Systematic reviews related to this topic

loading
9 References (9 articles) loading Revert Studify

Systematic review

Unclassified

Efficacy of Psychosocial Interventions in Inducing and Maintaining Alcohol Abstinence in Patients With Chronic Liver Disease: A Systematic Review.

blocked
Journal Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association
Year 2016
Links Pubmed DOI PubMed Central

This article includes 13 Primary studies 13 Primary studies (13 references)

Loading references information
BACKGROUND & AIMS: We conducted a systematic review of efficacy of psychosocial interventions in inducing or maintaining alcohol abstinence in patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) and alcohol use disorder (AUD). METHODS: We performed structured keyword searches in PubMed, PsychINFO, and MEDLINE for original research articles that were published from January 1983 through November 2014 that evaluated the use of psychosocial interventions to induce or maintain alcohol abstinence in patients with CLD and AUD. RESULTS: We identified 13 eligible studies that comprised 1945 patients; 5 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Delivered therapies included motivational enhancement therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), motivational interviewing, supportive therapy, and psychoeducation either alone or in combination in the intervention group and general health education or treatment as usual in the control group. All studies of induction of abstinence (4 RCTs and 6 observational studies) reported an increase in abstinence among participants in the intervention and control groups. Only an integrated therapy that combined CBT and motivational enhancement therapy with comprehensive medical care, delivered during a period of 2 years, produced a significant increase in abstinence (74% increase in intervention group versus 48% increase in control group, P = .02), which was reported in 1 RCT. All studies of maintenance of abstinence (1 RCT and 2 observational studies) observed recidivism in the intervention and control groups. Only an integrated therapy that combined medical care with CBT produced a significantly smaller rate of recidivism (32.7% in integrated CBT group versus 75% decrease in control group, P = .03), which was reported from 1 observational study. However, data were not collected for more than 2 years on outcomes of patients with CLD and AUD. CONCLUSIONS: In a systematic analysis of studies of interventions to induce or maintain alcohol abstinence in patients with CLD and AUD, integrated combination psychotherapy with CBT, motivational enhancement therapy, and comprehensive medical care increased alcohol abstinence. No psychosocial intervention was successful in maintaining abstinence, but an integrated therapy with CBT and medical care appears to reduce recidivism.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Collaborative chronic care models for mental health conditions: cumulative meta-analysis and metaregression to guide future research and implementation.

Journal Medical care
Year 2013
Links Pubmed DOI PubMed Central

This article includes 44 Primary studies 45 Primary studies (44 references)

Loading references information
OBJECTIVE: Prior meta-analysis indicates that collaborative chronic care models (CCMs) improve mental and physical health outcomes for individuals with mental disorders. This study aimed to investigate the stability of evidence over time and identify patient and intervention factors associated with CCM effects to facilitate implementation and sustainability of CCMs in clinical practice. METHODS: We reviewed 53 CCM trials that analyzed depression, mental quality of life (QOL), or physical QOL outcomes. Cumulative meta-analysis and metaregression were supplemented by descriptive investigations across and within trials. RESULTS: Most trials targeted depression in the primary care setting, and cumulative meta-analysis indicated that effect sizes favoring CCM quickly achieved significance for depression outcomes, and more recently achieved significance for mental and physical QOL. Four of 6 CCM elements (patient self-management support, clinical information systems, system redesign, and provider decision support) were common among reviewed trials, whereas 2 elements (health care organization support and linkages to community resources) were rare. No single CCM element was statistically associated with the success of the model. Similarly, metaregression did not identify specific factors associated with CCM effectiveness. Nonetheless, results within individual trials suggest that increased illness severity predicts CCM outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Significant CCM trials have been derived primarily from 4 original CCM elements. Nonetheless, implementing and sustaining this established model will require health care organization support. Although CCMs have typically been tested as population-based interventions, evidence supports stepped care application to more severely ill individuals. Future priorities include developing implementation strategies to support adoption and sustainability of the model in clinical settings while maximizing fit of this multicomponent framework to local contextual factors.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Comparative effectiveness of collaborative chronic care models for mental health conditions across primary, specialty, and behavioral health care settings: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Journal The American journal of psychiatry
Year 2012
Links Pubmed Health Technology Assessment (HTA) DOI crd.york.ac.uk

This article is included in 1 Structured summary of systematic reviews 55 Structured summaries of systematic reviews (1 reference) 1 Broad synthesis 55 Broad syntheses (1 reference)

This article includes 56 Primary studies 55 Primary studies (56 references)

Loading references information
OBJECTIVE: Collaborative chronic care models (CCMs) improve outcome in chronic medical illnesses and depression treated in primary care settings. The effect of such models across other treatment settings and mental health conditions has not been comprehensively assessed. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the comparative effectiveness of CCMs for mental health conditions across disorders and treatment settings. METHOD: Randomized controlled trials comparing CCMs with other care conditions, published or in press by August 15, 2011, were identified in a literature search and through contact with investigators. CCMs were defined a priori as interventions with at least three of the six components of the Improving Chronic Illness Care initiative (patient self-management support, clinical information systems, delivery system redesign, decision support, organizational support, and community resource linkages). Articles were included if the CCM effect on mental health symptoms or mental quality of life was reported. Data extraction included analyses of these outcomes plus social role function, physical and overall quality of life, and costs. Meta-analyses included comparisons using unadjusted continuous measures. RESULTS: Seventy-eight articles yielded 161 analyses from 57 trials (depression, N=40; bipolar disorder, N=4; anxiety disorders, N=3; multiple/other disorders, N=10). The meta-analysis indicated significant effects across disorders and care settings for depression as well as for mental and physical quality of life and social role function (Cohen's d values, 0.20-0.33). Total health care costs did not differ between CCMs and comparison models. A systematic review largely confirmed and extended these findings across conditions and outcome domains. CONCLUSIONS: CCMs can improve mental and physical outcomes for individuals with mental disorders across a wide variety of care settings, and they provide a robust clinical and policy framework for care integration.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Integration of priority population, health and nutrition interventions into health systems: systematic review.

Journal BMC public health
Year 2011
Links Pubmed DOI PubMed Central

This article includes 11 Primary studies 10 Primary studies (11 references)

Loading references information
BACKGROUND: Objective of the study was to assess the effects of strategies to integrate targeted priority population, health and nutrition interventions into health systems on patient health outcomes and health system effectiveness and thus to compare integrated and non-integrated health programmes. METHODS: Systematic review using Cochrane methodology of analysing randomised trials, controlled before-and-after and interrupted time series studies. We defined specific strategies to search PubMed, CENTRAL and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group register, considered studies published from January 1998 until September 2008, and tracked references and citations. Two reviewers independently agreed on eligibility, with an additional arbiter as needed, and extracted information on outcomes: primary (improved health, financial protection, and user satisfaction) and secondary (improved population coverage, access to health services, efficiency, and quality) using standardised, pre-piloted forms. Two reviewers in the final stage of selection jointly assessed quality of all selected studies using the GRADE criteria. RESULTS: Of 8,274 citations identified 12 studies met inclusion criteria. Four studies compared the benefits of Integrated Management of Childhood Illnesses in Tanzania and Bangladesh, showing improved care management and higher utilisation of health facilities at no additional cost. Eight studies focused on integrated delivery of mental health and substance abuse services in the United Kingdom and United States of America. Integrated service delivery resulted in better clinical outcomes and greater reduction of substance abuse in specific sub-groups of patients, with no significant difference found overall. Quality of care, patient satisfaction, and treatment engagement were higher in integrated delivery models. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted priority population health interventions we identified led to improved health outcomes, quality of care, patient satisfaction and access to care. Limited evidence with inconsistent findings across varied interventions in different settings means no general conclusions can be drawn on the benefits or disadvantages of integrated service delivery.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Interventions to improve veterans' access to care: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors Kehle SM , Greer N , Rutks I , Wilt T
Journal Journal of general internal medicine
Year 2011
Links Pubmed DOI PubMed Central

This article includes 19 Primary studies 19 Primary studies (19 references)

Loading references information
OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review to address the following key questions: (1) what interventions have been successful in improving access for veterans with reduced health care access? (2) Have interventions that have improved health care access led to improvements in process and clinical outcomes? DATA SOURCES: OVID MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS: English language articles published in peer-reviewed journals from 1990 to June 2010. All interventions designed to improve access to health care for US veterans that reported the impact of the intervention on perceived (e.g., satisfaction with access) or objective (e.g., travel time, wait time) access were included. APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Investigators abstracted data on study design, study quality, intervention, and impact of the intervention on access, process outcomes, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Nineteen articles (16 unique studies) met the inclusion criteria. While there were a small number of studies in support of any one intervention, all showed a positive impact on either perceived or objective measures of access. Implementation of Community Based Outpatient Clinics (n = 5 articles), use of Telemedicine (n = 5 articles), and Primary Care Mental Health Integration (n = 6 articles) improved access. All 16 unique studies reported process outcomes, most often satisfaction with care and utilization. Four studies reported clinical outcomes; three found no differences. LIMITATIONS: Included studies were largely of poor to fair methodological quality. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Interventions can improve access to health care for veterans. Increased access was consistently linked to increased primary care utilization. There was a lack of data regarding the link between access and clinical outcomes; however, the limited data suggest that increased access may not improve clinical outcomes. Future research should focus on the quality and appropriateness of care and clinical outcomes.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Review article: Effectiveness of patient care teams and the role of clinical expertise and coordination: a literature review.

Journal Medical care research and review : MCRR
Year 2009
Links Pubmed DOI RxForChange

This article includes 25 Primary studies 25 Primary studies (25 references)

Loading references information
Health care is increasingly provided by teams of health professionals rather than by individual doctors. For decision makers, it is imperative to identify the critical elements for effective teams to transform health care workplaces into effective team-based environments. The authors reviewed the research literature published between 1990 and February 2008. The available research indicated that teams with enhanced clinical expertise improved professional performance and had mixed effects on patient outcomes. Teams with improved coordination had some positive effects on patient outcomes and limited effects on costs and resource utilization. The combination of enhanced expertise and coordination only showed some limited effect on patient outcomes. The authors conclude that enhancement of the clinical expertise is a potentially effective component of improving the impact of patient care teams. The added value of coordination functions remained unclear. Overall, current studies provide little insight into the underlying mechanisms of teamwork.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Integration of mental health/substance abuse and primary care.

Journal Evidence report/technology assessment
Year 2008
Links Pubmed PubMed Central

This article is included in 1 Structured summary of systematic reviews 38 Structured summaries of systematic reviews (1 reference) 1 Broad synthesis 38 Broad syntheses (1 reference)

This article includes 44 Primary studies 38 Primary studies (44 references)

Loading references information
OBJECTIVES: To describe models of integrated care used in the United States, assess how integration of mental health services into primary care settings or primary health care into specialty outpatient settings impacts patient outcomes and describe barriers to sustainable programs, use of health information technology (IT), and reimbursement structures of integrated care programs within the United States. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane databases, and PsychINFO databases, the internet, and expert consultants for relevant trials and other literature that does not traditionally appear in peer reviewed journals. REVIEW METHODS: Randomized controlled trials and high quality quasi-experimental design studies were reviewed for integrated care model design components. For trials of mental health services in primary care settings, levels of integration codes were constructed and assigned for provider integration, integrated processes of care, and their interaction. Forest plots of patient symptom severity, treatment response, and remission were constructed to examine associations between level of integration and outcomes. RESULTS: Integrated care programs have been tested for depression, anxiety, at-risk alcohol, and ADHD in primary care settings and for alcohol disorders and persons with severe mental illness in specialty care settings. Although most interventions in either setting are effective, there is no discernible effect of integration level, processes of care, or combination, on patient outcomes for mental health services in primary care settings. Organizational and financial barriers persist to successfully implement sustainable integrated care programs. Health IT remains a mostly undocumented but promising tool. No reimbursement system has been subjected to experiment; no evidence exists as to which reimbursement system may most effectively support integrated care. Case studies will add to our understanding of their implementation and sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: In general, integrated care achieved positive outcomes. However, it is not possible to distinguish the effects of increased attention to mental health problems from the effects of specific strategies, evidenced by the lack of correlation between measures of integration or a systematic approach to care processes and the various outcomes. Efforts to implement integrated care will have to address financial barriers. There is a reasonably strong body of evidence to encourage integrated care, at least for depression. Encouragement can include removing obstacles, creating incentives, or mandating integrated care. Encouragement will likely differ between fee-for-service care and managed care. However, without evidence for a clearly superior model, there is legitimate reason to worry about premature orthodoxy.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Continuity of care and quality care outcomes for people experiencing chronic conditions: A literature review.

Journal Nursing & health sciences
Year 2006
Links Pubmed DOI

This article includes 25 Primary studies 25 Primary studies (25 references)

Loading references information
Continuity of patient care is frequently linked to quality care outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to examine the clinical trial literature in order to determine the extent to which informational, management, and relational continuity of care are associated with quality care indicators. A MEDLINE search of the literature via PubMed was conducted for clinical trials that were carried out from 1 January 1996-1 June 2005. Analyses of 32 unduplicated citations revealed a focus on one or more aspects of continuity and its association with quality care outcomes. Management continuity interventions were identified most often, followed by informational and relational continuity interventions. The outcomes were primarily patient-focused with a wide range of functional status, quality of life, and patient satisfaction indicators. This analysis provides implications for research that could contribute to an understanding of the types of continuity of patient care and their relationships to quality care.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Better practices in collaborative mental health care: an analysis of the evidence base.

Authors Craven MA , Bland R
Journal Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie
Year 2006
Links Pubmed RxForChange

This article is included in 2 Broad syntheses 29 Broad syntheses (2 references)

This article includes 37 Primary studies 29 Primary studies (37 references)

Loading references information
OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review of the experimental literature in order to identify better practices in collaborative mental health care in the primary care setting. METHODS: A review of Canadian and international literature using Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and other databases yielded over 900 related reports, of which, 38 studies met the inclusion criteria. A systematic review and descriptive analysis is presented, with key conclusions and best practices. RESULTS: Successful collaboration requires preparation, time, and supportive structures, building on preexisting clinical relationships. Collaborative practice is likely to be most developed when clinicians are colocated and most effective when the location is familiar and nonstigmatizing for patients. Degree of collaboration does not appear to predict clinical outcome. Enhanced collaboration paired with treatment guidelines or protocols offers important benefits over either intervention alone in major depression. Systematic follow-up was a powerful predictor of positive outcome in collaborative care for depression. A clear relation between collaborative efforts to increase medication adherence and clinical outcomes was not evident. Collaboration alone has not been shown to produce skill transfer in PCP knowledge or behaviours in the treatment of depression. Service restructuring designed to support changes in practice patterns of primary health care providers is also required. Enhanced patient education was part of many studies with good outcomes. Education was generally provided by someone other than the PCP. Collaborative interventions that are part of a research protocol may be difficult to sustain long-term without ongoing funding. Consumer choice about treatment modality may be important in treatment engagement in collaborative care (for example, having the option to choose psychotherapy vs medication). CONCLUSIONS: A body of experimental literature evaluating the impact of enhanced collaboration on patient outcomes-primarily in depressive disorders-now exists. Better practices in collaborative mental health care are beginning to emerge.