A multifaceted provider-centred intervention versus usual care to improve the recognition and diagnosis of depression in primary health care: a hybrid study.

Eva Vanesa Nogueras, Nazaret Cantero, María Macías, José Miguel Morales-Asencio, José María García-Herrera Pérez-Bryan, María M Hurtado
{"title":"A multifaceted provider-centred intervention versus usual care to improve the recognition and diagnosis of depression in primary health care: a hybrid study.","authors":"Eva Vanesa Nogueras,&nbsp;Nazaret Cantero,&nbsp;María Macías,&nbsp;José Miguel Morales-Asencio,&nbsp;José María García-Herrera Pérez-Bryan,&nbsp;María M Hurtado","doi":"10.1017/S1463423623000300","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a multifaceted intervention to implement an adapted guideline for the management of depression in primary health care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A hybrid trial was carried out to determine the effect of a multicomponent provider-centred intervention to improve the detection and diagnosis of depression in primary care, as part of the guideline implementation process, and to collect information about barriers and facilitators in a real-world context. Before the multicomponent intervention, a descriptive cross-sectional study was performed to assess the population prevalence of depression in the participating health centres and to detect possible differences. Subsequently, a quasi-experimental two-phase study was carried out with a concurrent control group to assess the impact of the multicomponent intervention on the main outcomes (detection of depression, evaluation of its severity and the use of structured methods to support the diagnosis).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine-hundred seventy-four patients took part in the first phase. According to their clinical records, the prevalence of depression ranged from 7.2% to 7.9%, and there were no significant differences between the health centres scheduled to receive the intervention and those in the control group. In the experimental phase, 797 randomly selected participants received the multicomponent intervention. Adjusted multivariable analysis performed before the implementation revealed no significant differences in depression between the experimental and control groups. However, after the intervention, modest but significant differences were observed, which persisted at 1 year after the intervention.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A multicomponent intervention for the implementation of a clinical guideline for the management of depression in primary care produced improvements in the identification of depression and in the degree of severity recorded.</p>","PeriodicalId":74493,"journal":{"name":"Primary health care research & development","volume":"24 ","pages":"e45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10372767/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Primary health care research & development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1463423623000300","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a multifaceted intervention to implement an adapted guideline for the management of depression in primary health care.

Methods: A hybrid trial was carried out to determine the effect of a multicomponent provider-centred intervention to improve the detection and diagnosis of depression in primary care, as part of the guideline implementation process, and to collect information about barriers and facilitators in a real-world context. Before the multicomponent intervention, a descriptive cross-sectional study was performed to assess the population prevalence of depression in the participating health centres and to detect possible differences. Subsequently, a quasi-experimental two-phase study was carried out with a concurrent control group to assess the impact of the multicomponent intervention on the main outcomes (detection of depression, evaluation of its severity and the use of structured methods to support the diagnosis).

Results: Nine-hundred seventy-four patients took part in the first phase. According to their clinical records, the prevalence of depression ranged from 7.2% to 7.9%, and there were no significant differences between the health centres scheduled to receive the intervention and those in the control group. In the experimental phase, 797 randomly selected participants received the multicomponent intervention. Adjusted multivariable analysis performed before the implementation revealed no significant differences in depression between the experimental and control groups. However, after the intervention, modest but significant differences were observed, which persisted at 1 year after the intervention.

Conclusions: A multicomponent intervention for the implementation of a clinical guideline for the management of depression in primary care produced improvements in the identification of depression and in the degree of severity recorded.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以提供者为中心的多方面干预与常规护理相比,改善初级卫生保健中抑郁症的识别和诊断:一项混合研究。
背景:本研究的目的是评估在初级卫生保健中实施一项适用于抑郁症管理指南的多方面干预的影响。方法:作为指南实施过程的一部分,开展了一项混合试验,以确定以提供者为中心的多成分干预措施在改善初级保健中抑郁症的检测和诊断方面的效果,并收集现实环境中有关障碍和促进因素的信息。在多成分干预之前,进行了一项描述性横断面研究,以评估参与保健中心的人口抑郁症患病率,并发现可能的差异。随后,进行了一项准实验两阶段的研究,同时进行了对照组,以评估多组分干预对主要结果(抑郁症的检测,其严重程度的评估和使用结构化方法来支持诊断)的影响。结果:974名患者参加了第一阶段的研究。根据他们的临床记录,抑郁症的患病率从7.2%到7.9%不等,计划接受干预的保健中心与对照组的保健中心之间没有显著差异。在实验阶段,随机选择797名参与者接受多成分干预。在实施之前进行的调整多变量分析显示,实验组和对照组在抑郁方面没有显着差异。然而,在干预后,观察到适度但显著的差异,这种差异在干预后1年仍然存在。结论:为实施初级保健中抑郁症管理临床指南而进行的多组分干预在抑郁症的识别和记录的严重程度方面取得了改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Healthy ageing in long-term care? Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic: a position paper. Early structured communication between general practitioner, sick-listed patient, and employer: Results and lessons learned from a pragmatic trial in the Capacity Note project. The impact of COVID-19 on referrals among general practitioners and specialists in Shanghai, China. The unrevealed links: periodontal health, human milk composition, and infant gut microbiome dynamics. Primary healthcare as a strategy for eliminating hepatitis C: the METRIC toolkit.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1