A systematic review and meta-analysis of pediatric integrated primary care for the prevention and treatment of physical and behavioral health conditions

Abstract

Abstract Objective To evaluate the effects of behavioral health interventions delivered within pediatric integrated primary care models on clinical outcomes. Methods We searched Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS for studies published from January 1, 1998, to September 20, 2023. We included studies that evaluated onsite behavioral health integration in pediatric primary care using a comparator condition (usual, enhanced usual care, or waitlist). Outcome data on symptom change, impairment/quality of life, health indicator, and behavior change were extracted using Covidence software. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed Risk of bias analysis was conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We used multilevel meta-analysis to synthesize multiple outcomes nested within studies. Open Science Foundation pre-registration: #10.17605/OSF.IO/WV7XP. Results In total, 33 papers representing 27 studies involving 6,879 children and caregivers were included. Twenty-four studies were randomized controlled trials and three were quasi-experimental designs. Seventeen papers reported on treatment trials and 16 reported on prevention trials. We found a small overall effect size (SMD = 0.19, 95% confidence interval [0.11, 0.27]) supporting the superiority of integrated primary care to usual or enhanced usual care. Moderator analyses suggested similar effectiveness between co-located and integrated models and no statistically significant differences were found between treatment and prevention trials. Conclusions Results suggest that integrated primary care is superior to usual and enhanced usual care at improving behavior, quality of life, and symptoms. Integrated primary care research needs improved standards for reporting to promote better synthesis and understanding of the literature.