Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Prevalence and Risk of Recurrence in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: A Meta-analytic Review

BACKGROUND:Acute coronary syndromes (ACS; myocardial infarction or unstable angina) can induce posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and ACS-induced PTSD may increase patients' risk for subsequent cardiac events and mortality. OBJECTIVE:To determine the prevalence of PTSD induced by ACS and to quantify the association between ACS-induced PTSD and adverse clinical outcomes using systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES:Articles were identified by searching Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus, and through manual search of reference lists. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Observational cohort studies that assessed PTSD with specific reference to an ACS event at least 1 month prior. We extracted estimates of the prevalence of ACS-induced PTSD and associations with clinical outcomes, as well as study characteristics. We identified 56 potentially relevant articles, 24 of which met our criteria (N = 2383). Meta-analysis yielded an aggregated prevalence estimate of 12% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9%-16%) for clinically significant symptoms of ACS-induced PTSD in a random effects model. Individual study prevalence estimates varied widely (0%-32%), with significant heterogeneity in estimates explained by the use of a screening instrument (prevalence estimate was 16% [95% CI, 13%-20%] in 16 studies) vs a clinical diagnostic interview (prevalence estimate was 4% [95% CI, 3%-5%] in 8 studies). The aggregated point estimate for the magnitude of the relationship between ACS-induced PTSD and clinical outcomes (ie, mortality and/or ACS recurrence) across the 3 studies that met our criteria (N = 609) suggested a doubling of risk (risk ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.69-2.37) in ACS patients with clinically significant PTSD symptoms relative to patients without PTSD symptoms. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE:This meta-analysis suggests that clinically significant PTSD symptoms induced by ACS are moderately prevalent and are associated with increased risk for recurrent cardiac events and mortality. Further tests of the association of ACS-induced PTSD and clinical outcomes are needed

Rationale, design and methodology of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of escitalopram in prevention of Depression in Acute Coronary Syndrome (DECARD)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The prevalence of depression in patients with acute coronary syndrome, i.e. myocardial infarction and unstable angina, is higher than in the general population. The prevalence of anxiety is higher as well. Both depression and anxiety are associated with poor cardiac outcomes and higher mortality. Comorbid depression in patients with acute coronary syndrome often goes undiagnosed, and it is therefore a challenging task to prevent this risk factor. The study of DEpression in Coronary ARtery Disease (DECARD) is designed to examine if it is possible to prevent depression in patients with acute coronary syndrome.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Two hundred forty non-depressed patients with acute coronary syndrome are randomized to treatment with either escitalopram or placebo for 1 year. Psychiatric and cardiac assessment of patients is performed to evaluate the possibility of preventing depression. Diagnosis of depression and Hamilton Depression Scale are the primary outcome measures.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This is the first study of prevention of depression in patients after acute coronary syndrome with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p><url>http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov.</url> Identifier: NCT00140257</p

Impact of COVID-19 on Primary Care Practice Sites and Their Vulnerable Patients

Purpose: While COVID-19 has upended lives, it has also catalyzed innovation with potential to advance health delivery. Yet, we know little about how the delivery system, and primary care in particular, has responded and how this has impacted vulnerable patients. We aimed to understand the impact of COVID-19 on primary care practice sites and their vulnerable patients and to identify explanations for variation. Approach: We developed and administered a survey to practice managers and physician leaders from 173 primary care practice sites, October-November 2020. We report and graphically depict results from univariate analysis and examine potential explanations for variation in practices' process innovations in response to COVID-19 by assessing bivariate relationships between seven dependent variables and four independent variables. Findings: Among 96 (55.5%) respondents, primary care practice sites on average took more safety (8.5 of 12) than financial (2.5 of 17) precautions in response to COVID-19. Practice sites varied in their efforts to protect patients with vulnerabilities, providing care initially postponed, and experience with virtual visits. Financial risk, practice size, practitioner age, and emergency preparedness explained variation in primary care practices' process innovations. Many practice sites plan to sustain virtual visits, dependent mostly on patient and provider preference and continued reimbursement. Value: While findings indicate rapid and substantial innovation, conditions must enable primary care practice sites to build on and sustain innovations, to support care for vulnerable populations, including those with multiple chronic conditions and socio-economic barriers to health, and to prepare primary care for future emergencies