The effects of collaborative care versus consultation liaison for anxiety disorders and depression in Denmark: two randomised controlled trials

BackgroundCollaborative care (CC) and consultation liaison (CL) are two conceptual models aiming to improve mental healthcare in primary care. The effects of these models have not been compared in a Danish setting.AimsTo examine the effects of CC versus CL for persons with anxiety and depression in Danish general practices (trial registration: NCT03113175 and NCT03113201).MethodTwo randomised parallel superiority trials for anxiety disorders and depression were carried out in 2018-2019. In the CC-group, care managers collaborated with general practitioners (GPs) to provide evidence-based treatment according to structured treatment plans. They followed up and provided psychoeducation and/or cognitive-behavioural therapy. The GPs initiated pharmacological treatment if indicated, and a psychiatrist provided supervision. In the CL-group, the intervention consisted of the GP's usual treatment. However, the psychiatrist and care manager could be consulted. Primary outcomes were depression symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory-II, BDI-II) in the depression trial and anxiety symptoms (Beck Anxiety Inventory, BAI) in the anxiety trial at 6-month follow-up.ResultsIn total, 302 participants with anxiety disorders and 389 participants with depression were included. A significant difference in BDI-II score was found in the depression trial, with larger symptom reductions in the CC-group (CC: 12.7, 95% CI 11.4-14.0; CL: 17.5, 95% CI 16.2-18.9; Cohen's d = -0.50, P & LE; 0.001). There was a significant difference in BAI in the anxiety trial (CC: 14.9, 95% CI 13.5-16.3; CL: 17.9, 95% CI 16.5-19.3; Cohen's d = -0.34, P & LE; 0.001), with larger symptom reductions in the CC-group.ConclusionsCollaborative care was an effective model to improve outcomes for persons with depression and anxiety disorders.