Cited by 36Mental Health Treatment and AccessHealth Policy Implementation ScienceAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

A pilot randomized controlled trial of a stepped care intervention package for depression in primary care in Nigeria

Open access
Oladeji, Bibilola D, Kola, Lola, Abiona, Taiwo, Montgomery, Alan A, Araya, Ricardo, Gureje, Oye·2015·BMC Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Depression is common in primary care and is often unrecognized and untreated. Studies are needed to demonstrate the feasibility of implementing evidence-based depression care provided by primary health care workers (PHCWs) in sub-Saharan Africa. We carried out a pilot two-parallel arm cluster randomized controlled trial of a package of care for depression in primary care. METHODS: Six primary health care centers (PHCC) in two Local Government Areas of Oyo State, South West Nigeria were randomized into 3 intervention and 3 control clinics. Three PHCWs were selected for training from each of the participating clinics. The PHCWs from the intervention clinics were trained to deliver a manualized multicomponent stepped care intervention package for depression consisting of psychoeducation, activity scheduling, problem solving treatment and medication for severe depression. Providers from the control clinics delivered care as usual, enhanced by a refresher training on depression diagnosis and management. Outcome measures Patient's Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), WHO quality of Life instrument (WHOQOL-Bref) and the WHO disability assessment schedule (WHODAS) were administered in the participants' home at baseline, 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: About 98% of the consecutive attendees to the clinics agreed to have the screening interview. Of those screened, 284 (22.7%) were positive (PHQ-9 score ≥ 8) and 234 gave consent for inclusion in the study: 165 from intervention and 69 from control clinics. The rates of eligible and consenting participants were similar in the control and intervention arms. In all 85.9% (92.8% in intervention and 83% in control) of the participants were successfully administered outcome assessments at 6 months. The PHCWs had little difficulty in delivering the intervention package. At 6 months follow up, depression symptoms had improved in 73.0% from the intervention arm compared to 51.6% control. Compared to the mean scores at baseline, there was improvement in the mean scores on all outcome measures in both arms at six months. CONCLUSION: The results provide support for the feasibility of conducting a fully-powered randomized study in this setting and suggest that the instruments used may have the potential to detect differences between the arms. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN46754188 (ISRTCN registry at isrtcn.com); registered 23 September 2013, details of the pilot study added 12/02/2015.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12888-015-0483-0

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Oladeji, B. D., Kola, L., Abiona, T., Montgomery, A. A., Araya, R., & Gureje, O.
Affiliations
  • University of Ibadan (NG)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
Corresponding author
Oladeji, Bibilola D
Venue
BMC Psychiatry
Published
2015-05-01
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
96-96
ISSN
1471-244X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1973368176
Cited by
36
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2
FWCI
4.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Nottingham ePrints (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
depression, stepped care, primary care, primary health care workers, depression screening, PHQ-9, psychoeducation, activity scheduling, problem-solving therapy, antidepressants, feasibility, quality of life, disability, sub-Saharan Africa, Nigeria
MeSH terms
Adult, Combined Modality Therapy, Depression, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nigeria, Pilot Projects, Primary Health Care, Quality of Life, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review