Effectiveness of an Integrated Care Pathway for Depression: Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Depression is the leading cause of disability in adolescents and a potent risk factor for adolescent suicide. Evidence-based treatments are available; however, many clinics do not provide guidelines-based treatments. Integrated Care Pathways (ICPs) are treatment algorithms based on the highest quality practice guidelines intended to facilitate the delivery of evidence-based treatment at the clinic level. Our group has already tested the feasibility of ICP for adolescent depression at an academic setting. There is still uncertainty regarding whether ICPs lead to improved outcomes in adolescent depression in community setting relative to typical care.

Objective: The current study aim is to test the effectiveness of an ICP for depression in adolescents, called the CARIBOU-2 intervention, versus treatment-as-usual (TAU) in community settings. We hypothesize that participants receiving the ICP will show greater clinical improvement (in symptoms and functioning) than participants in TAU. This study will also examine important implementation outcomes.

Method: The primary participants will be adolescents (N= 648), between the ages of 13 to 18 with depressive symptoms, presenting to one of six selected community mental health agencies. Through a stepped wedge design, all sites will begin in the TAU condition and transition to the ICP condition in a randomized sequence. The primary clinical outcome of interest is the difference between treatment groups in the rate of change of depressive symptoms from baseline to 24-week endpoint as measured by the Childhood Depression Rating Scale-Revised. Secondary outcomes include rate of change of functional improvement, as measured by the Children's Global Assessment Scale, and caregiver-rated internalizing symptoms as rated by the Childhood Behaviour Checklist.

Generalized linear mixed-effects model is a proper choice to test our clinical hypotheses to control for covariates (e.g. demographics and baseline clinical measures), to accommodate multiple forms of the outcome (e.g. continuous, categorical and count type), and to account for clustering at individual level (for repeated measures) and at site level. Time, stage assignment and their interactions will serve as the primary predictors for the analyses. As an example, if we let Y\_ijt to denote a continuous outcome of the j-th participant of the i-th site measured at time t, a linear model for Y\_ijt will look like the following:

Y\_ijt=β\_0+〖b\_(0,ij)+b\_(1,i)+β〗\_1 t+β\_2 〖Group〗\_(i,t)+β\_3 Group\_it\*t+〖β\_4 X\_ijt+ϵ〗\_ijt

of which 〖Group〗\_(i,t) denotes the treatment assignment of the i-th site at time t, X\_ijt, additional covariates, b\_(0,ij) and b\_(1,i), random effects at individual and site levels respectively, ϵ\_( ijt), unexplained random error, and β's, regression coefficients. For sensitivity analyses, we will explore the use of quadratic or piecewise models when the linear model may not be adequate. We will adopt the intention-to-treat approach in general and use multiple imputation methods as the primary missing data strategy.

Count data, proportions and qualitative data will be used to describe implementation outcomes.

Relevance: Should our results be consistent with our hypotheses, systematic implementation of the CARIBOU-2 intervention to other community mental health agencies would be indicated.

Edited on March 7th, 2024

Background: Depression is the leading cause of disability in adolescents and a potent risk factor for suicide. Evidence-based treatments are available; however, many clinics do not provide guidelines-based treatments. Integrated Care Pathways (ICPs) are treatment algorithms based on the highest quality practice guidelines intended to facilitate the delivery of evidence-based treatment at the clinic level. Our group has already tested the feasibility of ICP for adolescent depression at an academic setting. There is still uncertainty regarding whether ICPs lead to improved outcomes in depression in adolescents in community settings relative to typical care.

Objective: The current study aim is to test the effectiveness of an ICP for depression in adolescence, called the CARIBOU-2 intervention, versus treatment-as-usual (TAU) in community settings. This study will also examine important implementation outcomes.

Method: The primary participants will be adolescents (N= 300 ), between the ages of 13 to 18 with depressive symptoms, presenting to one of six selected community mental health agencies. Through a quasi-experimental, multi-site cluster controlled clinical trial design, sites will begin in the TAU condition and transition to the ICP condition once local enrollment to TAU has reached 25 participants. . The primary clinical outcome of interest is the difference between treatment groups in the rate of change of depressive symptoms from baseline to 24-week endpoint as measured by the Childhood Depression Rating Scale-Revised. Secondary outcomes include rate of change of functional improvement, as measured by the Children's Global Assessment Scale, and caregiver-rated internalizing symptoms as rated by the Childhood Behaviour Checklist. This study will also be examining the following implementation outcomes: feasibility, fidelity cost and acceptability.

Generalized linear mixed-effects model will be the primary analytic tool for evaluating whether the CARIBOU-2 intervention is more effective than TAU for adolescents with depression presenting to care in the community with regards to improvement of depressive symptoms (Hypothesis A), self-reported functioning (Hypothesis B), caregiver-reported internalizing psychopathology (Hypothesis C), and suicidal ideation and behaviours (exploratory). Generalized linear mixed-effects model is a proper choice to control for covariates (e.g. demographics and baseline clinical measures), to accommodate multiple forms of the outcome (e.g. continuous, categorical and count type), and to account for clustering at individual level (for repeated measures) and at site level. Time, treatment assignment and their interactions will serve as the primary predictors for the analyses. As an example, if we let Y\_ijt to denote a continuous outcome of the j-th participant of the i-th site measured at time t, a linear model for Y\_ijt will look like the following:

Y\_ijt=β\_0+〖b\_(0,ij)+b\_(1,i)+β〗\_1 t+β\_2 〖Group〗\_(i,t)+β\_3 Group\_it\*t+〖β\_4 X\_ijt+ϵ〗\_ijt

of which 〖Group〗\_(i,t) denotes the treatment assignment of the i-th site at time t, X\_ijt, additional covariates, b\_(0,ij) and b\_(1,i), random effects at individual and site levels respectively, ϵ\_( ijt), unexplained random error, and β's, regression coefficients. For sensitivity analyses, we will explore the use of the piecewise model to model the time trend differently . We will adopt the intention-to-treat approach in general and use multiple imputation methods as the primary missing data strategy.

Count data, proportions and qualitative data will be used to describe implementation outcomes.

Relevance: Should our results be consistent with our hypotheses, systematic implementation of the CARIBOU-2 intervention to other community mental health agencies would be indicated.

• Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale [Срок оценки: Change from baseline to 24 weeks]
• Depression Rating Scale [Срок оценки: Change from baseline to 24 weeks]
• Youth Quality of Life Scale Research Version [Срок оценки: Change from baseline to 24 weeks]
• Health and Social Service Utilization [Срок оценки: Change from baseline to 24 weeks]
• Ontario Perception of Care Tool for Mental Health and Addictions [Срок оценки: Change from baseline to 24 weeks]
• Adolescent Alcohol and Drug Involvement Scale Grid [Срок оценки: Change from baseline to 24 weeks]
• Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Skills Questionnaire [Срок оценки: Change from baseline to 24 weeks]
• CollaboRATE [Срок оценки: Change from baseline to 24 weeks]
• Nonsuicidal Self-Injury [Срок оценки: Change from baseline to 24 weeks]