Dataset Information

Collaborative care model versus usual care for the management of musculoskeletal and co-existing mental health conditions: a randomised feasibility mixed-methods study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

This study aimed to assess the feasibility of a future trial comparing the collaborative care model with usual care for patients with musculoskeletal conditions and co-existing symptoms of anxiety and depression.

Design

A single-centre, parallel-arm, one-to-one, randomised controlled trial design using a mixed-methods approach was used. semistructured interviews and focus groups were conducted post intervention with all participants and staff respectively to explore acceptability towards the model and identify recommendations for improvements.

Setting

An orthopaedic rehabilitation outpatient tertiary hospital.

Participants

Adult patients with musculoskeletal conditions and co-existing moderate or severe symptoms of anxiety and depression attending outpatient therapy appointments.

Intervention

The collaborative care model consisted of a tailored management programme to facilitate the integration of care provided by physical and mental healthcare professionals. A case manager screened and coordinated targeted mental health support for participants. Participants allocated to usual care had no support from the case manager.

Main outcomes measure

Feasibility indicators (rates of recruitment, randomisation and retention), acceptability of clinical outcome measures, usage of additional resources and cost of intervention implementation.

Results

Of the 89 patients who provided consent to take part, 40 participants who matched the eligibility criteria were randomised to either the intervention (n=20) or usual care arm (n=20). Overall adherence to the intervention was 58.82%, while the withdrawal rate was 37.5% at 6 months. All of the 27 participants who were retained completed self-reported outcomes. Qualitative data highlighted that integrated mental health support was favourably perceived. In addition to prenegotiating protected psychology time, the need for operationalised communication between the case manager and clinicians was identified as a recommendation for a future trial.

Conclusions

The trial and intervention were acceptable to patients and healthcare professionals. While the findings demonstrate the feasibility of trial recruitment, a future trial will require optimised retention strategies to improve adherence and withdrawal rates.

Trial registration number

NCT05018039.

SUBMITTER: Teixeira MJC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10882312 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Collaborative care model versus usual care for the management of musculoskeletal and co-existing mental health conditions: a randomised feasibility mixed-methods study.

Teixeira Maria Joao Cardoso MJC Ahmed Refah R Tehrany Rokhsaneh R Jaggi Anju A Ramanuj Parashar P

BMJ open 20240221 2

<h4>Objective</h4>This study aimed to assess the feasibility of a future trial comparing the collaborative care model with usual care for patients with musculoskeletal conditions and co-existing symptoms of anxiety and depression.<h4>Design</h4>A single-centre, parallel-arm, one-to-one, randomised controlled trial design using a mixed-methods approach was used. semistructured interviews and focus groups were conducted post intervention with all participants and staff respectively to explore acce ...[more]

PMID: 38387980

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInterplay between physical and mental health (MH) is widely recognised amongst patients with Musculoskeletal and co-existing MH conditions. Evidence suggests that psychological interventions improve outcomes and satisfaction in patients with physical conditions, however current healthcare models continue to separate physical and mental health care, as health services are fragmented. If the delivery of MH support could be facilitated by Allied Health Professionals (AHPs), such as physiotherapists and occupational therapists (OTs), this could be an effective, low-cost way to achieve routine integration. This study aimed to explore the experiences of UK physiotherapists and OTs working with patients with MSK and co-existing MH conditions and to understand views on improving MSK services.MethodsThis was an exploratory-descriptive qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Participants were recruited via social media and professional organisations using convenience sampling. Participants included registered UK physiotherapists or OTs within MSK settings who managed patients with MH conditions. Inductive thematic analysis was used, where single and double-level coding, single counting and inclusion of divergent cases were conducted to enhance methodological rigour.ResultsThree overarching themes were identified. Overarching theme one referred to openness to provide MH support, with scope of practice and lack of confidence as themes. Overarching theme two described challenges, incorporating mental health stigma, the clinical environment, and limited experience. The overarching theme referring to training, identified the need for further training and strategies to implement as themes.ConclusionMany challenges to achieving optimal integration of physical and mental health care exist within MSK services. These challenges go beyond the need for additional training and knowledge acquisition and include departmental readiness such as funding, diary management, and supervision by senior colleagues/or psychologists. These need consideration in parallel to match the evolving needs of the MSK population.

Project description:BackgroundEndometriosis is the most common cause of chronic pelvic pain worldwide. Non-surgical treatments are effective for only 30-50% of women and have a significant side effect burden that leads to high discontinuation rates. Surgery can be effective but is expensive and invasive, and symptoms tend to recur within 5 years. There is early evidence that acupuncture may be effective in treating endometriosis-related chronic pelvic pain, showing clinically significant analgesia. Both levels of inflammation and pain processing have been shown to be altered in women with chronic pelvic pain. Acupuncture has been shown to reduce inflammation and change central pain processing in other conditions, but research on women with endometriosis is currently lacking. The aim of this feasibility study is to provide data on recruitment rates, retention, appropriateness of outcome measures, minimal clinically important difference in numeric rated scales for pain and the potential effect of acupuncture on pain processing and markers of inflammation in endometriosis-related CPP.MethodsWe will include women aged 18-45 years with a diagnosis of endometriosis via laparoscopy in the past 5 years. A total of 30 participants will be recruited and randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive acupuncture or usual care. Women in the acupuncture group will receive two 45-min treatment sessions per week for 8 weeks (total of 16 sessions). Women in the usual care group will continue with their current treatment regimen. The primary feasibility outcomes are recruitment rates, retention rates and the safety and acceptability of the intervention; secondary patient-centred outcomes include a change in 0-10 daily pelvic pain ratings, the Endometriosis Health Profile 30 (EHP-30) and changes in conditioned pain modulation, resting and task-related EEG activity and inflammatory markers. Analyses will be performed blind to group allocation.DiscussionThis is a two-armed, assessor blind, randomised controlled feasibility trial. Data will be compared at baseline and trial completion 8 weeks later. Outcomes from this feasibility study will inform a larger, fully powered clinical trial should the treatment show trends for potential effectiveness.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000053325 (http://www.ANZCTR.org.au/ACTRN12617000053325.aspx).

Project description:Exacerbations of COPD are one of the commonest causes of admission and readmission to hospital. The role of digital interventions to support self-management in improving outcomes is uncertain. We conducted an open, randomised controlled trial of a digital health platform application (app) in 41 COPD patients recruited following hospital admission with an acute exacerbation. Subjects were randomised to either receive usual care, including a written self-management plan (n = 21), or the myCOPD app (n = 20) for 90 days. The primary efficacy outcome was recovery rate of symptoms measured by COPD assessment test (CAT) score. Exacerbations, readmission, inhaler technique quality of life and patient activation (PAM) scores were also captured by a blinded team. The app was acceptable in this care setting and was used by 17 of the 20 patients with sustained use over the study period. The treatment effect on the CAT score was 4.49 (95% CI: -8.41, -0.58) points lower in the myCOPD arm. Patients' inhaler technique improved in the digital intervention arm (101 improving to 20 critical errors) compared to usual care (100 to 72 critical errors). Exacerbations tended to be less frequent in the digital arm compared to usual care; 34 vs 18 events. Hospital readmissions risk was numerically lower in the digital intervention arm: OR for readmission 0.383 (95% CI: 0.074, 1.987; n = 35). In this feasibility study of the digital self-management platform myCOPD, the app has proven acceptable to patients to use and use has improved exacerbation recovery rates, with strong signals of lower re-exacerbation and readmission rates over 90 days. myCOPD reduced the number of critical errors in inhaler technique compared to usual care with written self-management. This provides a strong basis for further exploration of the use of app interventions in the context of recently hospitalised patients with COPD and informs the potential design of a large multi-centre trial.

Project description:BackgroundGerman statutory health insurances are pursuing the goal of improving treatment of chronically ill people by promoting networks of health care providers and supporting treatments that reflect the current medical knowledge. The so-called PNP program is a collaborative care program developed by a German statutory health insurance, which defines specific rules on psychiatric, neurological, psychosomatic, and psychotherapeutic treatment. It aims to strengthen provision of guideline-based outpatient treatment and collaboration between different health care providers. It includes the general practitioners' program, which aims to strengthen the coordinating role of GPs. This study aims to evaluate the PNP program.MethodsTo evaluate the effectiveness of the PNP program, we will conduct a prospective non-randomized controlled trial with primary data comparing patients enrolled in the PNP program and in the general practitioner program (intervention group) to patients enrolled only in the general practitioner program and patients who receive usual care (control groups). To evaluate costs and level of detail of diagnoses in care of patients with PNP program, we will use routinely collected secondary administrative health data in a retrospective quasi-experimental design. Patients who are at least 18 years old, insured by the statutory health insurance AOK, and on sick leave due to one of the mental or neurological diagnoses (affective, anxiety, somatoform or adjustment disorders, alcohol use disorders, schizophrenia, multiple sclerosis) will be included. We will collect data at baseline and at 12-months follow-up. Health-related quality of life (primary data) and direct costs (secondary data) caused by outpatient and inpatient service utilization and medication will be the primary outcomes. We will analyze data using (generalized) linear mixed models and exploratory analyses. We will use entropy balancing to control for possible differences between the groups. We will use an exploratory sequential design including qualitative and descriptive statistical analyses to assess the structure and process quality of the PNP program among health care providers.DiscussionThe results will help to develop a comprehensive picture of collaborative care programs for mental and neurological health care from the perspective of patients, health care providers, and health insurance companies.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trial Register DRKS00013114.

Project description:BackgroundDelirium is common in critically ill patients and associated with longer hospital stays, increased morbidity and higher healthcare costs. Non-pharmacological interventions have been advocated for delirium management, however there is little evidence evaluating feasibility and acceptability of physical interventions administered in the evening. The aim of this study was to conduct a feasibility trial of evening mobilisation to prevent and treat delirium in patients admitted to intensive care.MethodsIn this mixed-methods, randomised controlled feasibility trial we recruited participants from intensive care units at two university hospitals in the United Kingdom. Eligible participants who were able to respond to verbal stimulus (Richmond agitation and sedation scale ≥3) and expected to stay in intensive care for at least 24 h were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive usual care or usual care plus evening mobilisation. The evening mobilisation was delivered between 19:00 and 21:00, for up to seven consecutive evenings or ICU discharge, whichever was sooner. All outcome assessments were completed by a team member blinded to randomisation and group allocation. Primary objective was to assess feasibility and acceptability of evening mobilisation. Primary feasibility outcomes were recruitment, consent and retention rates, and intervention fidelity. Intervention acceptability was evaluated through semi-structured interviews of participants and staff. Secondary outcomes included prevalence in incidence and duration of delirium, measured using the Confusion Assessment Method for ICU. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05401461.FindingsBetween July 16th, 2022, and October 31st, 2022, 58 eligible patients (29 usual care; 29 usual care plus evening mobilisation) were enrolled. We demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of both the trial design and evening mobilisation intervention. Consent and retention rates over three months were 88% (58/66) and 90% (52/58) respectively, with qualitative analysis demonstrating good acceptability reported by both participants and staff. Secondary outcomes for the evening intervention group compared with the control group were: delirium incidence 5/26 (19%; 95% CI: 6-39%) vs 8/28 (29%; 95% CI: 13-49%) and mean delirium duration 2 days (SD 0.7) vs 4.25 days (SD 2.0).InterpretationResults of this trial will inform the development of a definitive full-scale randomised controlled trial investigating the effects of evening mobilisation to treat delirium and improve health-related outcomes.FundingNone.

Dataset Information

Collaborative care model versus usual care for the management of musculoskeletal and co-existing mental health conditions: a randomised feasibility mixed-methods study.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Intervention

Main outcomes measure

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration number

Publications

Collaborative care model versus usual care for the management of musculoskeletal and co-existing mental health conditions: a randomised feasibility mixed-methods study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets