Time Allocation and Caseload Capacity in Telephone Depression Care Management

Objective: To document time allocated to care management activities and care manager workload capacity using data collected for studies of telephone care management of depression.

Study Design: Cross-sectional, descriptive analysis of depression care manager (DCM) activities and workload in 2 collaborative depression care interventions (1 implementation study and 1 effectiveness study) at Department of Veterans Affairs primary care facilities.

Methods: Each intervention tracked specific care management activities for 4 weeks, recording the number of events for each activity type and length of time for each activity. Patient workload data were obtained from the patient tracking systems for the 2 projects. We calculated the average time for each activity type, the average total time required to complete an initial assessment call and follow-up call, and the maximum patient panel for both projects.

Results: The total time per successful initial assessment was 75 to 95 minutes, and the total time per successful follow-up call was 51 to 60 minutes, with more time spent on ancillary activities (precall preparation, postcall documentation, and provider communication) than on direct patient contact. A significant amount of time was spent in unsuccessful call attempts, requiring 9 to 11 minutes for each attempt. The maximum panel size per care manager per quarter was in the range of 143 to 165 patients.

Conclusions: The study found similar DCM time allocations and panel sizes across 2 studies and 3 regions with full-time DCMs. Reductions in DCM time spent on ancillary activities may be achievable through improved informatics and other support for panel management.

(Am J Manag Care. 2007;13:652-660)

Telephone care management is shown to significantly improve depression treatment outcomes in primary care, but there is little information on resources required for telephone care management of depression. This paper documents that:

Two telephone care management projects had similar care manager time allocations and panel sizes.

The total time per successful initial assessment was 75 to 95 minutes, and the total time per successful follow-up call was 51 to 60 minutes, with more time on ancillary activities (precall preparation, postcall documentation, and provider communication) than on direct patient contact.

The maximum panel size per care manager per quarter was 143 to 165 patients.

Collaborative care is a population-based approach to treating depression in which multidisciplinary care teams assist primary care providers (PCPs) in delivering evidence-based treatment. The collaborative depression care model, based on a chronic illness care management model, includes patient-, provider-, and system-level components.^1,2 A recent review of collaborative-care trials demonstrated this approach to be successful in improving both the process and outcomes of depression care.³

Using care management to systematically monitor adherence to treatment and follow-up care is a key element in collaborative care.⁴ Inclusion of systematic follow-up is an important predictor of positive clinical outcomes for depression.⁵ The care manager provides structured assessment and monitoring, education, and self-management support in partnership with the depression care team. The care manager role is based on the “clinical case manager†envisioned by Kanter⁶ more than the typical coordination and service support role of a case manager.

Among collaborative-care models, several types of medical professionals (nurses,^7,8 psychologists,⁹ social workers,¹⁰ pharmacists^11,12) or nonmedical professionals with healthcare experience¹³ have taken the role of care manager. Care management is conducted through on-site visits,⁹ telephone calls,^14-16 or a combination of both.^17,18 Care management by telephone, a less expensive approach than in-person patient visits, can significantly improve treatment of depression in primary care settings.^14,19,20

Information about the resources required for telephone care management is important for administrators and policymakers planning to implement collaborative-care models. However, no research has prospectively documented the time allocated to care management activities or estimated the workload capacity of depression care managers (DCMs). Based on data collected for 2 studies of telephone care management of depression, we describe the time care managers devote to specific clinic activities and provide estimates of care manager workload in terms of maximum patient panel sizes. The 2 programs were implemented in multiple primary care clinics in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. By documenting care management activities and resource needs, we hope within and outside the VA with concrete information for planning collaborative-care interventions to improve depression treatment.

METHODS

Study Design

This study is a cross-sectional, descriptive analysis of DCM activities and workload in 2 collaborative depression care interventions implemented in different VA primary care facilities. The Translating Best Practices for Depression into Evidence-based Solutions (TIDES) project was an implementation study conducted in 7 outpatient clinics in rural areas or small cities with on-site mental health staff in 3 VA regional healthcare networks, with 1 nurse DCM in each network. The TIDES clinics had 4600 to 14 000 primary care patients per year and 4 to 10 primary care clinicians. The Telemedicine Enhanced Antidepressant Management (TEAM) study was an effectiveness study conducted in 3 small community-based outpatient clinics without on-site psychiatrists in 1 regional healthcare network with 1 nurse DCM. The TEAM clinics had from 2900 to 4800 primary care patients per year and 5 to 10 primary care clinicians.

Both TIDES and TEAM DCMs were primary care registered nurses. Although the implementation plan for both projects did not require DCMs to have mental health experience, 2 of 3 TIDES DCMs (one with a master's degree and one with a bachelor's degree) and the TEAM DCM (who had a master's degree) were senior nurses with considerable experience in mental health. The third TIDES DCM, who had a 2-year associate's degree, had no experience in mental health and, in addition to psychiatric supervision, was mentored by the 2 other TIDES DCMs. The TIDES DCMs received an initial 2-day training session in depression care management and TIDES protocols before accepting patients. The TIDES DCMs also participated in weekly conference calls for support, problem solving, and care management education. The training for the TEAM DCM included directed readings and role playing over a 3-month period before patient enrollment. Both TIDES and TEAM DCMs worked full-time on the projects and were not involved in other clinical duties or research projects.

Table 1 presents characteristics of the TIDES and TEAMS interventions.

Translating Best Practices for Depression into Evidence-based Solutions

TIDES implemented a model of collaborative care based in primary care with mental health collaboration. The implementation strategy was the evidence-based quality improvement process, a structured implementation model that begins with establishing a work agreement between researchers as facilitators and regional and local administrators with organizational and fiscal decision-making authority. Implementation structure, templates, and protocols for the collaborative-care model are locally developed based on organizational priorities and resources, with guidance from the research/facilitation team. The implementation includes continuing education for PCPs and mental health specialists; information technology staff are involved, and to the extent practical, the electronic medical record is optimized for collaborative care.

In the TIDES depression care management model, PCPs referred patients with depressive symptoms to the DCM for assessment and follow-up care. DCMs followed a locally designed protocol for initial assessment of depression symptoms using a modified version of the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) approved by Kroenke et al.²¹ The modified version of PHQ-9 asked the second question (which referred to “feeling down, depressed or hopelessâ€

Author Affiliations: From VA Puget Sound Health Care Systemâ€â€1. Wagner EH, Austin BT, Von Korff M. Improving outcomes in chronic illness. Manag Care Q. 1996;4:12-25.

2. Wagner EH, Glasgow RE, Davis C, et al. Quality improvement in chronic illness care: a collaborative approach. Jt Comm J Qual Saf. 2001;27:63-80.

3. Williams JW Jr, Gerrity M, Holsinger T, Dobscha S, Gaynes B, Dietrich A. Systematic review of multifaceted interventions to improve depression care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2007;29:91-116.

4. Oxman TE, Dietrich AJ, Schulberg HC. The depression care manager and mental health specialist as collaborators within primary care. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2003;11:507-516.

5. Craven M, Bland R. Better practices in collaborative mental health care: an analysis of the evidence base. Can J Psychiatry. 2006;51 (6 suppl 1):7S-72S.

6. Kanter J. Clinical case management: definition, principles, components. Hosp Community Psychiatry. 1989;40:361-368.

7. Rost K, Nutting P, Smith J, Werner J, Duan N. Improving depression outcomes in community primary care practice: a randomized trial of the quEST intervention. Quality Enhancement by Strategic Teaming. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:143-149.

8. Wells KB, Sherbourne C, Schoenbaum M, et al. Impact of disseminating quality improvement programs for depression in managed primary care: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2000;283:212-220.

9. Katon W, Robinson P, Von Korff M, et al. A multifaceted intervention to improve treatment of depression in primary care. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1996;53:924-932.

10. Hedrick SC, Chaney EF, Felker B, et al. Effectiveness of collaborative care depression treatment in Veterans’ Affairs primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18:9-16.

11. Finley PR, Rens HR, Pont JM, et al. Impact of collaborative care model upon depression in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. Pharmacotherapy. 2003;23:1175-1185.

12. Adler DA, Bungay KM, Wilson IB, et al. The impact of a pharmacist intervention on 6-month outcomes in depressed primary care patients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2004;26:199-209.

13. Katzelnick DJ, Simon GE, Pearson SD, et al. Randomized trial of a depression management program in high utilizers of medical care. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:345-351. 14. Simon GE, VonKorff M, Rutter C,Wagner E. Randomised trial of monitoring, feedback, and management of care by telephone to improve treatment of depression in primary care. BMJ. 2000;320:550-554.

15. Katon W, Von Korff M, Lin E, et al. Stepped collaborative care for primary care patients with persistent symptoms of depression: a randomized trial. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1999;56:1109-1115.

16. Rost K, Nutting P, Smith J, Elliott CE, Dickinson M. Managing depression as a chronic disease: a randomised trial of ongoing treatment in primary care. BMJ. 2002;325:934-939.

17. Unutzer J, Katon W, Callahan CM, et al. Collaborative care management of late-life depression in the primary care setting: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002;288:2836-2845.

18. Katon W, Rutter C, Ludman EJ, et al. A randomized trial of relapse prevention of depression in primary care. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001;58:241-247.

19. Fortney JC, Pyne JM, Edlund MJ, et al. A randomized trial of telemedicine-based collaborative care for depression. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22:1086-1093.

20. Dietrich AJ. The telephone as a new weapon in the battle against depression. Eff Clin Pract. 2000;4:191-193.

21. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:606-613.

22. Rubenstein L, Chaney E, Smith J. Improving treatment for depression in primary care. QUERI Quarterly. Newsletter of the Quality Enhancement Research Initiative. 2004;6:1,4. Available at: http://www.hsrd.research.va.gov/publications/internal/QUERIQuarterly_VO6_N03.pdf. Accessed October 16, 2007.

23. Kirchner J, Parker L, Yano EM, Chaney E. Opening up the black box of quality improvement interventions: lessons from a formative evaluation of routine-care implementation of depression collaborative care. Paper presented at: Academy Health Annual Research Meeting; June 25, 2006; Seattle, Wash.

24. Chaney E, Rubenstein LV, Yano EM, et al. Randomized trial of implementation of collaborative care for depression in primary care: WAVES. Paper presented at: 6th International Conference on the Scientific Basis of Health Services; September 18-20, 2005; Montreal, Canada.

25. Fortney JC. NetDCMS: A decision support system to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based depression care management. Paper presented at: Transforming VHA Mental Health Care: Promoting Recovery and Integrated Care; July 19, 2007; Arlington, Va.

26. Fortney JC, Davis A, Hedrick R, et al. A decision support system for depression care management. Enhancing the impact of mental health services research. Paper presented at: National Institute for Mental Health Annual Conference of Enhancing the Impact of Mental Health Services Research. Washington, DC; July 23-24, 2007.

27. Dorr D, Bonner LM, Cohen AN, et al. Informatics systems to promote improved care for chronic illness: a literature review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007;14:156-163. 28. Young A, Bonner LM, Cohen A, et al. Information technology to support provision of care for complex, chronic illness. J Gen Intern Med. In press.

29. Harpole LH, Stechuchak KM, Saur CD, Steffens DC, Unutzer J, Oddone E. Implementing a disease management intervention for depression in primary care: a random work sampling study. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2003;25:238-245.

30. Bourbeau J, Collet JP, Schwartzman K, Ducruet T, Nault D, Bradley C. Economic benefits of self-management education in COPD. Chest. 2006;130:1704-1711.

Download PDF: Time Allocation and Caseload Capacity in Telephone Depression Care Management