Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34593055›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2021

Feasibility, experiences and outcomes of using DIALOG+ in primary care to improve quality of life and mental distress of patients with chronic conditions: an exploratory non-controlled trial in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia and Uganda.

Francois van Loggerenberg, Michael McGrath, Dickens Akena, Harriet Birabwa-Oketcho, Camilo Andrés Cabarique Méndez, Carlos Gómez-Restrepo, Alma Džubur Kulenoviĉ, Maja Muhić, Nelson K Sewankambo, Hana Sikira and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Francois van LoggerenbergUnit for Social and Community Psychiatry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. f.vanloggerenberg@qmul.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5317-7983
Michael McGrathUnit for Social and Community Psychiatry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Dickens AkenaDepartment of Psychiatry, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Harriet Birabwa-OketchoButabika National Referral Mental Hospital, Kampala, Uganda.
Camilo Andrés Cabarique MéndezDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia.
Carlos Gómez-RestrepoDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia.
Alma Džubur KulenoviĉClinical Center University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Maja MuhićClinical Center University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Nelson K SewankamboDepartment of Internal Medicine, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Hana SikiraClinical Center University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Stefan PriebeUnit for Social and Community Psychiatry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research 16/137/97
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDIALOG+ is a resource-oriented and evidence-based intervention to improve quality of life and reduce mental distress. While it has been extensively studied in mental health care, there is little evidence for how to use it in primary care settings for patients with chronic physical conditions. Considering that DIALOG+ is used in existing routine patient-clinician meetings and is very low cost, it may have the potential to help large numbers of patients with chronic physical conditions, mental distress and poor quality of life who are treated in primary care. This is particularly relevant in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where resources for specialised services for such patients are scarce or non-existent.

methodsAn exploratory non-controlled trial will be conducted to primarily assess the feasibility and acceptability and, secondarily, outcomes of delivering DIALOG+ to patients with chronic physical conditions and poor quality of life in primary care settings in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia and Uganda. Thirty patients in each country will receive DIALOG+ up to three times in monthly meetings over a 3-month period. Feasibility will be assessed by determining the extent to which the intervention is implemented as planned. Experiences will be captured in interviews and focus groups with care providers and participants to understand acceptability. Quality of life, symptoms of anxiety and depression, objective social situation and health status will be assessed at baseline and again after the three-session intervention. DISCUSSION: This study will inform our understanding of the extent to which DIALOG+ may be used in the routine care of patients with chronic physical conditions in different primary care settings. The findings of this exploratory trial can inform the design of future full randomised controlled trials of DIALOG+ in primary care settings in LMICs.

trial registrationAll studies were registered prospectively (on 02/12/2020 for Uganda and Bosnia and Herzegovina, and 01/12/2020 for Colombia) within the ISRCTN Registry. ISRCTN17003451 (Bosnia and Herzegovina), ISRCTN14018729 (Colombia) and ISRCTN50335796 (Uganda). Protocol version and date: v2.0; 28/07/2020 (Bosnia and Herzegovina), v0.3 02/08/2020 (Colombia) and v1.0, 05/11/2020 (Uganda).

Indexed as

DIALOG+Global mental healthLMICsPrimary carePsychosocial interventionsQuality of lifeResource-oriented approachSolution-focused

Identifiers

PMID34593055
PMCPMC8481761

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.