Chest pain, depression and anxiety in coronary heart disease:Consequence or cause? A prospective clinical study in primary care

Objective To examine if chest pain increases the risk of depression and anxiety, or, on the other hand, depression and anxiety increase the risk of chest pain onset in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). Design Prospective clinical study. Setting 16 general practices in the Greater London Primary Care Research Network. Participants 803 participants with a confirmed diagnosis of CHD at baseline on the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) CHD registers. Main outcome measures Rose Angina Questionnaire, HADS depression and anxiety subscales and PHQ-9 were assessed at seven time points, each 6 months apart. Multi-Level Analysis (MLA) and Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) were applied. Results Chest pain predicts both more severe anxiety and depression symptoms at all time points until 30 months after baseline. However, although anxiety predicted chest pain in the short term with a strong association, this association did not last after 18 months. Depression had only a small, negative association with chest pain. Conclusions In persons with CHD, chest pain increases the risk of both anxiety and depression to a great extent. However, anxiety and depression have only limited effects on the risk for chest pain. This evidence suggests that anxiety and depression tend to be consequences rather than causes of cardiac chest pain. Intervention studies that support persons with CHD by providing this information should be devised and evaluated, thus deconstructing potentially catastrophic cognitions and strengthening emotional coping

The Depression Initiative. Description of a collaborative care model for depression and of the factors influencing its implementation in the primary care setting in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND: In the Depression Initiative, a promising collaborative care model for depression that was developed in the US was adapted for implementation in the Netherlands. AIM: Description of a collaborative care model for major depressive disorder (MDD) and of the factors influencing its implementation in the primary care setting in the Netherlands. DATA SOURCES: Data collected during the preparation phase of the CC:DIP trial of the Depression Initiative, literature, policy documents, information sheets from professional associations. RESULTS: Factors facilitating the implementation of the collaborative care model are continuous supervision of the care managers by the consultant psychiatrist and the trainers, a supportive web-based tracking system and the new reimbursement system that allows for introduction of a mental health care-practice nurse (MHC-PN) in the general practices and coverage of the treatment costs. Impeding factors might be the relatively high percentage of solo-primary care practices, the small percentage of professionals that are located in the same building, unfamiliarity with the concept of collaboration as required for collaborative care, the reimbursement system that demands regular negotiations between each health care provider and the insurance companies and the reluctance general practitioners might feel to expand their responsibility for their depressed patients. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the collaborative care model in the Netherlands requires extensive training and supervision on micro level, facilitation of reimbursement on meso- and macro level and structural effort to change the treatment culture for chronic mental disorders in the primary care settin

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Transdiagnostic Decision Tool:matched care for patients with a mental disorder in need of highly specialised care

BackgroundEarly identification of patients with mental health problems in need of highly specialised care could enhance the timely provision of appropriate care and improve the clinical and cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies. Recent research on the development and psychometric evaluation of diagnosis-specific decision-support algorithms suggested that the treatment allocation of patients to highly specialised mental healthcare settings may be guided by a core set of transdiagnostic patient factors.AimsTo develop and psychometrically evaluate a transdiagnostic decision tool to facilitate the uniform assessment of highly specialised mental healthcare need in heterogeneous patient groups. Method The Transdiagnostic Decision Tool was developed based on an analysis of transdiagnostic items of earlier developed diagnosis-specific decision tools. The Transdiagnostic Decision Tool was psychometrically evaluated in 505 patients with a somatic symptom disorder or post-traumatic stress disorder. Feasibility, interrater reliability, convergent validity and criterion validity were assessed. In order to evaluate convergent validity, the five-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and the ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A) were administered.ResultsThe six-item clinician-administered Transdiagnostic Decision Tool demonstrated excellent feasibility and acceptable interrater reliability. Spearman's rank correlations between the Transdiagnostic Decision Tool and ICECAP-A (-0.335), EQ-5D-5L index (-0.386) and EQ-5D-visual analogue scale (-0.348) supported convergent validity. The area under the curve was 0.81 and a cut-off value of &gt;= 3 was found to represent the optimal cut-off value.ConclusionsThe Transdiagnostic Decision Tool demonstrated solid psychometric properties and showed promise as a measure for the early detection of patients in need of highly specialised mental healthcare.</p

UP's: A cohort study on recovery in psychotic disorder patients : Design protocol

Recovery is a multidimensional concept, including symptomatic, functional, social, as well as personal recovery. The present study aims at exploring psychosocial and biological determinants of personal recovery, and disentangling time-dependent relationships between personal recovery and the other domains of recovery in a sample of people with a psychotic disorder. A cohort study is conducted with a 10-year follow-up. Personal recovery is assessed using the Recovering Quality of Life Questionnaire (ReQoL) and the Individual Recovery Outcomes Counter (I.ROC). Other domains of recovery are assessed by the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale Remission (PANSS-R), the BRIEF-A and the Social Role Participation Questionnaire—Short version (SRPQ) to assess symptomatic, functional and societal recovery, respectively. In addition, multiple biological, psychological, and social determinants are assessed. This study aims to assess the course of personal recovery, and to find determinants and time-dependent relationships with symptomatic, functional and societal recovery in people with a psychotic disorder. Strengths of the study are the large number of participants, long duration of follow-up, multiple assessments over time, extending beyond the treatment trajectory, and the use of a broad range of biological, psychological, and social determinants

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

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of transmural collaborative care with consultation letter (TCCCL) and duloxetine for major depressive disorder (MDD) and (sub)chronic pain in collaboration with primary care: design of a randomized placebo-controlled multi-Centre trial: TCC:PAINDIP

__Abstract__ Background: The comorbidity of pain and depression is associated with high disease burden for patients in terms of disability, wellbeing, and use of medical care. Patients with major and minor depression often present themselves with pain to a general practitioner and recognition of depression in such cases is low, but evolving. Also, physical symptoms, including pain, in major depressive disorder, predict a poorer response to treatment. A multi-faceted, patient-tailored treatment programme, like collaborative care, is promising. However, treatment of chronic pain conditions in depressive patients has, so far, received limited attention in research. Cost effectiveness of an integrated approach of pain in depressed patients has not been studied. This article describes the aims and design of a study to evaluate effects and costs of collaborative care with the antidepressant duloxetine for patients with pain symptoms and a depressive disorder, compared to collaborative care with placebo and compared to duloxetine alone

Predicting Return to Work in Workers with All-Cause Sickness Absence Greater than 4 Weeks: A Prospective Cohort Study

Introduction Long-term sickness absence is a major public health and economic problem. Evidence is lacking for factors that are associated with return to work (RTW) in sick-listed workers. The aim of this study is to examine factors associated with the duration until full RTW in workers sick-listed due to any cause for at least 4 weeks. Methods In this cohort study, health-related, personal and job-related factors were measured at entry into the study. Workers were followed until 1 year after the start of sickness absence to determine the duration until full RTW. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR). Results Data were collected from N = 730 workers. During the first year after the start of sickness absence, 71% of the workers had full RTW, 9.1% was censored because they resigned, and 19.9% did not have full RTW. High physical job demands (HR .562, CI .348–.908), contact with medical specialists (HR .691, CI .560–.854), high physical symptoms (HR .744, CI .583–.950), moderate to severe depressive symptoms (HR .748, CI .569–.984) and older age (HR .776, CI .628–.958) were associated with a longer duration until RTW in sick-listed workers. Conclusions Sick-listed workers with older age, moderate to severe depressive symptoms, high physical symptoms, high physical job demands and contact with medical specialists are at increased risk for a longer duration of sickness absence. OPs need to be aware of these factors to identify workers who will most likely benefit from an early intervention

Collaborative stepped care for anxiety disorders in primary care: aims and design of a randomized controlled trial

Background. Panic disorder (PD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) are two of the most disabling and costly anxiety disorders seen in primary care. However, treatment quality of these disorders in primary care generally falls beneath the standard of international guidelines. Collaborative stepped care is recommended for improving treatment of anxiety disorders, but cost-effectiveness of such an intervention has not yet been assessed in primary care. This article describes the aims and design of a study that is currently underway. The aim of this study is to evaluate effects and costs of a collaborative stepped care approach in the primary care setting for patients with PD and GAD compared with care as usual. Methods/design. The study is a two armed, cluster randomized controlled trial. Care managers and their primary care practices will be randomized to deliver either collaborative stepped care (CSC) or care as usual (CAU). In the CSC group a general practitioner, care manager and psychiatrist work together in a collaborative care framework. Stepped care is provided in three steps: 1) guided self-help, 2) cognitive behavioral therapy and 3) antidepressant medication. Primary care patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of PD and/or GAD will be included. 134 completers are needed to attain sufficient power to show a clinically significant effect of 1/2 SD on the primary outcome measure, the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). Data on anxiety symptoms, mental and physical health, quality of life, health resource use and productivity will be collected at baseline and after three, six, nine and twelve months. Discussion. It is hypothesized that the collaborative stepped care intervention will be more cost-effective than care as usual. The pragmatic design of this study will enable the researchers to evaluate what is possible in real clinical practice, rather than under ideal circumstances. Many requirements for a high quality trial are being met. Results of this study will contribute to treatment options for GAD and PD in the primary care setting. Results will become available in 2011. Trial registration. NTR1071

Mental health research priorities for Europe

Mental and brain disorders represent the greatest health burden to Europe—not only for directly affected individuals, but also for their caregivers and the wider society. They incur substantial economic costs through direct (and indirect) health-care and welfare spending, and via productivity losses, all of which substantially affect European development. Funding for research to mitigate these effects lags far behind the cost of mental and brain disorders to society. Here, we describe a comprehensive, coordinated mental health research agenda for Europe and worldwide. This agenda was based on systematic reviews of published work and consensus decision making by multidisciplinary scientific experts and affected stakeholders (more than 1000 in total): individuals with mental health problems and their families, health-care workers, policy makers, and funders. We generated six priorities that will, over the next 5–10 years, help to close the biggest gaps in mental health research in Europe, and in turn overcome the substantial challenges caused by mental disorders