Table 1.

Summary of most relevant published studies of telephone-based support for depression, anxiety, or at-risk drinking.

Study and location	Study design	Main findings
Simon et al (2000) [9], United States (n=613)	Patients starting antidepressant trial randomized to 3 groups: (1) usual care; (2) telephone contacts every 3 months with feedback only; and (3) telephone contacts every 3 months with feedback and support.	Patients who received telephone feedback and support were more likely to receive an adequate antidepressant dosage; have lower depression scores; and have a lower likelihood of persistent major depression. Feedback only had no significant effect on the outcomes.
Oslin et al (2003) [10], United States (n=97)	Veteran participants (n=97) with depression and at-risk drinking were assigned to 2 groups: (1) usual care and (2) TDMa by a behavioral health specialist. Patients in the TDM received regular follow-ups for 24 wk. Symptomatic outcomes were assessed at 4-months.	TDM was associated with improved outcomes for depression and at-risk drinking: response rates were 39% in the TDM group and 18% in the usual care group.
Brown et al (2007) [11], United States (n=819)	12-month randomized comparison of a telephone intervention and a mail intervention for primary care patients (n=819) with alcohol use disorders. Participants received telephone counseling (motivational interviewing) or pamphlets on healthy lifestyle. Drinking levels were measured after 3 months.	Larger reduction in alcohol consumption was observed in the telephone group than in the mail group (males: 17.3% vs 12.9%; females: 13.9% vs 11.0%) The number of telephone counseling sessions was associated with the reduction in drinking.
McCusker et al (2012) and Simco et al (2015) [12,17], Canada (n=63)	Open, noncontrolled design. Participants with comorbid depression and chronic physical illness received self-care tools and telephone support by a lay coach for 6 months.	The telephone intervention was found to be feasible and acceptable: 91% (57/63) of the participants completed the 2-month follow-up; 63% (mean 5.7/9) of possible calls were completed. Participants experienced significant improvement in depression symptoms at 6 months.
Mello et al (2013) [13], United States (n=285)	Injured adults screening positive for alcohol use and discharged from an emergency room randomized to 2-call phone intervention or usual care. Outcomes were measured after 12 months.	Alcohol-related injuries were lower in the phone intervention group with no difference in consumption and other alcohol-related consequences.
Pickett et al (2014) [14], United States (n=124)	12-wk randomized trial of telephone-facilitated depression care and usual care in recently discharged primary care patients.	No significant difference in outcomes between facilitated and routine care.
McCusker et al (2015) and McClusker et al (2017) [15,16] (n=223)	Randomized trial of a depression self-care tool kit, with and without telephone coaching in primary care adults with depression and comorbid chronic physical condition. Outcomes were measured after 3 and 6 months.	77.1% completed the 6-month assessment. PHQ-9b scores were significantly different after 3 months but not after 6 months. The benefit of coaching on 6-month PHQ-9 was seen only among participants who were not receiving baseline psychological treatment. No significant differences in secondary outcomes (self-efficacy, satisfaction, and use of health services).
Rollman et al (2017) [18], United States (n=329)	Patients with anxiety randomized to a telephone-delivered CCc intervention or usual-care referral. Participants in the CC group received help from a nonmental health professional for 12 months.	Patients randomized to CC had improved mental health-related quality of life, anxiety symptoms, and mood at the 12-month follow-up compared with usual care.

^aTDM: telephone disease management.

^bPHQ-9: Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [19].

^cCC: collaborative care.