Search

Abstract Background Depression is common in coronary heart disease (CHD) and increases the incidence of coronary symptoms and death in CHD patients. Interventions feasible for use in primary care are needed to improve both mood and cardiac outcomes. The UPBEAT-UK programme of research has been funded by the NHS National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) to explore the relationship between CHD and depression and to develop a new intervention for use in primary care. Methods Using the Medical Research Council (MRC) guidelines for developing and evaluating complex interventions, we conducted a systematic review and qualitative research to develop a primary care-based nurse-led intervention to improve mood and cardiac outcomes in patients with CHD and depression. Iterative literature review was used to synthesise our empirical work and to identify evidence and theory to inform the intervention. Results We developed a primary care-based nurse-led personalised care intervention which utilises elements of case management to promote self management. Following biopsychosocial assessment, a personalised care plan is devised. Nurses trained in behaviour change techniques facilitate patients to address the problems important to them. Identification and utilisation of existing resources is promoted. Nurse time is conserved through telephone follow up. Conclusions Application of the MRC framework for complex interventions has allowed us to develop an evidence based intervention informed by patient and clinician preferences and established theory. The feasibility and acceptability of this intervention is now being tested further in an exploratory trial.

Abstract Background Community studies reveal people with coronary heart disease (CHD) are twice as likely to be depressed as the general population and that this co-morbidity negatively affects the course and outcome of both conditions. There is evidence for the efficacy of collaborative care and case management for depression treatment, and whilst NICE guidelines recommend these approaches only where depression has not responded to psychological, pharmacological, or combined treatments, these care approaches may be particularly relevant to the needs of people with CHD and depression in the earlier stages of stepped care in primary care settings. Methods This pilot randomised controlled trial will evaluate whether a simple intervention involving a personalised care plan, elements of case management and regular telephone review is a feasible and acceptable intervention that leads to better mental and physical health outcomes for these patients. The comparator group will be usual general practitioner (GP) care. 81 participants have been recruited from CHD registers of 15 South London general practices. Eligible participants have probable major depression identified by a score of ≥8 on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression subscale (HADS-D) together with symptomatic CHD identified using the Modified Rose Angina Questionnaire. Consenting participants are randomly allocated to usual care or the personalised care intervention which involves a comprehensive assessment of each participant’s physical and mental health needs which are documented in a care plan, followed by regular telephone reviews by the case manager over a 6-month period. At each review, the intervention participant’s mood, function and identified problems are reviewed and the case manager uses evidence based behaviour change techniques to facilitate achievement of goals specified by the patient with the aim of increasing the patient’s self efficacy to solve their problems. Depressive symptoms measured by HADS score will be collected at baseline and 1, 6- and 12 months post randomisation. Other outcomes include CHD symptoms, quality of life, wellbeing and health service utilisation. Discussion This practical and patient-focused intervention is potentially an effective and accessible approach to the health and social care needs of people with depression and CHD in primary care. Trial registration ISRCTN21615909.

Abstract Background Depression is common in coronary heart disease (CHD). Affected patients have an increased incidence of coronary symptoms and death. Little is known about how best to manage primary care patients with both CHD and depression. This study is part of the UPBEAT-UK programme of research and was designed to understand general practitioners' (GPs) and practice nurses' (PNs) views and experience of managing depression in CHD. Methods Individual in-depth interviews with 10 GPs and 12 PNs in South East London. Data were analysed using constant comparison. Results GPs and PNs had similar views. Distress following diagnosis or a cardiac event was considered to resolve spontaneously; if it endured or became severe it was treated as depression. GPs and PNs felt that psychosocial problems contributed to depression in patients with CHD. However, uncertainty was expressed as to their perceived role and responsibility in addressing these. In this respect, depression in patients with CHD was considered similar to depression in other patients and no coherent management approach specific for depression in CHD was identified. An individualised approach was favoured, but clinicians were unsure how to achieve this in the face of conflicting patient preferences and the treatment options they considered available. Conclusions GPs and PNs view depression in CHD similarly to depression uncomplicated by physical illness. However, uncertainty exists as to how best to manage depression associated psychosocial issues. Personalised interventions are needed which account for individual need and which enable and encourage clinicians and patients to make use of existing resources to address the psychosocial factors which contribute to depression.

Abstract Background Current management in primary care of depression, with or without comorbid physical illness, has been found to be suboptimal. We therefore conducted a systematic review to identify clinician perceived barriers to and facilitators for good depression care. Methods We conducted a systematic literature search to identify qualitative and quantitative studies published in the UK since 2000 of GPs' and practice nurses' attitudes to the management of depression. We used principles from meta-ethnography to identify common and refuted themes across studies. Results We identified 7 qualitative and 10 quantitative studies; none concerned depression and co-morbid physical illness of any kind. The studies of managing patients with a primary diagnosis of depression indicated that GPs and PNs are unsure of the exact nature of the relationship between mood and social problems and of their role in managing it. Among some clinicians, ambivalent attitudes to working with depressed people, a lack of confidence, the use of a limited number of management options and a belief that a diagnosis of depression is stigmatising complicate the management of depression. Conclusions Detection and management of depression is considered complex. In particular, primary care clinicians need guidance to address the social needs of depressed patients. It is not known whether the same issues are important when managing depressed people with co-morbid physical illness.

Abstract Background Coronary heart disease and depression are both common health problems and by 2020 will be the two leading causes of disability worldwide. Depression has been found to be more common in patients with coronary heart disease but the nature of this relationship is uncertain. In the United Kingdom general practitioners are now being remunerated for case-finding for depression in patients with coronary heart disease, however it is unclear how general practitioners should manage these patients. We aim to explore the relationship between coronary heart disease and depression in a primary care population and to develop an intervention for patients with coronary heart disease and depression. Methods/design This programme of research will consist of 4 inter-related studies. A 4 year prospective cohort study of primary care patients with coronary heart disease will be conducted to explore the relationship between coronary heart disease and depression. Within this, a nested case-control biological study will investigate genetic and blood-biomarkers as predictors of depression in this sample. Two qualitative studies, one of patients' perspectives of treatments for coronary heart disease and co-morbid depression and one of primary care professionals' views on the management of patients with coronary heart disease and depression will inform the development of an intervention for this patient group. A feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial will then be conducted. Discussion This study will provide information on the relationship between coronary heart disease and depression that will allow health services to determine the efficiency of case-finding for depression in this patient group. The results of the cohort study will also provide information on risk factors for depression. The study will provide evidence on the efficacy and feasibility of a joint patient and professional led intervention and data necessary to plan a definitive randomised controlled trial of the intervention.

Two of the authors were general practitioners (GPs) in the 1980s, when there was much interest in consultation, stimulated by the psychoanalyst Michael Balint. Around one in five psychiatrists worked in consultation liaison in general practice at that time, but in the 1990s this was stopped to increase the focus on psychosis. However, the Royal College of Psychiatrists and Royal College of General Practitioners have a strong history of collaboration, and many psychiatrists, nurses and GPs trained together in the national Trailblazers programme, focusing on service delivery in all areas of mental health. Recent proposals for mental health community collaborative networks from the NHS provide an opportunity for psychiatrists to work with GPs and a range of other professionals once more, for complex non-psychotic illness that cannot be helped by Improving Access to Psychological Therapies services. The circle is closing for GPs like us, who were working in the 1980s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]