Jeff C Huffman1, Shehzad K Niazi2, James R Rundell3, Michael Sharpe4, Wayne J Katon5. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA. Electronic address: jhuffman@partners.org. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL. 3. Tamber Health, Minneapolis, MN; Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD. 4. Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. 5. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Collaborative care interventions for psychiatric disorders combine several components integrated into the medical setting: (1) systematic psychiatric assessment, (2) use of a nonphysician care manager to perform longitudinal symptom monitoring, treatment interventions, and care coordination, and (3) specialist-provided stepped-care recommendations. Collaborative care interventions have now been evaluated in a wide spectrum of care settings and offer great promise as a way of increasing quality of patient care, improving health of populations, and reducing health care costs. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE databases was performed for publications between January 1970 and May 2013 to identify articles describing collaborative care and related interventions. Identified articles were then evaluated independently by multiple reviewers for quality and importance; additional articles were identified by searching reference lists and through recommendations of senior content-matter experts. The articles considered to be both of high quality and most important were then placed into categories and annotated reviews performed. RESULTS: Over 600 articles were identified of which 67 were selected for annotated review. The results reported in these articles indicate that collaborative care interventions for psychiatric disorders have been consistently successful in improving key outcomes in both research and clinical intervention studies; cost analyses also suggest that this model is cost effective. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative care models for psychiatric disorders are likely to serve an increasingly large role in health care given their effect on patient and population outcomes and their focus on integration of care.
BACKGROUND: Collaborative care interventions for psychiatric disorders combine several components integrated into the medical setting: (1) systematic psychiatric assessment, (2) use of a nonphysician care manager to perform longitudinal symptom monitoring, treatment interventions, and care coordination, and (3) specialist-provided stepped-care recommendations. Collaborative care interventions have now been evaluated in a wide spectrum of care settings and offer great promise as a way of increasing quality of patient care, improving health of populations, and reducing health care costs. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE databases was performed for publications between January 1970 and May 2013 to identify articles describing collaborative care and related interventions. Identified articles were then evaluated independently by multiple reviewers for quality and importance; additional articles were identified by searching reference lists and through recommendations of senior content-matter experts. The articles considered to be both of high quality and most important were then placed into categories and annotated reviews performed. RESULTS: Over 600 articles were identified of which 67 were selected for annotated review. The results reported in these articles indicate that collaborative care interventions for psychiatric disorders have been consistently successful in improving key outcomes in both research and clinical intervention studies; cost analyses also suggest that this model is cost effective. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative care models for psychiatric disorders are likely to serve an increasingly large role in health care given their effect on patient and population outcomes and their focus on integration of care.
Authors: Kirsti A Campbell; Elizabeth N Madva; Ana C Villegas; Eleanor E Beale; Scott R Beach; Jason H Wasfy; Ariana M Albanese; Jeff C Huffman Journal: Psychosomatics Date: 2016-12-09 Impact factor: 2.386
Authors: Charles H Bombardier; Casey B Azuero; Jesse R Fann; Donald D Kautz; J Scott Richards; Sunil Sabharwal Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2021
Authors: Christopher Woodrell; Jeffrey Weiss; Andrea Branch; Donald Gardenier; Katherine Krauskopf; Natalie Kil; Harold Paredes; Kian Bichoupan; Keith Sigel Journal: J Addict Med Date: 2015 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 3.702
Authors: Eric M Schmidt; Simone Behar; Alinne Barrera; Matthew Cordova; Leonard Beckum Journal: J Behav Health Serv Res Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 1.505
Authors: Kelly E Irwin; Elyse R Park; Lauren E Fields; Amy E Corveleyn; Joseph A Greer; Giselle K Perez; Catherine A Callaway; Jamie M Jacobs; Andrew A Nierenberg; Jennifer S Temel; David P Ryan; William F Pirl Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-01-29
Authors: Joseph M Cerimele; Abigail C Halperin; Clarence Spigner; Anna Ratzliff; Wayne J Katon Journal: Gen Hosp Psychiatry Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 3.238