BackgroundAnxiety and depression are not always diagnosed and treated in primary care as has been recommended. A tailored implementation programme, which addresses key barriers for change by targeted interventions, may help to remedy this.MethodsThe effectiveness of an individually tailored implementation programme, additional to standardised training and feedback on the recognition and treatment of patients with anxiety or depression in general practice, was examined in a cluster randomised controlled trial. Participants were 46 general practitioners (GPs) from 23 general practices (12 intervention, 11 control) and 444 patients aged 18 years or older (198 intervention, 246 control) who screened positive on the extended Kessler 10. In the control group, GPs received a 1-day training in guidelines for recognition and stepped treatment for anxiety and depression. Ten months after the training session, GPs received feedback on their performance over the preceding 6 months. In the intervention group, GPs received the same training and feedback as those in the control condition; in addition, they were offered support, tailored to perceived local barriers to change. The support was delivered in the format of peer group supervisions and personalised telephone consultations. Data were based on an audit of patient records and patient surveys at baseline and after 3 and 6 months.ResultsThe tailored implementation programme led to recognition of a higher proportion of patients presenting with anxiety and depression (42% versus 31%; odds ratio (OR) = 1.60; 95% CI: 1.01–2.53), more consultations after recognition (IRR = 1.78; 95% CI: 1.14–2.78) and did not lead to more prescription of antidepressants (OR = 1.07; 95% CI: 0.52–2.19) or referral to specialist mental health services (OR = 1.62; 95% CI: 0.72–3.64). Patients in the intervention group reported better accessibility of care (effect size (ES) = 0.4; p < 0.05) and provision of information and advice (ES = 0.5; p < 0.05).ConclusionsA tailored implementation programme may enhance the recognition and treatment of patients with anxiety or depression. Further development and evaluation of the programme is warranted to determine its cost-effectiveness.Trail registrationDutch Trial Register identifier NTR1912.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0210-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Improving the healthcare for patients with depression is a priority health policy across the world. Roughly, two major problems can be identified in daily practice: (1) the content of care is often not completely consistent with recommendations in guidelines and (2) the organization of care is not always integrated and delivered by multidisciplinary teams.

No abstract

It is important that depressed patients receive adequate and safe care as described in clinical guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of the Dutch depression guideline for children and adolescents, and to identify factors that were associated with the uptake of the guideline recommendations. The study took place in specialised child and adolescent mental healthcare. An implementation project was initiated to enhance the implementation of the guideline. An evaluation study was performed alongside the implementation project, using structured registration forms and interviews with healthcare professionals. Six multidisciplinary teams participated in the implementation study. The records of 655 patients were analysed. After 1 year, 72% of all eligible patients had been screened for depression and 38% were diagnosed with the use of a diagnostic instrument. The severity of the depression was assessed in 77% of the patients during the diagnostic process, and 41% of the patients received the recommended intervention based on the depression severity. Of the patients that received antidepressants, 25% received weekly checks for suicidal thoughts in the first 6 weeks. Monitoring of the patients' response was recorded in 32% of the patients. A wide range of factors were perceived to influence the uptake of guideline recommendations, e.g. the availability of capable professionals, available time, electronic tools and reminders, and the professionals' skills and attitudes. With the involvement of the teams, recommendations were provided for nationwide implementation of the guideline. In conclusion, a systematic implementation programme using stepped care principles for the allocation of depression interventions seems successful, but there remains room for further improvement.

BackgroundAnxiety and depressive disorders are common mental disorders. A substantial part of patients does not achieve symptomatic remission after treatment in specialized services. Current care as usual (CAU) for these patients consists of long-term supportive contacts. Termination of CAU is often not considered to be an option due to persistent symptoms, a low level of functioning, and the absence of further treatment options. A new intervention, ZemCAD, offers a program focused on rehabilitation and self-management, followed by referral back to primary care.MethodsThis multicenter randomized controlled trial was carried out in twelve specialized outpatient mental health care services in the Netherlands. Consenting and eligible patients were invited for the MINI interview and the baseline questionnaire. Assessments were done at 6 (T1), 12 (T2) and 18 (T3) months post baseline. We used linear mixed model analysis (LMM) to ascertain the effectiveness of the ZemCAD group relative to the CAU group on quality of life, symptom severity and empowerment.ResultsIn total 141 patients were included. The results at 18-month follow-up regarding to quality of life and symptom severity, showed no significant differences between the ZemCAD group and the CAU group, except on the ‘social relationships’-domain (d = 0.37). With regard to empowerment a significant difference between both groups was observed in the total empowerment score and one empowerment dimension (d = 0.45 and d = 0.39, respectively). After the ZemCAD intervention, more patients went from specialized outpatient mental health services back to a less specialized health care setting with less intensive treatment, such as primary care.ConclusionThe findings in this study suggest that patients with chronic and treatment-resistant anxiety and depression using the ZemCAD intervention improve on empowerment but not on symptom severity or quality of life. Since little is known about the effects of rehabilitation and self-management in patients with chronic and treatment resistant anxiety and depressive disorders, this is a first attempt to provide a proof-of-concept study in this under-researched but important field.Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register: NTR3335, registered 7 March 2012.