Intervention for depression among palliative care patients and their families : a study protocol for evaluation of a training program for professional care staff

Background: Clinical depression is highly prevalent yet under-detected and under-treated in palliative care settings and is associated with a number of adverse medical and psychological outcomes for patients and their family members. This article presents a study protocol to evaluate a training intervention for non-physician palliative care staff to improve the recognition of depression and provide support for depressed patients and their family members. Details of the hypotheses and expected outcomes, study design, training program development and evaluation measures are described.
Methods and Design: A randomised controlled trial will be implemented across two palliative care services to evaluate the “Training program for professional carers to recognise and manage depression in palliative care settings”. Pre-, post- and three-month follow-up data will be collected to assess: the impact of the training on the knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy and perceived barriers of palliative care staff when working with depression; referral rates for depression; and changes to staff practices. Quantitative and qualitative methods, in the form of self-report questionnaires and interviews with staff and family members, will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention.
Discussion: This study will determine the effectiveness of an intervention that aims to respond to the urgent need for innovative programs to target depression in the palliative care setting. The expected outcome of this study is the validation of an evidence-based training program to improve staff recognition and appropriate referrals for depression, as well as improve psychosocial support for depressed patients and their family members.

Implementation and evaluation of brief depression and anxiety screening in clients contacting a drug and alcohol service

Introduction and Aims. High prevalence mental health (HPMH) comorbidity is common in clients seeking alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment yet can remain undetected. Although research has reported on the introduction of screening into AOD services, little research has reported on the processes surrounding the introduction or evaluated its effectiveness.This study reports on the implementation and evaluation of brief anxiety and depression screening within a specialised, publicly funded AOD service in South-East Victoria.
Design and Methods. Study one examined the implementation of standardised HPMH screening with 114 adult clients (Mean age = 35.49, SD = 9.53; 64% male) telephoning an AOD service over a 5 week period. Measures included severity of HPMH problems,AOD use, care plans and referrals. Study two used semistructured interviews with nine staff/managers to evaluate the effectiveness of screening and its impact on service delivery.
Results. Ninety-four per cent of clients were identified at risk of anxiety or depression. Most care plans incorporated counselling, and concurrent referrals commonly involved a general practitioner. Staff and management found systematic screening increased identification and understanding of comorbid issues and enhanced client interaction but impacted on resource requirements.
Discussion and Conclusions. Most AOD treatment seekers were identified HPMH comorbid and care plans generally included counselling.Adjunctive referrals were more common for severely depressed clients. Screening was effective and enhanced client rapport.Evaluations revealed low confidence in treating HPMH issues in-house.Training may increase worker confidence in managing mental health interventions with subclinical cases, enhancing services’ ability to move towards dual diagnosis capability.

Identifying depression and anxiety disorders in people presenting for substance use treatment

Objective: To identify the type and proportion of depressive and related mental health disorders in a group of individuals seeking outpatient treatment at an alcohol and other drug (AOD) service.
Design, setting and participants: A cross-sectional study using diagnostic interviews with 95 participants (56 men, 39 women) seeking treatment from an AOD service.
Main outcome measures: Mental health and substance disorders were measured using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist, Beck Depression Inventory, and State–Trait Anxiety Inventory (Trait Version).
Results: This was a complex group with addiction, mental health and physical health conditions; 76% had a depressive disorder and 71% had an anxiety disorder. Most were diagnosed with at least two mental health disorders and 25% were diagnosed with four or more different disorders. Alcohol and cannabis use were the most commonly diagnosed AOD disorders. Further, those diagnosed with a drug use disorder reported significantly higher levels of depression compared with those with an alcohol-only disorder. Finally, 60% of the sample reported chronic health conditions, with over one third taking medication for a physical condition on a regular basis.
Conclusions: Primary care providers such as general practitioners are likely to be increasingly called on to assess, treat and/or coordinate care of patients with AOD disorders. We show that this group will likely present to their GP with more than one MJA 2011; 195: S60–S63 mental health disorder in addition to acute and chronic physical health conditions.