Daniela Heddaeus, Tharanya Seeralan, Kerstin Maehder, Sarah Porzelt, Anne Daubmann, Judith Dams, Thomas Grochtdreis, Hans-Helmut König, Olaf von dem Knesebeck, Bernd Löwe, Amra Pepić, Moritz Rosenkranz, Ingo Schäfer, Thomas Zimmermann, Bernd Schulte, Angelika Weigel, Karl Wegscheider, Silke Werner, Antonia Zapf, Martin Scherer, Jörg Dirmaier, Martin Härter
{"title":"Collaborative and Stepped Care for Mental Disorders: Results of a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial in Outpatient Care (The COMET Study).","authors":"Daniela Heddaeus, Tharanya Seeralan, Kerstin Maehder, Sarah Porzelt, Anne Daubmann, Judith Dams, Thomas Grochtdreis, Hans-Helmut König, Olaf von dem Knesebeck, Bernd Löwe, Amra Pepić, Moritz Rosenkranz, Ingo Schäfer, Thomas Zimmermann, Bernd Schulte, Angelika Weigel, Karl Wegscheider, Silke Werner, Antonia Zapf, Martin Scherer, Jörg Dirmaier, Martin Härter","doi":"10.3238/arztebl.m2025.0011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Collaborative and stepped care (CSC) models are recommended in guidelines because of their effectiveness in treating depression and anxiety disorders. The evidence for other mental disorders is, however, limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a collaborative and stepped care model (COMET) for patients with depressive, anxiety, somatoform, and/or alcohol-related disorders and related comorbidities in the routine care setting in Germany.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective, cluster-randomized, controlled, parallelgroup superiority trial was conducted; the subjects were patients in primary care practices. The primary endpoint was the change in mental health-related quality of life, assessed with the SF-36 Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) at 6 months in the intention-to-treat population. The secondary endpoints were symptom severity, remission, and response.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-one primary care offices were randomized either to COMET (n = 20) or treatment as usual (TAU, n = 21), and 615 patients were recruited (CSC: n = 307; TAU: n = 308). Data were available for 62% (COMET) and 55% (TAU) of the participants at 6 months. No significant group difference was found with respect to the primary endpoint (-1.96 ,95% confidence interval [-4.39; 0.48], p = 0.113) or any of the secondary endpoints.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found no superiority of the COMET model for the mental disorders addressed. Methodological issues, including differences at baseline and high dropout rates, make these findings challenging to interpret. Future studies should ensure comparability of groups, allocate resources for quality management, and investigate more suitable outcome measures, paying attention to factors of implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":11258,"journal":{"name":"Deutsches Arzteblatt international","volume":" Forthcoming","pages":"127-134"},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12452534/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Deutsches Arzteblatt international","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.m2025.0011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Collaborative and stepped care (CSC) models are recommended in guidelines because of their effectiveness in treating depression and anxiety disorders. The evidence for other mental disorders is, however, limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a collaborative and stepped care model (COMET) for patients with depressive, anxiety, somatoform, and/or alcohol-related disorders and related comorbidities in the routine care setting in Germany.
Methods: A prospective, cluster-randomized, controlled, parallelgroup superiority trial was conducted; the subjects were patients in primary care practices. The primary endpoint was the change in mental health-related quality of life, assessed with the SF-36 Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) at 6 months in the intention-to-treat population. The secondary endpoints were symptom severity, remission, and response.
Results: Forty-one primary care offices were randomized either to COMET (n = 20) or treatment as usual (TAU, n = 21), and 615 patients were recruited (CSC: n = 307; TAU: n = 308). Data were available for 62% (COMET) and 55% (TAU) of the participants at 6 months. No significant group difference was found with respect to the primary endpoint (-1.96 ,95% confidence interval [-4.39; 0.48], p = 0.113) or any of the secondary endpoints.
Conclusion: We found no superiority of the COMET model for the mental disorders addressed. Methodological issues, including differences at baseline and high dropout rates, make these findings challenging to interpret. Future studies should ensure comparability of groups, allocate resources for quality management, and investigate more suitable outcome measures, paying attention to factors of implementation.
期刊介绍:
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International is a bilingual (German and English) weekly online journal that focuses on clinical medicine and public health. It serves as the official publication for both the German Medical Association and the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians. The journal is dedicated to publishing independent, peer-reviewed articles that cover a wide range of clinical medicine disciplines. It also features editorials and a dedicated section for scientific discussion, known as correspondence.
The journal aims to provide valuable medical information to its international readership and offers insights into the German medical landscape. Since its launch in January 2008, Deutsches Ärzteblatt International has been recognized and included in several prestigious databases, which helps to ensure its content is accessible and credible to the global medical community. These databases include:
Carelit
CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature)
Compendex
DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals)
EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database)
EMNursing
GEOBASE (Geoscience & Environmental Data)
HINARI (Health InterNetwork Access to Research Initiative)
Index Copernicus
Medline (MEDLARS Online)
Medpilot
PsycINFO (Psychological Information Database)
Science Citation Index Expanded
Scopus
By being indexed in these databases, Deutsches Ärzteblatt International's articles are made available to researchers, clinicians, and healthcare professionals worldwide, contributing to the global exchange of medical knowledge and research.