Associations between DSM-IV diagnosis, psychiatric symptoms and morning cortisol levels in a community sample of adolescents

Purpose. Dysfunction of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical axis (HPA-axis) is implicated in a variety of psychiatric and emotional disorders. In this study, we explore the association between HPA-axis functioning, as measured by morning cortisol, and common psychiatric disorders and symptoms among a community sample of adolescents. Method. Data from a cross-sectional school-based survey of 501 school pupils, aged 15, were used to establish the strength of association between salivary morning cortisol and both diagnosis of psychiatric disorders and a number of psychiatric symptoms, as measured via a computerised psychiatric interview. Analysis, conducted separately by gender, used multiple regressions, adjusting for relevant confounders. Results-á-áWith one exception (a positive association between conduct disorder symptoms and cortisol among females) there was no association between morning cortisol and psychiatric diagnosis or symptoms. However, there was a significant two-way interaction between gender and conduct symptoms, with females showing a positive and males a negative association between cortisol and conduct symptoms. A further three-way interaction showed that while the association between cortisol and conduct symptoms was negative among males with a few mood disorder symptoms, among females with many mood symptoms it was positive. Conclusions. Except in relation to conduct symptoms, dysregulation of morning cortisol levels seems unrelated to any psychiatric disorder or symptoms. However, the relationship between cortisol and conduct symptoms is moderated by both gender and mood symptoms. Findings are compatible with the recent work suggesting research should concentrate on the moderated associations between gender, internalising and externalising symptoms and cortisol, rather than any simple relationship

Pancreatic cancer and depression: myth and truth

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Various studies reported remarkable high incidence rates of depression in cancer patients compared with the general population. Pancreatic cancer is still one of the malignancies with the worst prognosis and therefore it seems quite logical that it is one of the malignancies with the highest incidence rates of major depression.</p> <p>However, what about the scientific background of this relationship? Is depression in patients suffering from pancreatic cancer just due to the confrontation with a life threatening disease and its somatic symptoms or is depression in this particular group of patients a feature of pancreatic cancer per se?</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Several studies provide evidence of depression to precede the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and some studies even blame it for its detrimental influence on survival. The immense impact of emotional distress on quality of life of cancer patients enhances the need for its early diagnosis and adequate treatment. Knowledge about underlying pathophysiological mechanisms is required to provide the optimal therapy.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>A review of the literature on this issue should reveal which are the facts and what is myth.</p

Long-term outcome and prognosis of dissociative disorder with onset in childhood or adolescence

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the majority of cases short-term treatment outcome of juvenile dissociative disorder is rather favourable. In contrast, the long-term course seems to be less positive, but meaningful results are still fragmentary. The aim of this follow-up study is to bridge this gap to some extent describing the long-term outcome of juvenile dissociative disorder in a clinical sample. To our knowledge there is no comparable other long-term follow-up study which is based on a case definition according to actual classification systems using standardized interviews for individual assessment of the patients at the time of follow-up.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The total study group was made up of all patients treated for dissociative disorder at our department for child and adolescent psychiatry between 1983 and 1992 (<it>N </it>= 62). Two of these former patients committed suicide during the follow-up period (3%). We got information on the clinical course of 27 former patients (44%). 17 out of these 27 former patients were female (63%). The mean age of onset of dissociative disorder was11.7 years and the mean follow-up time was 12.4 years. Most of the patients were reassessed personally (n = 23) at a mean age of 24.8 years using structured interviews covering dissociative disorders, other Axis I disorders and personality disorders (Heidelberg Dissociation Inventory HDI; Expert System for Diagnosing Mental Disorders, DIA-X; Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, SCID-II). Social adjustment was assessed by a semi-structured interview and by patient self report (Social Adjustment Scale – Self Report, SAS-SR). Psychosocial outcome variables were additionally assessed in 36 healthy controls (67% female, mean age = 22.9 years).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>At the time of follow-up investigation 82.6% of the patients met the criteria for some form of psychiatric disorder, while 26.1% were still suffering from dissociative disorder. A total of 56.5% presented with an Axis I disorder (especially anxiety, dissociative and somatoform disorders). Personality disorders were seen in 47.8% (especially borderline, obsessive-compulsive and negativistic personality disorders). More dissociative symptoms and inpatient treatment in childhood or adolescence were significantly related to a lower level of psychosocial adjustment in adulthood.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Treatment strategies have to consider that in a significant portion of young patients initial recovery may not be stable over time. Limitations of the study refer to the small sample size and the low rate of former patients taking part in the follow-up investigation.</p

Cost-effectiveness of collaborative care for chronically ill patients with comorbid depressive disorder in the general hospital setting, a randomised controlled trial

Background. Depressive disorder is one of the most common disorders, and is highly prevalent in chronically ill patients. The presence of comorbid depression has a negative influence on quality of life, health care costs, self-care, morbidity, and mortality. Early diagnosis and well-organized treatment of depression has a positive influence on these aspects. Earlier research in the USA has reported good results with regard to the treatment of depression with a collaborative care approach and an antidepressant algorithm. In the UK 'Problem Solving Treatment' has proved to be feasible. However, in the general hospital setting this approach has not yet been evaluated. Methods/Design. CC: DIM (Collaborative Care: Depression Initiative in the Medical setting) is a two-armed randomised controlled trial with randomisation at patient level. The aim of the trial is to evaluate the treatment of depressive disorder in general hospitals in the Netherlands based on a collaborative care framework, including contracting, 'Problem Solving Treatment', antidepressant algorithm, and manual-guided self-help. 126 outpatients with diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or cardiovascular diseases will be randomised to either the intervention group or the control group. Patients will be included if they have been diagnosed with moderate to severe depression, based on the DSM-IV criteria in a two-step screening method. The intervention group will receive treatment based on the collaborative care approach; the control group will receive 'care as usual'. Baseline and follow-up measurements (after 3, 6, 9, and 12 months) will be performed by means of questionnaires. The primary outcome measure is severity of depressive symptoms, as measured with the PHQ-9. The secondary outcome measure is the cost-effectiveness of these treatments according to the TiC-P, the EuroQol and the SF-36. Discussion. Earlier research has indicated that depressive disorder is a chronic, mostly recurrent illness, which tends to cluster with physical comorbidity. Even though the treatment of depressive disorder based on the guidelines for depression is proven effective, these guidelines are often insufficiently adhered to. Collaborative care and 'Problem Solving Treatment' will be specifically tailored to patients with depressive disorders and evaluated in a general hospital setting in the Netherlands

Cost-effectiveness of collaborative care including PST and an antidepressant treatment algorithm for the treatment of major depressive disorder in primary care; a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Depressive disorder is currently one of the most burdensome disorders worldwide. Evidence-based treatments for depressive disorder are already available, but these are used insufficiently, and with less positive results than possible. Earlier research in the USA has shown good results in the treatment of depressive disorder based on a collaborative care approach with Problem Solving Treatment and an antidepressant treatment algorithm, and research in the UK has also shown good results with Problem Solving Treatment. These treatment strategies may also work very well in the Netherlands too, even though health care systems differ between countries. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a two-armed randomised clinical trial, with randomization on patient-level. The aim of the trial is to evaluate the treatment of depressive disorder in primary care in the Netherlands by means of an adapted collaborative care framework, including contracting and adherence-improving strategies, combined with Problem Solving Treatment and antidepressant medication according to a treatment algorithm. Forty general practices will be randomised to either the intervention group or the control group. Included will be patients who are diagnosed with moderate to severe depression, based on DSM-IV criteria, and stratified according to comorbid chronic physical illness. Patients in the intervention group will receive treatment based on the collaborative care approach, and patients in the control group will receive care as usual. Baseline measurements and follow up measures (3, 6, 9 and 12 months) are assessed using questionnaires and an interview. The primary outcome measure is severity of depressive symptoms, according to the PHQ9. Secondary outcome measures are remission as measured with the PHQ9 and the IDS-SR, and cost-effectiveness measured with the TiC-P, the EQ-5D and the SF-36. DISCUSSION: In this study, an American model to enhance care for patients with a depressive disorder, the collaborative care model, will be evaluated for effectiveness in the primary care setting. If effective across the Atlantic and across different health care systems, it is also likely to be an effective strategy to implement in the treatment of major depressive disorder in the Netherlands