Self-care interventions to assist family physicians with mental health care of older patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: Feasibility, acceptability, and outcomes of a pilot randomized controlled trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has required family physicians to rapidly address increasing mental health problems with limited resources. Vulnerable home-based seniors with chronic physical conditions and commonly undermanaged symptoms of anxiety and depression were recruited in this pilot study to compare two brief self-care intervention strategies for the management of symptoms of depression and/or anxiety. METHODS: We conducted a pilot RCT to compare two tele-health strategies to address mental health symptoms either with 1) validated CBT self-care tools plus up to three telephone calls from a trained lay coach vs. 2) the CBT self-guided tools alone. The interventions were abbreviated from those previously trialed by our team, to enable their completion in 2 months. Objectives were to assess the feasibility of delivering the interventions during a pandemic (recruitment and retention); and assess the comparative acceptability of the interventions across the two groups (satisfaction and tool use); and estimate preliminary comparative effectiveness of the interventions on severity of depression and anxiety symptoms. Because we were interested in whether the interventions were acceptable to a wide range of older adults, no mental health screening for eligibility was performed. RESULTS: 90 eligible patients were randomized. 93% of study completers consulted the self-care tools and 84% of those in the coached arm received at least some coaching support. Satisfaction scores were high among participants in both groups. No difference in depression and anxiety outcomes between the coached and non-coached participants was observed, but coaching was found to have a significant effect on participants' use and perceived helpfulness of the tools. CONCLUSION: Both interventions were feasible and acceptable to patients. Trained lay coaching increased patients' engagement with the tools. Self-care tools offer a low cost and acceptable remote activity that can be targeted to those with immediate needs. While effectiveness results were inconclusive, this may be due to the lack of eligibility screening for mental health symptoms, abbreviated toolkit, and fewer coaching sessions than those used in our previous effective interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0460937.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,019 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».