CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 44Cardiac Health and Mental HealthCancer survivorship and careDiabetes Management and Education

The UPBEAT Nurse-Delivered Personalized Care Intervention for People with Coronary Heart Disease Who Report Current Chest Pain and Depression: A Randomised Controlled Pilot Study

Open access
Barley, Elizabeth A., Walters, Paul, Haddad, Mark, Phillips, Rachel, Achilla, Evanthia, McCrone, Paul, Van Marwijk, Harm, Mann, Anthony +1 more·2014·PLoS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0098704PMC PMC4047012
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Depression is common in people with coronary heart disease (CHD) and associated with worse outcome. This study explored the acceptability and feasibility of procedures for a trial and for an intervention, including its potential costs, to inform a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a nurse-led personalised care intervention for primary care CHD patients with current chest pain and probable depression. METHODS: Multi-centre, outcome assessor-blinded, randomized parallel group study. CHD patients reporting chest pain and scoring 8 or more on the HADS were randomized to personalized care (PC) or treatment as usual (TAU) for 6 months and followed for 1 year. Primary outcome was acceptability and feasibility of procedures; secondary outcomes included mood, chest pain, functional status, well being and psychological process variables. RESULT: 1001 people from 17 General Practice CHD registers in South London consented to be contacted; out of 126 who were potentially eligible, 81 (35% female, mean age = 65 SD11 years) were randomized. PC participants (n = 41) identified wide ranging problems to work on with nurse-case managers. Good acceptability and feasibility was indicated by low attrition (9%), high engagement and minimal nurse time used (mean/SD = 78/19 mins assessment, 125/91 mins telephone follow up). Both groups improved on all outcomes. The largest between group difference was in the proportion no longer reporting chest pain (PC 37% vs TAU 18%; mixed effects model OR 2.21 95% CI 0.69, 7.03). Some evidence was seen that self efficacy (mean scale increase of 2.5 vs 0.9) and illness perceptions (mean scale increase of 7.8 vs 2.5) had improved in PC vs TAU participants at 1 year. PC appeared to be more cost effective up to a QALY threshold of approximately £3,000. CONCLUSIONS: Trial and intervention procedures appeared to be feasible and acceptable. PC allowed patients to work on unaddressed problems and appears cheaper than TAU. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN21615909.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0098704

Cites

6 of 6 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

Research works printed but not linked: 40

  1. [1]Thombs BD, Bass EB, Ford DE, Stewart KJ, Tsilidis KK, et al (2006) Prevalence of depression in survivors of acute myocardial infarction. Journal of General Internal Medicine 21: 30– 38. 16423120 PMC1484630
  2. [2]Egede LE (2007) Major depression in individuals with chronic medical disorders: prevalence, correlates and association with health resource utilization, lost productivity and functional disability. General Hospital Psychiatry 29: 409– 416. 17888807
  3. [3]Davidson KW, Kupfer DJ, Bigger JT, Califf RM, Carney RM, et al (2006) Assessment and treatment of depression in patients with cardiovascular disease: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Working Group Report. Psychosomatic Medicine 68: 645– 650. 17012516
  4. [4]Rutledge T, Redwine LS, Linke SE, Mills PJ (2013) A meta-analysis of mental health treatments and cardiac rehabilitation for improving clinical outcomes and depression among patients with coronary heart disease. Psychosomatic medicine 75: 335– 349. 23630306
  5. [5]Richards DA, Hill JJ, Gask L, Lovell K, Chew-Graham C, et al (2013) Clinical effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in UK primary care (CADET): cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ 347: f4913. 23959152 PMC3746956
  6. [8]Barley EA, Walters P, Tylee A, Murray J (2012) General practitioners' and practice nurses' views and experience of managing depression in coronary heart disease: a qualitative interview study. BMC Family Practice 13: 1. 22221509 PMC3276431
  7. [9]Tylee A, Ashworth M, Barley E, Brown J, Chambers J, et al (2011) Up-beat UK: a programme of research into the relationship between coronary heart disease and depression in primary care patients. BMC Family Practice 12: 38. 21605435 PMC3120657
  8. [12]Barley EA, Murray J, Walters P, Tylee A (2011) Managing depression in primary care: A meta-synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research from the UK to identify barriers and facilitators. BMC Family Practice 12: 47. 21658214 PMC3135545
  9. [13]Simmonds RL, Tylee A, Walters P, Rose D (2013) Patients' perceptions of depression and coronary heart disease: a qualitative UPBEAT-UK study. BMC Family Practice 14: 38. 23509869 PMC3606418
  10. [14]Bennett M, Walters K, Drennan V, Buszewicz M (2013) Structured Pro-Active Care for Chronic Depression by Practice Nurses in Primary Care: A Qualitative Evaluation. PLos One 8: e75810. 24069451 PMC3772088
  11. [15]Walters P, Barley E, Mann A, Phillips R, Williams P, et al.. (2013) Depression in primary care patients with coronary heart disease: the UPBEAT UK Study. available from the authors. PMC4055485 24922312
  12. [16]Tylee A, Haddad M, Barley E, Ashworth M, Brown J, et al (2012) A pilot randomised controlled trial of personalised care for depressed patients with symptomatic coronary heart disease in South London general practices: the UPBEAT-UK RCT protocol and recruitment. BMC Psychiatry 12: 58. 22672407 PMC3437191
  13. [18]Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB (2003) The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: validity of a two-item depression screener. Medical Care 41: 1284– 1292. 14583691
  14. [19]Rose GA (1962) The diagnosis of ischaemic heart pain and intermittent claudication in field surveys. Bull World Health Organ. Bull World Health Organ 27: 645– 658. 13974778 PMC2555832
  15. [20]Zigmond AS, Snaith RP (1983) The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 67: 361– 370. 6880820
  16. [22]Tennant R, Hiller L, Fishwick R, Platt S, Joseph S, et al (2007) The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation. Health & Quality of Life Outcomes 5: 63. 18042300 PMC2222612
  17. [23]Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD (1996) A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care 34: 220– 233. 8628042
  18. [24]Goldman L, Hashimoto B, Cook EF, Loscalzo A (1981) Comparative reproducibility and validity of systems for assessing cardiovascular functional class: advantages of a new specific activity scale. Circulation 64: 1227– 1234. 7296795
  19. [25]Corney RH, Clare AW (1985) The construction, development and testing of a self-report questionnaire to identify social problems. Psychological Medicine 15: 637– 649. 4048322
  20. [26]Morisky DE, Green LW, Levine DM (1986) Concurrent and predictive validity of a self-reported measure of medication adherence. Medical Care 24: 67– 74. 3945130
  21. [29]Broadbent E, Petrie KJ, Main J, Weinman J (2006) The brief illness perception questionnaire. Journal of Psychosomatic Research 60: 631– 637. 16731240
  22. [31]Hurst NP, Kind P, Ruta D, Hunter M, Stubbings A (1997) Measuring health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis: validity, responsiveness and reliability of EuroQol (EQ-5D). British Journal of Rheumatology 36: 551– 559. 9189057
  23. [37]Manca A, Palmer S (2005) Handling missing data in patient-level cost-effectiveness analysis alongside randomised clinical trials. Applied Health Economics & Health Policy 4: 65– 75. 16162026
  24. [38]Barber JA, Thompson SG (2000) Analysis of cost data in randomized trials: an application of the non-parametric bootstrap. Statistics in Medicine 19: 3219– 3236. 11113956
  25. [39]Fenwick E, Byford S (2005) A guide to cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. British Journal of Psychiatry 187: 106– 108. 16055820
  26. [40]Buszewicz M, Griffin M, McMahon E, Beecham J, King M (2010) Evaluation of a system of structured, pro-active care for chronic depression in primary care: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry 10: 61. 20684786 PMC2923105
  27. [41]Lenfant C (2010) Chest pain of cardiac and noncardiac origin. Metabolism: Clinical & Experimental 59 Suppl 1 S41– 46. 20837193
  28. [42]Kisely S, Campbell L, Yelland M, Paydar A (2012) Psychological interventions for symptomatic management of non-specific chest pain in patients with normal coronary anatomy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012: Art. No.: CD004101. 22696339
  29. [43]Kisely SR, Campbell LA, Skerritt P, Yelland MJ (2010) Psychological interventions for symptomatic management of non-specific chest pain in patients with normal coronary anatomy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: CD004101. 20091559
  30. [44]Kennedy A, Bower P, Reeves D, Blakeman T, Bowen R, et al.. (2013) Implementation of self management support for long term conditions in routine primary care settings: cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ 346. PMC3652644 23670660
  31. [46]Sharp DJ, Chew-Graham C, Tylee A, Lewis G, Howard L, et al. A pragmatic randomised controlled trial to compare antidepressants with a community-based psychosocial intervention for the treatment of women with postnatal depression: the RESPOND trial. Health Technology Assessment 14: iii–iv, ix–xi, 1–. 20860888
  32. [48]Gerrits MMJG, Vogelzangs N, van Oppen P, van Marwijk HWJ, van der Horst H, et al (2012) Impact of pain on the course of depressive and anxiety disorders. Pain 153: 429– 436. 22154919
  33. [49]Licht-Strunk E, Van Marwijk HWJ, Hoekstra T, Twisk JWR, De Haan M, et al (2009) Outcome of depression in later life in primary care: longitudinal cohort study with three years' follow-up. BMJ 338: a3079. 19188214 PMC2635593
  34. [50]Baumeister H, Hutter N, Bengel J (2011) Psychological and pharmacological interventions for depression in patients with coronary artery disease. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: CD008012. PMC8673695 34910821
  35. [51]Aragones E, Pinol JL, Caballero A, Lopez-Cortacans G, Casaus P, et al (2012) Effectiveness of a multi-component programme for managing depression in primary care: a cluster randomized trial. The INDI project. Journal of Affective Disorders 142: 297– 305. 23062747
  36. [52]Knowles SE, Chew-Graham C, Coupe N, Adeyemi I, Keyworth C, et al. (2013) Better together? a naturalistic qualitative study of inter-professional working in collaborative care for co-morbid depression and physical health problems. Implementation Science 8.. PMC3848572 24053257
  37. [53]Penninx BWJH, Nolen WA, Lamers F, Zitman FG, Smit JH, et al (2011) Two-year course of depressive and anxiety disorders: results from the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA). Journal of Affective Disorders 133: 76– 85. 21496929
  38. [54]Noordman J, de Vet E, van der Weijden T, van Dulmen S (2013) Motivational interviewing within the different stages of change: an analysis of practice nurse-patient consultations aimed at promoting a healthier lifestyle. Social Science & Medicine 87: 60– 67. 23631779
  39. [55]Butler CC, Simpson SA, Hood K, Cohen D, Pickles T, et al (2013) Training practitioners to deliver opportunistic multiple behaviour change counselling in primary care: a cluster randomised trial. BMJ 346: f1191. 23512758 PMC3601942
  40. [56]Koopmanschap MA, van Exel JNA, van den Berg B, Brouwer WBF (2008) An overview of methods and applications to value informal care in economic evaluations of healthcare. Pharmacoeconomics 26: 269– 280. 18370563

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barley, E. A., Walters, P., Haddad, M., Phillips, R., Achilla, E., McCrone, P., Van Marwijk, H., Mann, A., & Tylee, A.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • City, University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Barley, Elizabeth A.
ORCID
Venue
PLoS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2014-06-05
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
e98704
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0098704
PMC
PMC4047012
OpenAlex
W2167827093
Cited by
44
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5
FWCI
3.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • UWL Repository (University of West London) (acceptedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (RP-PG-0606-1048, MET-08-08-101)
  • King's College London
  • Programme Grants for Applied Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
coronary artery disease, depression, chest pain, nursing care delivery, individualized care, nurse case management, feasibility and acceptability, primary care, telephone follow-up, self-efficacy, illness perception, cost-effectiveness, quality-adjusted life years
MeSH terms
Aged, Chest Pain, Coronary Disease, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Depression, Female, Humans, London, Male, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Primary Health Care, Risk Factors, Time Factors, Nurse's Role, Precision Medicine, Patient Outcome Assessment

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