CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 181Mental Health Treatment and AccessPrimary Care and Health OutcomesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Case Management for Depression by Health Care Assistants in Small Primary Care Practices: A Cluster Randomized Trial

Gensichen, Jochen, von Korff, Michael, Peitz, Monika, Muth, Christiane, Beyer, Martin, Güthlin, Corina, Torge, Marion, Petersen, Juliana J., Rosemann, Thomas, König, Jochem, Gerlach, Ferdinand M., for PRoMPT (PRimary care Monitoring for depressive Patients Trial)·2009·Annals of Internal Medicine
DOI 10.7326/0003-4819-151-6-200909150-00001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Case management by health care assistants in small primary care practices provides unclear benefit for improving depression symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether case management provided by health care assistants in small primary care practices is more effective than usual care in improving depression symptoms and process of care for patients with major depression. DESIGN: Cluster randomized, controlled trial. A central automated system generated the randomization scheme, which was stratified by urban and rural practices; allocation sequence was concealed until groups were assigned. SETTING: 74 small primary care practices in Germany from April 2005 to September 2007. PATIENTS: 626 patients age 18 to 80 years with major depression. INTERVENTION: Structured telephone interview to monitor depression symptoms and support for adherence to medication, with feedback to the family physician. MEASUREMENTS: Depression symptoms at 12 months, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9); secondary outcomes were patient assessment of chronic illness care, adherence to medication, and quality of life. RESULTS: A total of 310 patients were randomly assigned to case management and 316 to usual care. At 12 months, 249 intervention recipients and 278 control patients were assessed; 555 patients were included in a modified intention-to-treat-analysis (267 intervention recipients vs. 288 control patients). Compared with control patients, intervention recipients had lower mean PHQ-9 values in depression symptoms (-1.41 [95% CI, -2.49 to -0.33]; P = 0.014), more favorable assessments of care (3.41 vs. 3.11; P = 0.011), and increased treatment adherence (2.70 vs. 2.53; P = 0.042). Quality-of-life scores did not differ between groups. LIMITATION: Patients, health care assistants, family physicians, and researchers were not blinded to group assignment, and 12-month follow-up of patients was incomplete. CONCLUSION: Case management provided by primary care practice-based health care assistants may reduce depression symptoms and improve process of care for patients with major depression more than usual care. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: German Ministry of Education and Research.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7326/0003-4819-151-6-200909150-00001

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 61 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Wagner EH, 1996, Manag Care Q, 4, 12
  2. Anderson B, 2007, Am J Manag Care, 13, S103
  3. Gensichen J, 2006, Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich, 100, 375
  4. Grol R, 2000, Br J Gen Pract, 50, 882
  5. 10.1186/1471-2296-9-25 · DOI
  6. Wittchen HU, 2002, J Clin Psychiatry, 63, 24

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 181

Related

Metadata

Authors
Gensichen, J., von Korff, M., Peitz, M., Muth, C., Beyer, M., Güthlin, C., Torge, M., Petersen, J. J., Rosemann, T., König, J., Gerlach, F. M., & Trial), F. P. (. C. M. F. D. P.
Affiliations
  • Goethe University Frankfurt (DE)
  • From Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany; Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Group Health Center for Health Studies, Seattle, Washington; University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland; and University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Corresponding author
Gensichen, Jochen
ORCID
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Publisher
American College of Physicians
Published
2009-09-15
Volume
151
Issue
6
Pages
369-378
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
DOI
10.7326/0003-4819-151-6-200909150-00001
OpenAlex
W2095843429
Cited by
181
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 15
FWCI
19.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.acpjournals.org/journal/aim/text-and-data-mining (tdm)
Locations
  • Annals of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
case management, healthcare assistants, major depressive disorder, primary care, small primary care practices, telephone follow-up, medication adherence, process of care, quality of life, chronic care, PHQ-9
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Allied Health Personnel, Antidepressive Agents, Depressive Disorder, Family Practice, Female, Germany, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Prospective Studies, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Telephone, Case Management, Medication Adherence, Young Adult

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