Depression dimensions : integrating clinical signs and symptoms from the perspectives of clinicians and patients

Background Several studies have recognized that depression is a multidimensional construct, although the scales that are currently available have been shown to be limited in terms of the ability to investigate the multidimensionality of depression. The objective of this study is to integrate information from instruments that measure depression from different perspectives–a self-report symptomatic scale, a clinician-rated scale, and a clinician-rated scale of depressive signs–in order to investigate the multiple dimensions underlying the depressive construct. Methods A sample of 399 patients from a mood disorders outpatient unit was investigated with the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), and the Core Assessment of Psychomotor Change (CORE). Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) were used to investigate underlying dimensions of depression, including item level analysis with factor loadings and item thresholds. Results A solution of six depression dimensions has shown good-fit to the data, with no cross-loading items, and good interpretability. Item-level analysis revealed that the multidimensional depressive construct might be organized into a continuum of severity in the following ascending order: sexual, cognitive, insomnia, appetite, non-interactiveness/motor retardation, and agitation.Conclusion An integration of both signs and symptoms, as well as the perspectives of clinicians and patients, might be a good clinical and research alternative for the investigation ofmultidimensional issues within the depressive syndrome. As predicted by theoretical models of depression, the melancholic aspects of depression (non-interactiveness/motor retardation and agitation) lie at the severe end of the depressive continuum

Factors related to positive and negative outcomes in psychiatric inpatients in a General Hospital Psychiatric Unit: a proposal for an outcomes index

Background General Hospital Psychiatric Units have a fundamental importance in the mental health care systems. However, there is a lack of studies regarding the level of improvement of patients in this type of facility. Objective To assess factors related to good and poor outcomes in psychiatric inpatients using an index composed by clinical parameters easily measured. Methods Length of stay (LOS), Global Assessment of Functioning (variation and at discharge) and Clinical Global Impression (severity and improvement) were used to build a ten-point improvement index (I-Index). Records of psychiatric inpatients of a general hospital during an 18-month period were analyzed. Three groups (poor, intermediate and good outcomes) were compared by univariate and multivariate models according to clinical and sociodemographic variables. Results Two hundred and fifty patients were included, with a percentage in the groups with poor, regular and good outcomes of 16.4%, 59,6% and 24.0% respectively. Poor outcome at the discharge was associated mainly with lower education, transient disability, antipsychotics use, chief complaint “behavioral change/aggressiveness” and psychotic features. Multivariate analysis found a higher OR for diagnoses of “psychotic disorders” and “personality disorders” and others variables in relation to protective categories in the poor outcome group compared to the good outcome group. Discussion Our I-Index proved to be an indicator of that allows an easy and more comprehensive evaluation to assess outcomes of inpatients than just LOS. Different interventions addressed to conditions such as psychotic disorders and disruptive chief complaints are necessary

Tradução e adaptação cultural para o português brasileiro do Temperament and Personality Questionnaire

Introduction: The Temperament & Personality Questionnaire (T&P) is a self-report instrument designed to evaluate personality styles overrepresented in patients with depression. This report briefly describes the translation and adaptation of the T&P into Brazilian Portuguese. Methods: The procedures, which included 10 steps, followed guidelines for the adaptation of self-report instruments defined by the International Society For Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Results: The author of the original T&P questionnaire authorized and participated in the translation conducted by the authors and independent native speakers. Evaluation of the translated questionnaire indicated that only minor adjustments were required in the Portuguese version. Conclusions: The Brazilian version of T&P, translated and adapted following a rigid standardized process, is available for use free of charge and may be especially useful in pursuing links between personality styles and depressive conditions.Introdução: O Temperament & Personality Questionnaire (T&P) é um instrumento de autorrelato criado para avaliar quais estilos de personalidade têm maior representação em pacientes com depressão. Este trabalho descreve brevemente o processo de tradução e adaptação do T&P para o português brasileiro. Métodos: A tradução e a adaptação cultural se desenvolveram em 10 passos e seguiram as diretrizes para adaptação de instrumentos de autorrelato definidas por força-tarefa do ISPOR (International Society For Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research). Resultados: O autor do questionário T&P original autorizou e participou da tradução feita pelos autores e por falantes nativos independentes. A avaliação do questionário traduzido mostrou que apenas pequenos ajustes foram necessários na versão em português. Conclusões: A versão brasileira do questionário T&P, traduzido e adaptado seguindo um rígido processo padronizado, está disponível gratuitamente e pode ser de grande utilidade na pesquisa sobre as relações entre estilos de personalidade e quadros depressivos

Biological differences between melancholic and nonmelancholic depression subtyped by the CORE measure

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare melancholic patients rated by the CORE measure of observable psychomotor disturbance with nonmelancholic and control subjects across a set of biomarkers. Methods: Depressed patients were classified as melancholic or nonmelancholic by using the CORE measure. Both groups of patients, as well as control subjects, were compared for a set of clinical and laboratory measures. Serum levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor, of two markers of oxidative stress (protein carbonyl content [PCC] and thiobarbituric acid reactive substances [TBARS]), and of several immunity markers (interleukin [IL]-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, IL-17, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, and interferon-gamma) were analyzed. Results: Thirty-three depressed patients and 54 healthy controls were studied. Depressive patients showed higher IL-4, IL-6, and PCC values than healthy controls. Thirteen (39%) of the depressed patients were assigned as melancholic by the CORE measure. They generated lower interferon-gamma (compared with nonmelancholic depressed patients) and TBARS (compared with both the nonmelancholic subset and controls) and returned higher IL-6 levels than controls. Both depressive groups generated higher PCC scores than controls, with no difference between melancholic and nonmelancholic subsets. Conclusion: A sign-based measure to rate melancholia was able to replicate and extend biological findings discriminating melancholic depression. Signs of psychomotor disturbance may be a useful diagnostic measure of melancholia

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors for anxiety, obsessive-compulsive, and stress disorders : a 3-level network metaanalysis

Background: Anxiety, obsessive-compulsive, and stress-related disorders frequently co-occur, and patients often present symptoms of several domains. Treatment involves the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), but data on comparative efficacy and acceptability are lacking. We aimed to compare the efficacy of SSRIs, SNRIs, and placebo in multiple symptom domains in patients with these diagnoses over the lifespan through a 3-level network meta-analysis. Methods and findings: We searched for published and unpublished randomized controlled trials that aimed to assess the efficacy of SSRIs or SNRIs in participants (adults and children) with diagnosis of any anxiety, obsessive-compulsive, or stress-related disorder in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to 23 April 2015, with an update on 11 November 2020. We supplemented electronic database searches with manual searches for published and unpublished randomized controlled trials registered in publicly accessible clinical trial registries and pharmaceutical companies’ databases. No restriction was made regarding comorbidities with any other mental disorder, participants’ age and sex, blinding of participants and researchers, date of publication, or study language. The primary outcome was the aggregate measure of internalizing symptoms of these disorders. Secondary outcomes included specific symptom domains and treatment discontinuation rate. We estimated standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 3-level network meta-analysis with random slopes by study for medication and assessment instrument. Risk of bias appraisal was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias tool. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017069090). We analyzed 469 outcome measures from 135 studies (n = 30,245). All medications were more effective placebo for the aggregate measure of internalizing symptoms (SMD −0.56, 95% CI −0.62 to −0.51, p < 0.001), for all symptom domains, and in patients from all diagnostic categories. We also found significant results when restricting to the most used assessment instrument for each diagnosis; nevertheless, this restriction led to exclusion of 72.71% of outcome measures. Pairwise comparisons revealed only small differences between medications in efficacy and acceptability. Limitations include the moderate heterogeneity found in most outcomes and the moderate risk of bias identified in most of the trials. Conclusions: In this study, we observed that all SSRIs and SNRIs were effective for multiple symptom domains, and in patients from all included diagnostic categories. We found minimal differences between medications concerning efficacy and acceptability. This three-level network meta-analysis contributes to an ongoing discussion about the true benefit of antidepressants with robust evidence, considering the significantly larger quantity of data and higher statistical power when compared to previous studies. The 3-level approach allowed us to properly assess the efficacy of these medications on internalizing psychopathology, avoiding potential biases related to the exclusion of information due to distinct assessment instruments, and to explore the multilevel structure of transdiagnostic efficacy

Factors related to positive and negative outcomes in psychiatric inpatients in a General Hospital Psychiatric Unit: a proposal for an outcomes index

Background General Hospital Psychiatric Units have a fundamental importance in the mental health care systems. However, there is a lack of studies regarding the level of improvement of patients in this type of facility. Objective To assess factors related to good and poor outcomes in psychiatric inpatients using an index composed by clinical parameters easily measured. Methods Length of stay (LOS), Global Assessment of Functioning (variation and at discharge) and Clinical Global Impression (severity and improvement) were used to build a ten-point improvement index (I-Index). Records of psychiatric inpatients of a general hospital during an 18-month period were analyzed. Three groups (poor, intermediate and good outcomes) were compared by univariate and multivariate models according to clinical and sociodemographic variables. Results Two hundred and fifty patients were included, with a percentage in the groups with poor, regular and good outcomes of 16.4%, 59,6% and 24.0% respectively. Poor outcome at the discharge was associated mainly with lower education, transient disability, antipsychotics use, chief complaint &#8220;behavioral change/aggressiveness&#8221; and psychotic features. Multivariate analysis found a higher OR for diagnoses of &#8220;psychotic disorders&#8221; and &#8220;personality disorders&#8221; and others variables in relation to protective categories in the poor outcome group compared to the good outcome group. Discussion Our I-Index proved to be an indicator of that allows an easy and more comprehensive evaluation to assess outcomes of inpatients than just LOS. Different interventions addressed to conditions such as psychotic disorders and disruptive chief complaints are necessary

Prevalência e tendências temporais de transtornos mentais necessitando de tratamento de internação na cidade de Porto Alegre: Um estudo de toda a cidade incluindo todas as internações por motivo de saúde mental no sistema público de 2013-2017

Objectives: To investigate the 5-year prevalence of patients admitted to public inpatient care units due to a mental disorder, stratifying them by age group and diagnosis, and to assess trends of admissions over this time period in Porto Alegre. Methods: All admissions to the public mental health care system regulated by the city-owned electronic system Administração Geral dos Hospitais (AGHOS) were included in the analysis. The total population size was obtained by estimations of Fundação de Economia e Estatística (FEE). General information about 5-year prevalence of inpatient admissions, time-series trends e prevalence by age groups and diagnosis were presented. Results: There were 32,608 admissions over the 5-year period analyzed. The overall prevalence of patients was 1.62% among the total population, 0.01% among children, 1.12% among adolescents, 2.28% among adults and 0.93% among the elderly. The most common diagnosis was drug-related, followed by mood, alcohol-related and psychotic disorders. There was a linear trend showing an increase in the number of admissions from 2013 to the midst of 2014, which dropped in 2015. Conclusions: Admissions due to mental disorders are relatively common, mainly among adults and related to drug use and mood disorders. Time trends varied slightly over the 5 years. Prevalence rates in real-world settings might be useful for policymakers interested in planning the public mental health system in large Brazilian cities