Karen Overend

Effect of Collaborative Care vs Usual Care on Depressive Symptoms in Older Adults With Subthreshold Depression: The CASPER Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance There is little evidence to guide management of depressive symptoms in older people. Objective To evaluate whether a collaborative care intervention can reduce depressive symptoms and prevent more severe depression in older people. Design, Setting, and Participants Randomized clinical trial conducted from May 24, 2011, to November 14, 2014, in 32 primary care centers in the United Kingdom among 705 participants aged 65 years or older with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) subthreshold depression; participants were followed up for 12 months. Interventions Collaborative care (n=344) was coordinated by a case manager who assessed functional impairments relating to mood symptoms. Participants were offered behavioral activation and completed an average of 6 weekly sessions. The control group received usual primary care (n=361). Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was self-reported depression severity at 4-month follow-up on the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9; score range, 0-27). Included among 10 prespecified secondary outcomes were the PHQ-9 score at 12-month follow-up and the proportion meeting criteria for depressive disorder (PHQ-9 score ≥10) at 4- and 12-month follow-up. Results The 705 participants were 58% female with a mean age of 77 (SD, 7.1) years. Four-month retention was 83%, with higher loss to follow-up in collaborative care (82/344 [24%]) vs usual care (37/361 [10%]). Collaborative care resulted in lower PHQ-9 scores vs usual care at 4-month follow-up (mean score with collaborative care, 5.36 vs with usual care, 6.67; mean difference, −1.31; 95% CI, −1.95 to −0.67; P < .001). Treatment differences remained at 12 months (mean PHQ-9 score with collaborative care, 5.93 vs with usual care, 7.25; mean difference, −1.33; 95% CI, −2.10 to −0.55). The proportions of participants meeting criteria for depression at 4-month follow-up were 17.2% (45/262) vs 23.5% (76/324), respectively (difference, −6.3% [95% CI, −12.8% to 0.2%]; relative risk, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.61-1.27]; P = .25) and at 12-month follow-up were 15.7% (37/235) vs 27.8% (79/284) (difference, −12.1% [95% CI, −19.1% to −5.1%]; relative risk, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.46-0.91]; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance Among older adults with subthreshold depression, collaborative care compared with usual care resulted in a statistically significant difference in depressive symptoms at 4-month follow-up, of uncertain clinical importance. Although differences persisted through 12 months, findings are limited by attrition, and further research is needed to assess longer-term efficacy. Trial Registration isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN02202951

Needles, Jabs and Jags: a qualitative exploration of barriers and facilitators to child and adult immunisation uptake among Gypsies, Travellers and Roma

BackgroundGypsies, Travellers and Roma (referred to as Travellers) are less likely to access health services including immunisation. To improve immunisation rates, it is necessary to understand what helps and hinders individuals in these communities in taking up immunisations. This study had two aims.1.Investigate the views of Travellers in the UK on the barriers and facilitators to acceptability and uptake of immunisations and explore their ideas for improving immunisation uptake;2.Examine whether and how these responses vary across and within communities, and for different vaccines (childhood and adult).MethodsThis was a qualitative, cross-sectional interview study informed by the Social Ecological Model. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 174 Travellers from six communities: Romanian Roma, English Gypsy/Irish Travellers (Bristol), English Gypsy (York), Romanian/Slovakian Roma, Scottish Show people (Glasgow) and Irish Traveller (London). The focus was childhood and selected adult vaccines. Data were analysed using the Framework approach.ResultsCommon accounts of barriers and facilitators were identified across all six Traveller communities, similar to those documented for the general population. All Roma communities experienced additional barriers of language and being in a new country. Men and women described similar barriers and facilitators although women spoke more of discrimination and low literacy. There was broad acceptance of childhood and adult immunisation across and within communities, with current parents perceived as more positive than their elders. A minority of English-speaking Travellers worried about multiple/combined childhood vaccines, adult flu and whooping cough and described barriers to booking and attending immunisation. Cultural concerns about antenatal vaccines and HPV vaccination were most evident in the Bristol English Gypsy/Irish Traveller community. Language, literacy, discrimination, poor school attendance, poverty and housing were identified as barriers across different communities. Trustful relationships with health professionals were important and continuity of care valued.ConclusionsThe experience of many Travellers in this study, and the context through which they make health decisions, is changing. This large study identified key issues that should be considered when taking action to improve uptake of immunisations in Traveller families and reduce the persistent inequalities in coverage.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN20019630.

How should we implement collaborative care for older people with depression? A qualitative study using normalisation process theory within the CASPER plus trial

BackgroundDepression in older people may have a prevalence as high as 20%, and is associated with physical co-morbidities, loss, and loneliness. It is associated with poorer health outcomes and reduced quality of life, and is under-diagnosed and under-treated. Older people may find it difficult to speak to their GPs about low mood, and GPs may avoid identifying depression due to limited consultation time and referral options for older patients.MethodsA qualitative study nested within a randomised controlled trial for older people with moderate to severe depression: the CASPER plus Trial (Care for Screen Positive Elders). We interviewed patient participants, GPs, and case managers (CM) to explore patients’ and professionals’ views on collaborative care developed for older people, and how this model could be implemented at scale. Transcripts were analysed thematically using normalization process theory.ResultsThirty-three interviews were conducted. Across the three data-sets, four main themes were identified based on the main principles of the Normalization Process Theory: understanding of collaborative care, interaction between patients and professionals, liaison between GPs and case managers, and the potential for implementation.ConclusionsA telephone-delivered intervention, incorporating behavioural activation, is acceptable to older people with depression, and is deliverable by case managers. The collaborative care framework makes sense to case managers and has the potential to optimize patient outcomes, but implementation requires integration in day to day general practice. Increasing GPs’ understanding of collaborative care might improve liaison and collaboration with case managers, and facilitate the intervention through better support of patients. The CASPER plus model, delivering therapy to older adults with depression by telephone, offers the potential for implementation in a resource-poor health service.

G325(P) Understanding uptake of immunisations in travelling and gypsy communities

Aims To investigate the barriers and facilitators to acceptability and uptake of immunisation among Gypsy/Traveller communities in the UK. Methods We interviewed 174 Gypsy/Travellers from five communities: Romanian/Slovakian Roma, English Gypsy, Irish Travellers, English Roma, Scottish Showpeople, in four UK cities: Interviews gathered views about the influences on their immunisation behaviours (childhood, adult flu and pertussis vaccines) and ideas for improving uptake in their community. Interview data were analysed using the framework approach. The Social Ecological Model provided the theoretical framework. Results General acceptance of immunisation based on social norms and trust in health professionals was expressed by approximately half of the participants from the English Roma and London Irish Traveller communities in two cities; three quarters of the English Gypsy/Irish Traveller community and Scottish Showpeople; and almost all of the Romanian/Slovakian Roma participants. Concerns about specific vaccines were evident for particular communities e.g. pertussis vaccine in pregnancy for the English/Irish Traveller community in one city, MMR for the Scottish Showpeople. A belief that having the HPV vaccination would imply that Traveller girls are promiscuous was evident for a minority of Travellers in four communities (not Scottish Showpeople). Romanian/Slovakian Roma communities identified language barriers to accessing immunisation services and low literacy across all communities resulted in people being unable to read immunisation leaflets or letters/texts about appointments and struggling to make sense of conversations with health professionals. Relationships with health professionals appeared to be very important. Recall and reminder systems (letters, texts, phone calls) were seen as effective for the majority of participants including those who regularly travel. Most did not appear to have problems with attending appointments for immunisations although some talked about the difficulty of registering with a GP practice without a fixed address and being unable to get an appointment within two weeks. Conclusion Although these Travellers’ accounts of the barriers and facilitators to immunisation have consistency with the wider population, there are some important differences between communities. Immunisation services need to be aware of Gypsy/Traveller communities in their area and tailor services accordingly.