Cost-effectiveness of a stepped-care intervention to prevent major depression in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or coronary heart disease and subthreshold depression: design of a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Background: Co-morbid major depression is a significant problem among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or coronary heart disease and this negatively impacts quality of life. Subthreshold depression is the most important risk factor for the development of major depression. Given the highly significant association between depression and adverse health outcomes and the limited capacity for depression treatment in primary care, there is an urgent need for interventions that successfully prevent the transition from subthreshold depression into a major depressive disorder. Nurse led stepped-care is a promising way to accomplish this. The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a nurse-led indicated stepped-care program to prevent major depression among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or coronary heart disease in primary care who also have subthreshold depressive symptoms.Methods/design: An economic evaluation will be conducted alongside a cluster-randomized controlled trial in approximately thirty general practices in the Netherlands. Randomization takes place at the level of participating practice nurses. We aim to include 236 participants who will either receive a nurse-led indicated stepped-care program for depressive symptoms or care as usual. The stepped-care program consists of four sequential but flexible treatment steps: 1) watchful waiting, 2) guided self-help treatment, 3) problem solving treatment and 4) referral to the general practitioner. The primary clinical outcome measure is the cumulative incidence of major depressive disorder as measured with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview. Secondary outcomes include severity of depressive symptoms, quality of life, anxiety and physical outcomes. Costs will be measured from a societal perspective and include health care utilization, medication and lost productivity costs. Measurements will be performed at baseline and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months.Discussion: The intervention being investigated is expected to prevent new cases of depression among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or coronary heart disease and subthreshold depression, with subsequent beneficial effects on quality of life, clinical outcomes and health care costs. When proven cost-effective, the program provides a viable treatment option in the Dutch primary care system.Trial registration: Dutch Trial Register NTR3715. © 2013 van Dijk et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Outpatient costs in pharmaceutically treated diabetes patients with and without a diagnosis of depression in a Dutch primary care setting

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To assess differences in outpatient costs among pharmaceutically treated diabetes patients with and without a diagnosis of depression in a Dutch primary care setting.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A retrospective case control study over 3 years (2002-2004). Data on 7128 depressed patients and 23772 non-depressed matched controls were available from the electronic medical record system of 20 general practices organized in one large primary care organization in the Netherlands. A total of 393 depressed patients with diabetes and 494 non-depressed patients with diabetes were identified in these records. The data that were extracted from the medical record system concerned only outpatient costs, which included GP care, referrals, and medication.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Mean total outpatient costs per year in depressed diabetes patients were €1039 (SD 743) in the period 2002-2004, which was more than two times as high as in non-depressed diabetes patients (€492, SD 434). After correction for age, sex, type of insurance, diabetes treatment, and comorbidity, the difference in total annual costs between depressed and non-depressed diabetes patients changed from €408 (uncorrected) to €463 (corrected) in multilevel analyses. Correction for comorbidity had the largest impact on the difference in costs between both groups.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Outpatient costs in depressed patients with diabetes are substantially higher than in non-depressed patients with diabetes even after adjusting for confounders. Future research should investigate whether effective treatment of depression among diabetes patients can reduce health care costs in the long term.</p

Does treatment of subsyndromal depression improve depression and diabetes related outcomes: protocol for a randomised controlled comparison of psycho-education, physical exercise and treatment as usual

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The prevalence of mood difficulties in persons with diabetes is approximately twice that in the general population, affecting the health outcomes and patients' quality of life in an undesirable way. Although subsyndromal depression is an important predictor of a more serious clinical depression, it is often overlooked. This study aims to compare the effects of two non-pharmacological interventions for subsyndromal depression, psychoeducation and physical exercise, with diabetes treatment as usual on mood- and diabetes-related outcomes.</p> <p>Methods and Design</p> <p>Type 2 diabetic patients aged 18-65 yrs. who report mood difficulties and the related need for help in a mail survey will be potential participants. After giving informed consent, they will be randomly assigned to one of the three groups (psychoeducation, physical activity, treatment as usual). Depressive symptoms, diabetes distress, health-related quality of life and diabetes self-care activities will be assessed at baseline, at 6 weeks, 6 months and 12 months. A structured clinical interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID-I) will be performed at baseline and at one-year follow-up in order to determine the clinical significance of the patients' depressive symptoms. Disease-related data will be collected from patients' files and from additional physical examinations and laboratory tests.</p> <p>The two interventions will be comparable in terms of format (small group work), duration (six sessions) and approach (interactive learning; supporting the participants' active roles). The group treated as usual will be informed about their screening results and about the importance of treating depression. They will be provided with brief re-education on diabetes and written self-help instructions to cope with mood difficulties.</p> <p>Primary outcomes will be depressive symptoms. Secondary outcomes will be glycaemic control, diabetes-related distress, self-management of diabetes and health-related quality of life. Tertiary outcomes will be biochemical markers reflecting common pathophysiological processes of insulin resistance, inflammation and oxidative damage that are assumed to be intertwined in both diabetes and depression. The mixed-effect linear model will be used to compare the outcome variables.</p> <p>Power analysis has indicated that the two intervention groups and the control group should comprise 59 patients to enable detection of clinically meaningful differences in depressive symptoms with a power of 80% and alpha = 0.05. Outcomes will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ISRCTN: <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN05673017">ISRCTN05673017</a></p

Cost-effectiveness of collaborative care for the treatment of major depressive disorder in primary care. A systematic review

Background. The effectiveness of collaborative care for patients with major depressive disorder in primary care has been established. Assessing its cost-effectiveness is important for deciding on implementation. This review therefore evaluates the cost-effectiveness of collaborative care for major depressive disorder in primary care. Methods. A systematic search on economic evaluations of collaborative care was conducted in Pubmed and PsychInfo. Quality of the studies was measured with the Cochrane checklist and the CHEC-list for economic evaluations. Cost-effectiveness and costs per depression-free days were reported. Results. 8 studies were found, involving 4868 patients. The quality of the cost effectiveness studies, according to the CHEC-list, could be improved. Generally, the studies did not include all relevant costs and did not perform sensitivity analysis. Only 4 out of 8 studies reported cost per QALY, 6 out of 8 reported costs per depression-free days. The highest costs per QALY reported were $49,500, the highest costs per depression-free day were$24. Conclusions. Although studies did not fulfil all criteria of the CHEC-list, collaborative care is a promising intervention and it may be cost-effective. However, to conclude on the cost-effectiveness, depression research should follow economic guidelines to improve the quality of the economic evaluations

Depression: Current treatments with low cost strategies

Depression has profound social, economic and personal consequences for the affected individual, and it shows no signs of abating in the general population. There are several treatment modalities available for this debilitating illness, however, effective as they are, these treatments have pitfalls. Antidepressants are the most common form of treatment for depression; they are relatively cheap and effective, but induce uncomfortable side-effects, some of which can be life threatening. These can include cardiotoxicity, weight gain, serotonin syndrome, sexual dysfunction, dry mouth and urinary retention. Electroconvulsive therapy has been used in the treatment of depression since the late 1930s and is effective particularly in severe depression. It is quick acting, but its use tend to evoke moral and ethical debates. Psychological therapies have been used since the 9th century and are effective and have little side-effects but they are relatively expensive and there is a long waiting list in the NHS for these therapies. Emerging evidence suggest a place for the use of exercise to improve depressive symptoms. The article discusses evidence in support of exercise and ecotherapy in particular to alleviate symptoms of depression and promote recovery. This has implications for mental health nursing practice

Comparison of the CES-D and PHQ-9 depression scales in people with type 2 diabetes in Tehran, Iran

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The quality of life in patients with various chronic disorders, including diabetes has been directly affected by depression. Depression makes patients less likely to manage their self-care regimens. Accurate assessment of depression in diabetic populations is important to the treatment of depression in this group and may improve diabetes management. To our best knowledge, there are few studies that have looked for utilizing questionnaires in screening for depression among patients with diabetes in Iran. Therefore the aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and accuracy of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) scale and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), in comparison with clinical interview in people with type 2 diabetes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Outpatients who attended diabetes clinics at IEM were recruited on a consecutive basis between February 2009 and July 2009. Inclusion criteria included patients with type 2 diabetes who could fluently read and speak Persian, had no severe diabetes complications and no history of psychological disorders. The history of psychological disorders was ascertained through patients' medical files, taking history of any medications in this regard. The study design was explained to all patients and informed consent was obtained. Volunteer patients completed the Persian version of the questionnaires (CES-D and PHQ-9) and a psychiatrist interviewed them based on Structured Clinical Interview (SCID) for DSM-IV criteria.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 185 patients, 43.2% were diagnosed as having Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) based on the clinical interview, 47.6% with PHQ-9 and 61.62% with CES-D. The Area Under the Curve (AUC) for the total score of PHQ-9 was 0.829 ± 0.30. A cut-off score for PHQ-9 of ≥ 13 provided an optimal balance between sensitivity (73.80%) and specificity (76.20%). For CES-D the AUC for the total score was 0.861 ± 0.029. Optimal balance between sensitivity (78.80%) and specificity (77.1%) was provided at cut-off score of ≥ 23.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>It could be concluded that the PHQ-9 and CES-D perform well as screening instruments, but in diagnosing major depressive disorder, a formal diagnostic process following the PHQ-9 and also the CES-D remains essential.</p

A retrospective study on the impact of comorbid depression or anxiety on healthcare resource use and costs among diabetic neuropathy patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Diabetic neuropathy (DN) is a common complication of diabetes that has significant economic burden, especially for patients with comorbid depression or anxiety. This study examines and quantifies factors associated with healthcare costs among patients diagnosed with diabetic neuropathy (DN) with or without a comorbid diagnosis of depression or anxiety (DA) using retrospective administrative claims data. No study has examined the differences in economic outcomes depending on the presence of comorbid DA disorders.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Over-age-18 individuals with 1+ diagnosis of DN in 2005 were selected. The first observed DN claim was considered the "index date." All individuals had a 12-month pre-index and follow-up period. For both under-age-65 commercially insured and over-age-65 individuals with employer-sponsored Medicare supplemental insurance, we constructed 2 subgroups for individuals with DA (DN-DA) or without (DN-only). Patients' clinical characteristics over pre-index period were compared. Multivariate regressions were performed to assess whether DN-DA patients had higher utilization of healthcare resources and costs than DN-only patients, controlling for demographic and clinical characteristics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We identified 16,831 DN-only and 1,699 DN-DA patients in the Medicare supplemental cohort, as well as 17,205 and 3,105 in the commercially insured. DN-DA patients had higher prevalence of diabetes-related comorbidities for cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular/peripheral vascular disease, nephropathy, obesity, and hypoglycemic events than DN-only patients (all p < 0.05). Controlling for differences in demographic and clinical characteristics, DN-DA patients had $9,235 (p < 0.05) higher total healthcare costs than patients with DN-only among those with Medicare supplemental coverage ($26,718 vs. $17,483), and$10,389 (p < 0.05) more total costs among commercially insured ($29,775 vs.$19,386). Factors associated with increased costs included insurance type, geographical region, diabetes-related comorbidities, and insulin therapy.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>These findings indicate that the healthcare costs were significantly higher for DN patients with depression or anxiety relative to those without such comorbid disorders.</p

Type 2 diabetes, depressive symptoms and trajectories of cognitive decline in a national sample of community-dwellers: a prospective cohort study

We examined the individual and synergistic effects of type 2 diabetes and elevated depressive symptoms on memory and executive function trajectories over 10 and eight years of follow-up, respectively. Our sample comprised 10,524 community-dwellers aged ≥50 years in 2002±03 from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. With respect to memory (word recall), participants with either diabetes or elevated depressive symptoms recalled significantly fewer words compared with those free of these conditions (reference category), but more words compared with those with both conditions. There was a significant acceleration in the rate of memory decline in participants aged ≤50±64 years with both conditions (-0.27, 95% CI, -0.45 to -0.08, per study wave), which was not observed in those with either condition or aged ≥65 years. With respect to executive function (animal naming), participants aged 65 years with diabetes or those with elevated depressive symptoms named significantly fewer animals compared with the reference category, while those with both conditions named fewer animals compared with any other category. The rate of executive function decline was significantly greater in participants with both conditions (-0.54, 95% CI, -0.99 to -0.10; and ±0.71, 95% CI, -1.16 to -0.27, per study wave, for those aged 50±64 and ≥65 years, respectively), but not in participants with either condition. Diabetes and elevated depressive symptoms are inversely associated with memory and executive function, but, individually, do not accelerate cognitive decline. The co-occurrence of diabetes and elevated depressive symptoms significantly accelerates cognitive decline over time, especially among those aged 50±64 years

A pilot study of an integrated mental health, social and medical model for diabetes care in an inner‐city setting: three dimensions for diabetes (3DFD)

Aims We examined the effectiveness of a service innovation, Three Dimensions for Diabetes (3DFD), that consisted of a referral to an integrated mental health, social care and diabetes treatment model, compared with usual care in improving biomedical and health economic outcomes. Methods Using a non‐randomized control design, the 3DFD model was offered in two inner‐city boroughs in London, UK, where diabetes health professionals could refer adult residents with diabetes, suboptimal glycaemic control [HbA1c ≥ 75 mmol/mol (≥ 9.0%)] and mental health and/or social problems. In the usual care group, there was no referral pathway and anonymized data on individuals with HbA1c ≥ 75 mmol/mol (≥ 9.0%) were collected from primary care records. Change in HbA1c from baseline to 12 months was the primary outcome, and change in healthcare costs and biomedical variables were secondary outcomes. Results 3DFD participants had worse glycaemic control and higher healthcare costs than control participants at baseline. 3DFD participants had greater improvement in glycaemic control compared with control participants [−14 mmol/mol (−1.3%) vs. −6 mmol/mol (−0.6%) respectively, P < 0.001], adjusted for confounding. Total follow‐up healthcare costs remained higher in the 3DFD group compared with the control group (mean difference £1715, 95% confidence intervals 591 to 2811), adjusted for confounding. The incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio was £398 per mmol/mol unit decrease in HbA1c, indicating the 3DFD intervention was more effective and costed more than usual care. Conclusions A biomedical, psychological and social criteria‐based referral system for identifying and managing high‐cost and high‐risk individuals with poor glycaemic control can lead to improved health in all three dimensions