Universality of interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) problem areas in Thai depressed patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many studies have shown the efficacy of interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) on depression; however, there are limited studies concerning the universality of the IPT problem areas in different countries. This study identifies whether the interpersonal problem areas defined in the IPT manual are endorsed by Thai depressed patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The Thai Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (Thai HRSD) and Thai Interpersonal Questionnaire were used to assess 90 depressed and 90 non-depressed subjects in King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, during July 2007 - January 2008. The association between interpersonal problem areas/sociodemographic variables and depressive disorder were analyzed by chi-square test. A multivariable analysis was performed by using logistic regression to identify the remaining factors associated with depressive disorder.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Most of the subjects were young to middle-aged females living in Bangkok and the Central Provinces. All four interpersonal problem areas (grief, interpersonal role disputes, role transitions, and interpersonal deficits) were increased in the depressed subjects as compared to the non-depressed subjects, as were the sociodemographic variables (low education, unemployment, low income, and having a physical illness). Logistic regression showed that all interpersonal problem areas still remained problems associated with depression (grief: adjusted OR = 6.01, 95%CI = 1.93 - 18.69, p < 0.01; interpersonal role disputes: adjusted OR = 6.01, 95%CI = 2.18 - 16.52, p < 0.01; role transitions: adjusted OR = 26.30, 95%CI = 7.84 - 88.25, p < 0.01; and interpersonal deficits: adjusted OR = 2.92, 95%CI = 1.12 - 7.60, p < 0.05).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>All four interpersonal problem areas were applicable to Thai depressed patients.</p

Level of agreement between self-rated and clinician-rated instruments when measuring major depressive disorder in the Thai elderly: a 1-year assessment as part of the THAISAD study

Nahathai Wongpakaran,1 Tinakon Wongpakaran,1 Kamonporn Wannarit,2 Nattha Saisavoey,2 Manee Pinyopornpanish,1 Peeraphon Lueboonthavatchai,3 Nattaporn Apisiridej,4 Thawanrat Srichan,5 Ruk Ruktrakul,5 Sirina Satthapisit,6 Daochompu Nakawiro,7 Thanita Hiranyatheb,7 Anakevich Temboonkiat,8 Namtip Tubtimtong,9 Sukanya Rakkhajeekul,9 Boonsanong Wongtanoi,10 Sitthinant Tanchakvaranont,11 Putipong Bookkamana,12 Usaree Srisutasanavong,1 Raviwan Nivataphand,3 Donruedee Petchsuwan4 1Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Kingdom of Thailand; 2Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Kingdom of Thailand; 3Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Kingdom of Thailand; 4Trang Hospital, Trang, Kingdom of Thailand; 5Lampang Hospital, Lampang, Kingdom of Thailand; 6Khon Kaen Hospital, Khon Kaen, Kingdom of Thailand; 7Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Kingdom of Thailand; 8Phramongkutklao Hospital, Bangkok, Kingdom of Thailand; 9Faculty of Medicine Naresuan University, Pitsanulok, Kingdom of Thailand; 10Srisangwal Hospital, Mae Hong Son, Kingdom of Thailand; 11Queen Savang Vadhana Memorial Hospital, Chonburi, Kingdom of Thailand; 12Faculty of Science, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Kingdom of Thailand Purpose: Whether self-reporting and clinician-rated depression scales correlate well with one another when applied to older adults has not been well studied, particularly among Asian samples. This study aimed to compare the level of agreement among measurements used in assessing major depressive disorder (MDD) among the Thai elderly and the factors associated with the differences found. Patients and methods: This was a prospective, follow-up study of elderly patients diagnosed with MDD and receiving treatment in Thailand. The Mini International Neuropsychiatric Inventory (MINI), 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17), 30-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-30), 32-item Inventory of Interpersonal Problems scale, Revised Experience of Close Relationships scale, ten-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10), and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support were used. Follow-up assessments were conducted after 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Results: Among the 74 patients, the mean age was 68&plusmn;6.02 years, and 86% had MDD. Regarding the level of agreement found between GDS-30 and MINI, Kappa ranged between 0.17 and 0.55, while for Gwet&#39;s AC1 the range was 0.49 to 0.91. The level of agreement was found to be lowest at baseline, and increased during follow-up visits. The correlation between HAMD-17 and GDS-30 scores was 0.17 (P=0.16) at baseline, then 0.36 to 0.41 in later visits (P&lt;0.01). The PSS-10 score was found to be positively correlated with GDS-30 at baseline, and predicted the level of disagreement found between the clinicians and patients when reporting on MDD. Conclusion: The level of agreement between the GDS, MINI, and HAMD was found to be different at baseline when compared to later assessments. Patients who produced a low GDS score were given a high rating by the clinicians. An additional self-reporting tool such as the PSS-10 could, therefore, be used in such under-reporting circumstances. Keywords: late-life depression, measurement, correlatio