Using data linkage to electronic patient records to assess the validity of selected mental health diagnoses in English Hospital Episode Statistics (HES)

<div><p>Background</p><p>Administrative data can be used to support research, such as in the UK Biobank. Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) are national data for England that include contain ICD-10 diagnoses for inpatient mental healthcare episodes, but the validity of these diagnoses for research purposes has not been assessed.</p><p>Methods</p><p>250 peoples' HES records were selected based on a HES recorded inpatient stay at the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, a wider schizophrenia spectrum disorder, bipolar affective disorder or unipolar depression. A gold-standard research diagnosis was made using Clinical Records Interactive Search pseudonymised electronic patient records using, and the OPCRIT+ algorithm.</p><p>Results</p><p>Positive predictive value at the level of lifetime psychiatric disorder was 100%, and at the level of lifetime diagnosis in the four categories of schizophrenia, wider schizophrenia spectrum, bipolar or unipolar depression was 73% (68–79). Agreement varied by diagnosis, with schizophrenia having the highest PPV at 90% (80–96). Each person had an average of five psychiatric HES records. An algorithm that looked at the last recorded psychiatric diagnosis led to greatest overall agreement with the research diagnosis.</p><p>Discussion</p><p>For people who have a HES record from a psychiatric admission with a diagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorder, bipolar affective disorder or unipolar depression, HES records appear to be a good indicator of a mental disorder, and can provide a diagnostic category with reasonable certainty. For these diagnoses, HES records can be an effective way of ascertaining psychiatric diagnosis.</p></div

Definitions and factors associated with subthreshold depressive conditions:a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Subthreshold depressive disorders (minor and subthrehold depression) have been defined in a wide range of forms, varying on the number of symptoms and duration required. Disability associated with these conditions has also been reported. Our aim was to review the different definitions and to determine factors associated with these conditions in order to clarify the nosological implications of these disorders. METHODS: A Medline search was conducted of the published literature between January 2001 and September 2011. Bibliographies of the retrieved papers were also analysed. RESULTS: There is a wide heterogeneity in the definition and diagnostic criteria of minor and subthreshold depression. Minor depression was defined according to DSM-IV criteria. Regarding subthreshold depression, also called subclinical depression or subsyndromal symptomatic depression, between 2 and 5 depressive symptoms were required for the diagnosis, and a minimum duration of 2 weeks. Significant impairment associated with subthreshold depressive conditions, as well as comorbidity with other mental disorders, has been described. CONCLUSIONS: Depression as a disorder is better explained as a spectrum rather than as a collection of discrete categories. Minor and subthreshold depression are common conditions and patients falling below the diagnostic threshold experience significant difficulties in functioning and a negative impact on their quality of life. Current diagnostic systems need to reexamine the thresholds for depressive disorders and distinguish them from ordinary feelings of sadness

Observational studies of depression in primary care: what do we know?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We undertook a systematic review of observational studies of depression in primary care to determine 1) the nature and scope of the published studies 2) the methodological quality of the studies; 3) the identified recovery and risk factors for persistent depression and 3) the treatment and health service use patterns among patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO using combinations of topic and keywords, and Medical Subject Headings in MEDLINE, Headings in CINAHL and descriptors in PsycINFO. Searches were limited to adult populations and articles published in English during 1985–2006.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>40 articles from 17 observational cohort studies were identified, most were undertaken in the US or Europe. Studies varied widely in aims and methods making it difficult to meaningfully compare the results. Methodological limitations were common including: selection bias of patients and physicians; small sample sizes (range 35–108 patients at baseline and 20–59 patients at follow-up); and short follow-up times limiting the extent to which these studies can be used to inform our understanding of recovery and relapse among primary care patients with depression. Risk factors for the persistence of depression identified in this review were: severity and chronicity of the depressive episode, the presence of suicidal thoughts, antidepressant use, poorer self-reported quality of life, lower self-reported social support, experiencing key life events, lower education level and unemployment.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Despite the growing interest in depression being managed as a chronic illness, this review identified only 17 observational studies of depression in primary care, most of which have included small sample sizes and been relatively short-term. Future research should be large enough to investigate risk factors for chronicity and relapse, and should be conducted over a longer time frame.</p

Depression in Primary care: Interpersonal Counseling vs Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. The DEPICS Study. A multicenter randomized controlled trial. Rationale and design

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Depression is a frequently observed and disabling condition in primary care, mainly treated by Primary Care Physicians with antidepressant drugs. Psychological interventions are recommended as first-line treatment by the most authoritative international guidelines but few evidences are available on their efficacy and effectiveness for mild depression.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This multi-center randomized controlled trial was conducted in 9 Italian centres with the aim to compare the efficacy of Inter-Personal Counseling, a brief structured psychological intervention, to that of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors. Patients with depressive symptoms referred by Primary Care Physicians to psychiatric consultation-liaison services were eligible for the study if they met the DSM-IV criteria for major depression, had a score ≥13 on the 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and were at their first or second depressive episode. The primary outcome was remission of depressive symptoms at 2-months, defined as a HDRS score ≤ 7. Secondary outcome measures were improvement in global functioning and recurrence of depressive symptoms at 12-months. Patients who did not respond to Inter-Personal Counseling or Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors at 2-months received augmentation with the other treatment.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This trial addresses some of the shortcomings of existing trials targeting major depression in primary care by evaluating the comparative efficacy of a brief psychological intervention that could be easily disseminated, by including a sample of patients with mild/moderate depression and by using different outcome measures.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12608000479303</p