Search

Background: Mental health problems are common and are associated with increased disability and health care costs. Problem-Solving Treatment (PST) delivered to these patients by nurses in primary care might be efficient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PST by mental health nurses compared with usual care (UC) by the general practitioner for primary care patients with mental health problems. Methods: An economic evaluation from a societal perspective was performed alongside a randomized clinical trial. Patients with a positive General Health Questionnaire score (score ≥ 4) and who visited their general practitioner at least three times during the past 6 months were eligible. Outcome measures were improvement on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and QALYs based on the EQ-5D. Resource use was measured using a validated questionnaire. Missing cost and effect data were imputed using multiple imputation techniques. Bootstrapping was used to analyze costs and cost-effectiveness of PST compared with UC. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes at 9 months. Mean total costs were €4795 in the PST group and €6857 in the UC group. Costs were not statistically significantly different between the two groups (95% CI -4698;359). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that PST was cost-effective in comparison with UC. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these findings. Conclusions: PST delivered by nurses seems cost-effective in comparison with UC. However, these results should be interpreted with caution, since the difference in total costs was mainly caused by 3 outliers with extremely high indirect costs in the UC group. Trial registration: Nederlands Trial Register ISRCTN51021015 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Major depression is a prevalent mental disorder with a high risk of relapse or recurrence. Only few studies have focused on the cost-effectiveness of interventions aimed at the prevention of relapse or recurrence of depression in primary care. Aim: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a supported Self-help Preventive Cognitive Therapy (S-PCT) added to treatment-as-usual (TAU) compared with TAU alone for patients with a history of depression, currently in remission. Methods: An economic evaluation alongside a multi-center randomised controlled trial was performed (n = 248) over a 12-month follow-up. Outcomes included relapse or recurrence of depression and quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs) based on the EuroQol-5D. Analyses were performed from both a societal and healthcare perspective. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputations. Uncertainty was estimated using bootstrapping and presented using the cost-effectiveness plane and the Cost-Effectiveness Acceptability Curve (CEAC). Cost estimates were adjusted for baseline costs. Results: S-PCT statistically significantly decreased relapse or recurrence by 15% (95%CI 3;28) compared to TAU. Mean total societal costs were €2,114 higher (95%CI -112;4261). From a societal perspective, the ICER for relapse or recurrence was 13,515. At a Willingness To Pay (WTP) of 22,000 €/recurrence prevented, the probability that S-PCT is cost-effective, in comparison with TAU, is 80%. The ICER for QALYs was 63,051. The CEA curve indicated that at a WTP of 30,000 €/QALY gained, the probability that S-PCT is cost-effective compared to TAU is 21%. Conclusions: Though ultimately depending on the WTP of decision makers, we expect that for both relapse or recurrence and QALYs, S-PCT cannot be considered cost-effective compared to TAU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Given the public health significance of poorly treatable co-morbid major depressive disorders (MDD) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) and coronary heart disease (CHD), we need to investigate whether strategies to prevent the development of major depression could reduce its burden of disease. We therefore evaluated the effectiveness of a stepped-care program for subthreshold depression in comparison with usual care in patients with DM2 and/or CHD. Methods: A cluster randomized controlled trial, with 27 primary care centers serving as clusters. A total of 236 DM2 and/or CHD patients with subthreshold depression (nine item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) score ≥ 6, no current MDD according to DSM-IV criteria) were allocated to the intervention group (N = 96) or usual care group (n = 140). The stepped-care program was delivered by trained practice nurses during one year and consisted of four sequential treatment steps: watchful waiting, guided self-help, problem solving treatment and referral to the general practitioner. The primary outcome was the 12-month cumulative incidence of MDD as measured with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Secondary outcomes included severity of depression (measured by PHQ-9) at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Results: Of 236 patients (mean age, 67,5 (SD 10) years; 54.7% men), 210 (89%) completed the MINI at 12 months. The cumulative incidence of MDD was 9 of 89 (10.1%) participants in the intervention group and 12 of 121 (9.9%) participants in the usual care group. We found no statistically significant overall effect of the intervention (OR = 1.21; 95% confidence interval (0.12 to 12.41)) and there were no statistically significant differences in the course or severity of depressive symptoms between the two groups. Conclusions: This study suggest that Step-Dep was not more effective in preventing MDD than usual care in a primary care population with DM2 and/or CHD and subthreshold depression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ) is originally a Dutch 50 item questionnaire developed in primary care to assess distress, depression, anxiety and somatization. We aimed to develop and validate a Turkish translation of the 4DSQ. Methods: The questionnaire was translated using forward and backward translation, and pilot testing. Turkish 4DSQ-data were collected in 352 consecutive adult primary care patients. For comparison, gender and age matched Dutch reference data were drawn from a larger existing dataset. We used differential item and test functioning (DIF and DTF) analysis to validate the Turkish translation to the original Dutch questionnaire. Through additional inquiry we tried to obtain more insight in the background of DIF in some items. Results: Twenty-one items displayed DIF but this impacted only the distress and depression scores. Inquiry among Turkish people revealed that the reason for DTF in the distress scale was probably related to unfavourable socio-economic circumstances. On the other hand, the likely explanation for DTF in the depression scale appeared to be grounded in culturally and religiously determined optimistic beliefs. Raising the distress cut-offs by 2 points and lowering the depression cut-offs by 1 point ensures that individual Turkish 4DSQ scores be correctly interpreted. Conclusions: The Turkish translation of the 4DSQ (named: "Dört-Boyutlu Yakınma Listesi", 4BYL) measures the same constructs as the original Dutch questionnaire. Turkish anxiety and somatization scores can be interpreted in the same way as Dutch scores. However, when interpreting Turkish distress and depression scores, DTF should be taken into account. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic pain is commonly co-morbid with a depressive or anxiety disorder. Objective of this study is to examine the influence of depression, along with anxiety, on pain-related disability, pain intensity, and pain location in a large sample of adults with and without a depressive and/or anxiety disorder. The study population consisted of 2981 participants with a depressive, anxiety, co-morbid depressive and anxiety disorder, remitted disorder or no current disorder (controls). Severity of depressive and anxiety symptoms was also assessed. In separate multinomial regression analyses, the association of presence of depressive or anxiety disorders and symptom severity with the Chronic Pain Grade and location of pain was explored. Presence of a depressive (OR = 6.67; P<.001), anxiety (OR = 4.84; P<.001), or co-morbid depressive and anxiety disorder (OR = 30.26; P<.001) was associated with the Chronic Pain Grade. Moreover, symptom severity was associated with more disabling and severely limiting pain. Also, a remitted depressive or anxiety disorder showed more disabling and severely limiting pain (OR = 3.53; P<.001) as compared to controls. A current anxiety disorder (OR = 2.96; p<.001) and a co-morbid depressive and anxiety disorder (OR = 5.15; P<.001) were more strongly associated with cardio-respiratory pain, than gastro-intestinal or musculoskeletal pain. These findings remain after adjustment for chronic cardio respiratory illness. Patients with a current and remitted depressive and/or anxiety disorder and those with more severe symptoms have more disabling pain and pain of cardio-respiratory nature, than persons without a depressive or anxiety disorder. This warrants further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Depressive symptoms are highly prevalent in old age, but they remain mostly untreated. Several clinical trials have shown promising results in preventing or reducing depressive symptoms. However, it is not clear how robust these effects are in the real world of day-today care. Therefore, we have implemented the 'Lust for Life' programme, which significantly reduced depressive symptoms in community-dwelling older adults in the first three months after implementation. This mixed-methods study was conducted alongside the trial to develop a contextualised understanding of factors affecting the implementation. Methods A total of 263 persons of 65 years and older with depressive symptoms were recruited from 18 general practices and home care organizations in the Netherlands. We used qualitative data (in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with participants with depressive symptoms and healthcare professionals) as well as quantitative data (longitudinal data on the severity of depressive symptoms) to explore hindering and facilitating factors to the implementation of the 'Lust for Life' programme. Results The uptake of the routine screening was poor and imposed significant burdens on participants and healthcare professionals, and drop-out rates were high. Participants' perceived mental problems and need for care played a key role in their decision to participate in the programme and to step up to consequent interventions. Older people preferred interventions that focused on interpersonal contact. The programme was only effective when delivered by mental healthcare nurses, compared to home care nurses with limited experience in providing mental healthcare. Conclusions The intervention programme was effective in reducing depressive symptoms, and valuable lessons can be learned from this implementation trial. Given the low uptake and high investment, we advise against routine screening for depressive symptoms in general healthcare. Further, agreement between the participant and healthcare professional on perceived need for care and intervention is vital. Rather than providing a stepped care intervention programme, we showed that offering only one single preference-led intervention is effective. Lastly, since the provision of the interventions seems to ask for specific skills and experiences, it might require mental healthcare nurses to offer the programme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The comorbidity of pain and depression is associated with high disease burden for patients in terms of disability, wellbeing, and use of medical care. Patients with major and minor depression often present themselves with pain to a general practitioner and recognition of depression in such cases is low, but evolving. Also, physical symptoms, including pain, in major depressive disorder, predict a poorer response to treatment. A multi-faceted, patient-tailored treatment programme, like collaborative care, is promising. However, treatment of chronic pain conditions in depressive patients has, so far, received limited attention in research. Cost effectiveness of an integrated approach of pain in depressed patients has not been studied. This article describes the aims and design of a study to evaluate effects and costs of collaborative care with the antidepressant duloxetine for patients with pain symptoms and a depressive disorder, compared to collaborative care with placebo and compared to duloxetine alone. Methods/Design: This study is a placebo controlled double blind, three armed randomized multi centre trial. Patients with (sub)chronic pain and a depressive disorder are randomized to either a) collaborative care with duloxetine, b) collaborative care with placebo or c) duloxetine alone. 189 completers are needed to attain sufficient power to show a clinically significant effect of 0.6 SD on the primary outcome measures (PHQ-9 score). Data on depression, anxiety, mental and physical health, medication adherence, medication tolerability, quality of life, patient-doctor relationship, coping, health resource use and productivity will be collected at baseline and after three, six, nine and twelve months. In the collaborative care conditions a) and b), a care-manager provides Problem Solving Treatment and integrated symptom management guidance with a self-help manual, monitors depressive and pain symptoms, and refers patients to a physiotherapist for treatment according to a 'Graded Activity' protocol. A psychiatrist provides duloxetine or placebo and pain medication according to algorithms, and also monitors pain and depressive symptoms. In condition c), the psychiatrist prescribes duloxetine without collaborative care. After 12 weeks, the patient is referred back to the general practitioner with a consultation letter, with information for further treatment of the patient. Discussion: This study enables us to show the value of a closely monitored integrated treatment model above usual pharmacological treatment. Furthermore, a comparison with a placebo arm enables us to evaluate effectiveness of duloxetine in this population in a real life setting. Also, this study will provide evidence-based treatments and tools for their implementation in practice. This will facilitate generalization and implementation of results of this study. Moreover, patients included in this study are screened for pain symptoms, differentiating between nociceptive and neuropathic pain. Therefore, pain relief can be thoroughly evaluated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To identify associations of patient characteristics (predisposing, enabling and need factors) with guideline-concordant care for anxiety and depression in primary care.Design: Analysis of data from the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA).Participants: Seven hundred and twenty-one patients with a current anxiety or depressive disorder, recruited from 67 general practitioners (GPs), were included.Measures: Diagnoses according to the Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV) were made using a structured and widely validated assessment. Socio-demographic and enabling characteristics, severity of symptoms, disability, (under treatment for) chronic somatic conditions, perceived need for care, beliefs and evaluations of care were measured by questionnaires. Actual care data were derived from electronic medical records. Criteria for guideline-concordant care were based on general practice guidelines, issued by the Dutch College of General Practitioners.Results: Two hundred and eighty-one (39%) patients received guideline-concordant care. High education level, accessibility of care, comorbidity of anxiety and depression, and severity and disability scores were positively associated with receiving guideline-concordant care in univariate analyses. In multivariate multi-level logistic regression models, significant associations with the clinical need factors disappeared. Positive evaluations of accessibility of care increased the chance (OR = 1.31; 95%-CI = 1.05-1.65; p = 0.02) of receiving guideline-concordant care, as well as perceiving any need for medication (OR = 2.99; 95%-CI = 1.84-4.85; p < 0.001), counseling (OR = 2.25; 95%-CI = 1.29-3.95; p = 0.005) or a referral (OR = 1.83; 95%-CI = 1.09-3.09; p = 0.02). A low educational level decreased the odds (OR = 0.33; 95%-CI = 0.11-0.98; p = 0.04) of receiving guideline-concordant care.Conclusions: This study shows that education level, accessibility of care and patients' perceived needs for care are more strongly associated with the delivery of guideline-concordant care for anxiety or depression than clinical need factors. Initiatives to improve GPs' communication skills around mental health issues, and to improve recognition of people suffering from anxiety disorders, could increase the number of patients receiving treatment for depression and anxiety in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Little is known about the prevalence of depression in older patients consulting their general practitioner. Aim To estimate the prevalence of major and minor depression in older GP attendees. Design Cross sectional two-stage screening design. Setting Seventeen GPs in urban and 41 GPs in rural settings. Methods Data of The West Friesland Study were used. Five thousand, six hundered and eight-six GP attendees of 55 years and older filled in the Geriatric Depression Scale—15 items as a screening instrument for depression (response 62%). Of those screened positive on the GDS-15, 846 (77.5%) were interviewed using the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD). A random sample (n = 102) scoring below the threshold of the GDS-15 was interviewed to estimate the proportion of false negatives. Results Major depression was prevalent in 13.7% and minor depression in 10.2% of the patients. Depressed patients were older (mean difference 0.7 years; p = 0.037), more often female (OR 1.3; p < 0.001) and lived more often in urban districts (OR 1.5; p < 0.001). Patients with major depression were younger (mean difference 1.9 years; p < 0.001) and more often female (OR 1.4; p = 0.026) than those with a minor depression. Only 22.9% of the patients with a major depression were treated with antidepressants. Conclusion Depression in older GP attendees is a very common health problem. Further research should focus on identifying those groups of patients with high risk of persistence of depression. This could help to focus the limited resources available in general practice to those patients in whom treatment is most urgently needed. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Comorbid depression is common in patients with type 2 diabetes (DM2) and/or coronary heart disease (CHD) and is associated with poor quality of life and adverse health outcomes. However, little is known about patients' and practice nurses' (PNs) perceptions of depression. Tailoring care to these perceptions may affect depression detection and patient engagement with treatment and prevention programs. This study aimed to explore patients' and PNs' perceptions of depression in patients with DM2/CHD screened for subthreshold depression. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted as part of a Dutch stepped-care prevention project. Using a purposive sampling strategy, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 15 patients and 9 PNs. After consent, all interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed independently by two researchers with Atlas.ti.5.7.1 software. The patient and PN datasets were inspected for commonalities using a constant comparative method, from which a final thematic framework was generated. Results: Main themes were: illness perception, need for care and causes of depression. Patients generally considered themselves at least mildly depressed, but perceived severity levels were not always congruent with Patient Health Questionnaire 9 scores at inclusion. Initially recognizing or naming their mental state as a (subthreshold) depression was difficult for some. Having trouble sleeping was frequently experienced as the most burdensome symptom. Most experienced a need for care; psycho-educational advice and talking therapy were preferred. Perceived symptom severity corresponded with perceived need for care, but did not necessarily match help-seeking behaviour. Main named barriers to help-seeking were experienced stigma and lack of awareness of depression and mental health care possibilities. PNs frequently perceived patients as not depressed and with minimal need for specific care except for attention. Participants pointed to a mix of causes of depression, most related to negative life events and circumstances and perceived indirect links with DM2/CHD. Conclusion: Data of the interviewed patients and PNs suggest that they have different perceptions about (subthreshold) depressive illness and the need for care, although views on its causes seem to overlap more. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]