Search

Background: In the Depression Initiative, a promising collaborative care model for depression that was developed in the US was adapted for implementation in the Netherlands. Aim: Description of a collaborative care model for major depressive disorder (MDD) and of the factors influencing its implementation in the primary care setting in the Netherlands. Data sources: Data collected during the preparation phase of the CC:DIP trial of the Depression Initiative, literature, policy documents, information sheets from professional associations. Results: Factors facilitating the implementation of the collaborative care model are continuous supervision of the care managers by the consultant psychiatrist and the trainers, a supportive web-based tracking system and the new reimbursement system that allows for introduction of a mental health care-practice nurse (MHC-PN) in the general practices and coverage of the treatment costs. Impeding factors might be the relatively high percentage of solo-primary care practices, the small percentage of professionals that are located in the same building, unfamiliarity with the concept of collaboration as required for collaborative care, the reimbursement system that demands regular negotiations between each health care provider and the insurance companies and the reluctance general practitioners might feel to expand their responsibility for their depressed patients. Conclusion: Implementation of the collaborative care model in the Netherlands requires extensive training and supervision on micro level, facilitation of reimbursement on meso- and macro level and structural effort to change the treatment culture for chronic mental disorders in the primary care setting.

Introduction: Different professionals provide health care for mental disorder in the primary care setting. In view of the changing reimbursement system in the Netherlands, information is needed on their specific expertise. Method: This study attempts to describe this by literature study, by assessment of expert opinions, and by consulting Associations of the relevant professions. Results: There is no clear differentiation of expertise and tasks amongst these professionals in primary care. Notably, distinction between different psychotherapeutic treatment modes provided by psychologists is unclear. Discussion: Research is needed to assess actual treatment modules in correlation with patient diagnostic classification for the different professions in primary care. An alternative way of classifying patients, that takes into account not only mental disorder or problems but especially the level of functioning, is proposed to discern which patients can be treated in primary care, and which patients should not. Integrated care models are promising, because many professionals can be involved in treatment of mental disorder in the primary care setting; especially for collaborative care models, evidence favours the treatment of common mental disorders in this setting. Conclusion: Integrated care models, such as collaborative care, provide a basis for multidisciplinary care for mental disorder in the primary care setting. Professional responsibilities should be clearly differentiated in order to facilitate integrated care. The level of functioning of patients with mental disorder can be used as indication criterion for treatment in the primary care setting or in Mental Health Institutions. Research to establish the feasibility of this model is needed.

Introduction: Stepped care strategies are potentially effective to organise integrated care but unknown is whether they function well in practice. This paper evaluates the implementation of a stepped care programme for depression in primary care and secondary care. Theory and methods: We developed a stepped care algorithm for diagnostics and treatment of depression, supported by a liaison-consultation function. In a 2½ year study with pre-post design in a pilot region, adherence to the protocol was assessed by interviewing 28 caregivers of 235 patients with mild, moderate, or severe major depression. Consultation and referral patterns between primary and secondary care were analysed. Results: Adherence of general practitioners and consultant caregivers to the stepped care protocol proved to be 96%. The percentage of patients referred for depression to secondary care decreased significantly from 26% to 21% (p=0.0180). In the post-period more patients received treatment in primary care and requests for consultation became more concordant with the stepped care protocol. Conclusions: Implementation of a stepped care programme is feasible in a primary and secondary care setting and is associated with less referrals. Discussion: Further research on all subsequent treatment steps in a standardised stepped care protocol is needed.