Karen J Coleman1, Mark Dreskin2, Daniel L Hackett3, Alisa Aunskul4, Jialuo Liu5, Tracy M Imley6, Amy L Wolfner7, Gabrielle F Beaubrun8. 1. Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California , 100 S. Los Robles, Pasadena, CA, 91104, USA. Karen.J.Coleman@kp.org. 2. Department of Family Medicine, Los Angeles Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente Southern California , Los Angeles, CA, USA. 3. Department of Psychiatry, Riverside Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente Southern California , Riverside, CA, USA. 4. Complete Care Support Programs, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, USA. 5. Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California , 100 S. Los Robles, Pasadena, CA, 91104, USA. 6. Quality and Clinical Analysis, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, USA. 7. Department of Family Medicine, Irvine Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Irvine, CA, USA. 8. Department of Psychiatry, South Bay Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente Southern California , Harbor City, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Collaborative models for depression have not been widely adopted throughout the USA, possibly because there are no successful roadmaps for implementing these types of models. OBJECTIVE: To provide such a roadmap through a case study of the institutionalization of a depression care management (DCM) initiative for adult depression in a large healthcare system serving over 300,000 adults with depression. DESIGN: A retrospective observational program evaluation. Program evaluation results are presented for those patients enrolled in the initiative from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2018. PARTICIPANTS: Over a 4-year period, 17,052 patients were treated in the DCM program. In general, participants were women (76%), were Hispanic (47%), spoke English (84%), and were 51.1 ± 18.3 years old, the majority of whom were 30-64 years old (57%). INTERVENTION: The collaborative care portion of the DCM initiative (DCM program) was implemented by a collaborative care team containing a treatment specialist, an assessment specialist, administrative staff, a primary care physician, and a psychiatry physician. MAIN MEASURES: The main outcome measures were total score on the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Outcomes were improvement (defined as at least 50% reduction in symptoms) and remission (defined as a PHQ-9 less than 5) of depression symptoms. Follow-up of depression symptoms was also collected at 6 months following discharge. KEY RESULTS: The average course of treatment in 2018, after full implementation, was 4.6 ± 3.0 months; 62% of patients experienced improvement in symptoms, and 45% experienced remission of their depression at the time of discharge. These rates were maintained at the 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative care for depression can be institutionalized in large healthcare systems and be sustained with a specific, detailed roadmap that includes workflows, training, treatment guidelines, and clear documentation standards that are linked to performance metrics. Extensive stakeholder engagement at every level is also critical for success.
BACKGROUND: Collaborative models for depression have not been widely adopted throughout the USA, possibly because there are no successful roadmaps for implementing these types of models. OBJECTIVE: To provide such a roadmap through a case study of the institutionalization of a depression care management (DCM) initiative for adult depression in a large healthcare system serving over 300,000 adults with depression. DESIGN: A retrospective observational program evaluation. Program evaluation results are presented for those patients enrolled in the initiative from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2018. PARTICIPANTS: Over a 4-year period, 17,052 patients were treated in the DCM program. In general, participants were women (76%), were Hispanic (47%), spoke English (84%), and were 51.1 ± 18.3 years old, the majority of whom were 30-64 years old (57%). INTERVENTION: The collaborative care portion of the DCM initiative (DCM program) was implemented by a collaborative care team containing a treatment specialist, an assessment specialist, administrative staff, a primary care physician, and a psychiatry physician. MAIN MEASURES: The main outcome measures were total score on the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Outcomes were improvement (defined as at least 50% reduction in symptoms) and remission (defined as a PHQ-9 less than 5) of depression symptoms. Follow-up of depression symptoms was also collected at 6 months following discharge. KEY RESULTS: The average course of treatment in 2018, after full implementation, was 4.6 ± 3.0 months; 62% of patients experienced improvement in symptoms, and 45% experienced remission of their depression at the time of discharge. These rates were maintained at the 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative care for depression can be institutionalized in large healthcare systems and be sustained with a specific, detailed roadmap that includes workflows, training, treatment guidelines, and clear documentation standards that are linked to performance metrics. Extensive stakeholder engagement at every level is also critical for success.
Authors: Peter Pronovost; Dale Needham; Sean Berenholtz; David Sinopoli; Haitao Chu; Sara Cosgrove; Bryan Sexton; Robert Hyzy; Robert Welsh; Gary Roth; Joseph Bander; John Kepros; Christine Goeschel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-12-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Leif I Solberg; A Lauren Crain; Michael V Maciosek; Jürgen Unützer; Kris A Ohnsorg; Arne Beck; Lisa Rubenstein; Robin R Whitebird; Rebecca C Rossom; Pamela B Pietruszewski; Benjamin F Crabtree; Kenneth Joslyn; Andrew Van de Ven; Russell E Glasgow Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Michael S Klinkman; Sabrina Bauroth; Stacey Fedewa; Kevin Kerber; Julie Kuebler; Tanya Adman; Ananda Sen Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2010 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Anilkrishna B Thota; Theresa Ann Sipe; Guthrie J Byard; Carlos S Zometa; Robert A Hahn; Lela R McKnight-Eily; Daniel P Chapman; Ana F Abraido-Lanza; Jane L Pearson; Clinton W Anderson; Alan J Gelenberg; Kevin D Hennessy; Farifteh F Duffy; Mary E Vernon-Smiley; Donald E Nease; Samantha P Williams Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Jürgen Unützer; Ya-Fen Chan; Erin Hafer; Jessica Knaster; Anne Shields; Diane Powers; Richard C Veith Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2012-04-19 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Peter J Pronovost; Christine A Goeschel; Elizabeth Colantuoni; Sam Watson; Lisa H Lubomski; Sean M Berenholtz; David A Thompson; David J Sinopoli; Sara Cosgrove; J Bryan Sexton; Jill A Marsteller; Robert C Hyzy; Robert Welsh; Patricia Posa; Kathy Schumacher; Dale Needham Journal: BMJ Date: 2010-02-04
Authors: Laura J Damschroder; David C Aron; Rosalind E Keith; Susan R Kirsh; Jeffery A Alexander; Julie C Lowery Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2009-08-07 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Arne Beck; Jennifer M Boggs; Angelika Alem; Karen J Coleman; Rebecca C Rossom; Claire Neely; Mark D Williams; Robert Ferguson; Leif I Solberg Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2018 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.657