Definitions of recovery and outcomes of major depression: results from a 10-year follow-up

Furukawa TA, Fujita A, Harai H, Yoshimura R, Kitamura T, Takahashi K. Definitions of recovery and outcomes of major depression: results from a 10-year follow-up

Effectiveness of trauma-focused treatment for adolescents with major depressive disorder

Background: Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) in adolescence has a high prevalence and risk of disability, but current treatments show limited effectiveness and high drop-out and relapse rates. Although the role of distressing experiences that relate to the development and maintenance of MDD has been recognized for decades, the efficacy of a trauma-focused treatment approach for MDD has hardly been studied. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) therapy as a stand-alone intervention in adolescents diagnosed with MDD. We hypothesized that reprocessing core memories related to the onset and maintenance of MDD using EMDR therapy would be associated with a significant decrease in depressive and comorbid symptoms. Method: We recruited 32 adolescents (12–18 years) fulfilling DSM-IV criteria for mild to moderate-severe MDD from an outpatient youth mental health care unit. Treatment consisted of six weekly 60-min individual sessions. Presence or absence of MDD classification (ADIS-C), symptoms of depression (CDI), symptoms of posttraumatic stress (UCLA), anxiety (SCARED), somatic complaints (CSI), and overall social-emotional functioning (SDQ) were assessed pre and post-treatment and 3 months after treatment. Results: 60.9% of the adolescents completing treatment no longer met DSM-IV criteria for MDD after treatment anymore, and 69.8% at follow-up. Multilevel analyses demonstrated significant posttreatment reductions of depressive symptoms (CDI: Cohen’s d = 0.72), comorbid posttraumatic stress, anxiety and somatic complaints, while overall socialemotional functioning improved. These gains were maintained at 3-month follow-up (Cohen’s d = 1.11). Severity of posttraumatic stress reactions significantly predicted the posttreatment outcome; however, duration of MDD, number of comorbid disorders, or having a history of emotional abuse, emotional neglect or physical neglect were not predictive for outcome. Conclusions: This is the first study suggesting that EMDR therapy is associated with a significant reduction of depressive symptoms and comorbid psychiatric problems in adolescents with mild to moderate-severe MDD

The European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD/MHEDEA 2000) project: rationale and methods

The European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD/MHEDEA 2000) is a new cross-sectional study investigating the prevalence and the associated factors of mental disorders, as well as their effect on health-related quality of life and the use of services in six European countries. This paper describes the rationale, methods and the plan for the analysis of the project. A total of 22,000 individuals representative of the non-institutionalized population aged 18 and over from Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain are being interviewed in their homes. Trained interviewers use a computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI) including the most recent version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI, 2000), a well-established epidemiological survey for assessing mental disorders. This is the first international study using the standardized up-to-date methodology for epidemiological assessment. Sizeable differences in prevalence, impact and level of need that is met by the health services are expected. The analysis of these differences should facilitate the monitoring of ongoing mental health reform initiatives in Europe and provide new research hypotheses. Copyright © 2002 Whurr Publishers Ltd.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/34230/1/123_ftp.pd

Accessibility and implementation in the UK NHS services of an effective depression relapse prevention programme:learning from mindfulness-based cognitive therapy through a mixed-methods study

Background: Depression affects as many as one in five people in their lifetime and often runs a recurrent lifetime course. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is an effective psychosocial approach that aims to help people at risk of depressive relapse to learn skills to stay well. However, there is an ‘implementation cliff’: access to those who could benefit from MBCT is variable and little is known about why that is the case, and how to promote sustainable implementation. As such, this study fills a gap in the literature about the implementation of MBCT. Objectives: To describe the existing provision of MBCT in the UK NHS, develop an understanding of the perceived costs and benefits of MBCT implementation, and explore the barriers and critical success factors for enhanced accessibility. We aimed to synthesise the evidence from multiple data sources to create an explanatory framework of the how and why of implementation, and to co-develop an implementation resource with key stakeholders. Design: A two-phase qualitative, exploratory and explanatory study, which was conceptually underpinned by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework. Setting: UK NHS services. Methods: Phase 1 involved interviews with participants from 40 areas across the UK about the current provision of MBCT. Phase 2 involved 10 case studies purposively sampled with differing degrees of MBCT provision, and from each UK country. Case study methods included interviews with key stakeholders, including commissioners, managers, MBCT practitioners and teachers, and service users. Observations were conducted and key documents were also collected. Data were analysed using a modified approach to framework analysis. Emerging findings were verified through stakeholder discussions and workshops. Results: Phase 1: access to and the format of MBCT provision across the NHS remains variable. NHS services have typically adapted MBCT to their context and its integration into care pathways was also highly variable even within the same trust or health board. Participants’ accounts revealed stories of implementation journeys that were driven by committed individuals that were sometimes met by management commitment. Phase 2: a number of explanations emerged that explained successful implementation. Critically, facilitation was the central role of the MBCT implementers, who were self-designated individuals who ‘championed’ implementation, created networks and over time mobilised top-down organisational support. Our explanatory framework mapped out a prototypical implementation journey, often over many years. This involved implementers working through grassroots initiatives and over time mobilising top-down organisational support, and a continual fitting of evidence, with the MBCT intervention, contextual factors and the training/supervision of MBCT teachers. Key pivot points in the journey provided windows of challenge or opportunity. Limitations: The findings are largely based on informants’ accounts and, therefore, are at risk of the bias of self-reporting. Conclusions: Although access to MBCT across the UK is improving, it remains very patchy. This study provides an explanatory framework that helps us understand what facilitates and supports sustainable MBCT implementation. Future work: The framework and stakeholder workshops are being used to develop online implementation guidance

Routine use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for improving treatment of common mental health disorders in adults

BACKGROUND: Routine outcome monitoring of common mental health disorders (CMHDs), using patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), has been promoted across primary care, psychological therapy and multidisciplinary mental health care settings, but is likely to be costly, given the high prevalence of CMHDs. There has been no systematic review of the use of PROMs in routine outcome monitoring of CMHDs across these three settings. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of routine measurement and feedback of the results of PROMs during the management of CMHDs in 1) improving the outcome of CMHDs; and 2) in changing the management of CMHDs. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis group specialised controlled trials register (CCDANCTR-Studies and CCDANCTR-References), the Oxford University PROMS Bibliography (2002-5), Ovid PsycINFO, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and International trial registries, initially to 30 May 2014, and updated to 18 May 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected cluster and individually randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including participants with CMHDs aged 18 years and over, in which the results of PROMs were fed back to treating clinicians, or both clinicians and patients. We excluded RCTs in child and adolescent treatment settings, and those in which more than 10% of participants had diagnoses of eating disorders, psychoses, substance use disorders, learning disorders or dementia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two authors independently identified eligible trials, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. We conducted meta-analysis across studies, pooling outcome measures which were sufficiently similar to each other to justify pooling. MAIN RESULTS: We included 17 studies involving 8787 participants: nine in multidisciplinary mental health care, six in psychological therapy settings, and two in primary care. Pooling of outcome data to provide a summary estimate of effect across studies was possible only for those studies using the compound Outcome Questionnaire (OQ-45) or Outcome Rating System (ORS) PROMs, which were all conducted in multidisciplinary mental health care or psychological therapy settings, because both primary care studies identified used single symptom outcome measures, which were not directly comparable to the OQ-45 or ORS.Meta-analysis of 12 studies including 3696 participants using these PROMs found no evidence of a difference in outcome in terms of symptoms, between feedback and no-feedback groups (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.16 to 0.01; P value = 0.10). The evidence for this comparison was graded as low quality however, as all included studies were considered at high risk of bias, in most cases due to inadequate blinding of assessors and significant attrition at follow-up.Quality of life was reported in only two studies, social functioning in one, and costs in none. Information on adverse events (thoughts of self-harm or suicide) was collected in one study, but differences between arms were not reported.It was not possible to pool data on changes in drug treatment or referrals as only two studies reported these. Meta-analysis of seven studies including 2608 participants found no evidence of a difference in management of CMHDs between feedback and no-feedback groups, in terms of the number of treatment sessions received (mean difference (MD) -0.02 sessions, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.39; P value = 0.93). However, the evidence for this comparison was also graded as low quality. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found insufficient evidence to support the use of routine outcome monitoring using PROMs in the treatment of CMHDs, in terms of improving patient outcomes or in improving management. The findings are subject to considerable uncertainty however, due to the high risk of bias in the large majority of trials meeting the inclusion criteria, which means further research is very likely to have an important impact on the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. More research of better quality is therefore required, particularly in primary care where most CMHDs are treated.Future research should address issues of blinding of assessors and attrition, and measure a range of relevant symptom outcomes, as well as possible harmful effects of monitoring, health-related quality of life, social functioning, and costs. Studies should include people treated with drugs as well as psychological therapies, and should follow them up for longer than six months

The Use of Herbal Medications and Dietary Supplements by People with Mental Illness

This study examined the relationship between herbal medication and dietary supplement (HMDS) use and mental health characteristics. Data are drawn from a national household survey of the United States’ civilian, non-institutionalized population (N = 9,585). Psychiatric medication and HMDS use, psychiatric diagnoses and treatment needs, utilization and satisfaction were assessed. Compared to non-users, HMDS users were more likely to perceive themselves as having mental health needs, to have received mental health and primary care treatment, and to be dissatisfied with their overall healthcare. Psychiatric medication use was not related to HMDS use, and in multivariate analyses, HMDS use was associated with perceived mental health needs. Differences in use of specific HMDS between those with and without a psychiatric disorder were also examined. The use of HMDS warrants particular attention in persons with perceived mental health problems as these individuals may be turning to HMDS use for treatment of their symptoms

Postpartum psychiatric disorders

Pregnancy is a complex and vulnerable period that presents a number of challenges to women, including the development of postpartum psychiatric disorders (PPDs). These disorders can include postpartum depression and anxiety, which are relatively common, and the rare but more severe postpartum psychosis. In addition, other PPDs can include obsessive–compulsive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder and eating disorders. The aetiology of PPDs is a complex interaction of psychological, social and biological factors, in addition to genetic and environmental factors. The goals of treating postpartum mental illness are reducing maternal symptoms and supporting maternal–child and family functioning. Women and their families should receive psychoeducation about the illness, including evidence-based discussions about the risks and benefits of each treatment option. Developing effective strategies in global settings that allow the delivery of targeted therapies to women with different clinical phenotypes and severities of PPDs is essential