 2. Overview of Models 6. Healthcare context / improved outcomes 12. Barriers Research Type of Evidence setting addressed Aim 3. Main components 7. Nursing disciplines involved Desiree et al. (2013). 1. NR. 4. Adults 18+ Years 8. At 4-month post test the 10. Training costs for 13. Replicate study with (n=163) . intervention group results were GP’s and Nursing Team. larger participant numbers Holland. 2. The collaborative care superior to the TAU group with a particular focus on model incorporates 5. Common mental 74.7% (n=68) v. 50.8% (n=31) 11. NR. cost-effectiveness. RCT multiple interventions and disorders diagnosed by GP responders (P=0.003). At 8 and has been extensively including, panic disorder, 12 month post-test no 12. Possibility of 14. NR. “To evaluate the studied in the field of agoraphobia, social phobia, significant differences were selection bias. effectiveness of depression. specific phobia, generalized found. Difficulty in recruiting collaborative stepped care anxiety disorder, unipolar GP’s and retaining GP’s in the treatment of common Three different algorithms, major and minor 9. It is suggested that this after randomization to mental disorders.” (P.132). for depression, anxiety and depressive disorder of approach brings about a faster TAU group. stress related disorders. dysthymia. response in remission rates. These were further divided The rapid provision of low into mild and moderate. 6. Step 1 in Primary Care in intensity treatment in primary GP Practice and Step 2 in care and improved 3. This was a two-step Out Patient Secondary collaboration between intervention with the first Mental Health Service. healthcare providers was step happening in primary deemed to be important. care. Five 45 minute 7. Psychiatric Nurses. sessions on self-help based around psycho education, cognitive and behavioral exercises. Patients with
Appendix 1: Data Extraction Tables Integrated and Collaborative care Multi-disciplinary Source Country Type of Evidence Aim 1. Definitions 2. Overview of Models 3. Main components 4. Population Group and Size 5. Health Condition / Problem 6. Healthcare context / setting addressed 7. Nursing disciplines involved 8. Outcomes assessed and effects on outcomes 9. Components associated with improved outcomes 10. Resource Implications 11. Enablers 12. Barriers 13. Key conclusions 14. Recommendations for Practice, Policy, Education, Research Desiree et al. (2013). Holland. RCT “To evaluate the effectiveness of collaborative stepped care in the treatment of common mental disorders.” (P.132). 1. NR. 2. The collaborative care model incorporates multiple interventions and has been extensively studied in the field of depression. Three different algorithms, for depression, anxiety and stress related disorders. These were further divided into mild and moderate. 3. This was a two-step intervention with the first step happening in primary care. Five 45 minute sessions on self-help based around psycho education, cognitive and behavioral exercises. Patients with 4. Adults 18+ Years (n=163) . 5. Common mental disorders diagnosed by GP including, panic disorder, agoraphobia, social phobia, specific phobia, generalized anxiety disorder, unipolar major and minor depressive disorder of dysthymia. 6. Step 1 in Primary Care in GP Practice and Step 2 in Out Patient Secondary Mental Health Service. 7. Psychiatric Nurses. 8. At 4-month post test the intervention group results were superior to the TAU group 74.7% (n=68) v. 50.8% (n=31) responders (P=0.003). At 8 and 12 month post-test no significant differences were found. 9. It is suggested that this approach brings about a faster response in remission rates. The rapid provision of low intensity treatment in primary care and improved collaboration between healthcare providers was deemed to be important. 10. Training costs for GP’s and Nursing Team. 11. NR. 12. Possibility of selection bias. Difficulty in recruiting GP’s and retaining GP’s after randomization to TAU group. 13. Replicate study with larger participant numbers with a particular focus on cost-effectiveness. 14. NR.