A computer-assisted telephone collaborative care intervention provided by lay providers for the treatment of comorbid depression and at-risk drinking: Analysis of a randomized controlled trial

Introduction: Virtual collaborative care for people with comorbid depression and at-risk drinking lacks strong evidence. Our aim was to assess the impact of 12 months of telephone collaborative care (tCC) versus enhanced usual care (eUC) on depression and drinking.Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of the Primary care Assessment and Research of a Telephone intervention for Neuropsychiatric conditions with Education and Resources study (PARTNERs), a blinded randomized controlled trial. We examined 144 participants with comorbid depression and at-risk drinking, of which 129 were from the original sample whose data have been published, and 15 were studied since the original report had been published. PARTNERs compared eUC consisting of usual care plus assessment of symptoms at baseline, and 4, 8, and 12 months later vs. tCC consisting of eUC plus telephone-based coaching and symptom monitoring provided by a lay mental health technician to patients supervised by a psychiatrist. The study assessed depression response and remission using logistic regression; we assessed trajectory of drinking using Generalized-estimating equations (GEE). Baseline factors associated with likelihood of not exceeding number of drinks at 12 months were identified using decision trees.Results: tCC produced a faster decline in the number of drinks than eUC (Wald Chi(2) = 9.47, p = 0.02). However, drinking and depression outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups at the end of treatment. Higher alcohol consumption at baseline (>= 18 standard drinks per week in the tCC group and >= 11 standard drinks per week in the eUC group) was associated with a higher likelihood of having at-risk drinking after 12 months of treatment.Conclusions: Our findings suggest that, compared to eUC, tCC may accelerate drinking reductions in patients with comorbid depression and at-risk drinking. Both treatments were equally effective at the end of treatment for both depression and drinking outcomes.