Evaluation of a system of structured, pro-active care for chronic depression in primary care: a randomised controlled trial

Background: People with chronic depression are frequently lost from effective care, with resulting psychological, physical and social morbidity and considerable social and financial societal costs. This randomised controlled trial will evaluate whether regular structured practice nurse reviews lead to better mental health and social outcomes for these patients and will assess the cost-effectiveness of the structured reviews compared to usual care. The hypothesis is that structured, pro-active care of patients with chronic depression in primary care will lead to a cost-effective improvement in medical and social outcomes when compared with usual general practitioner (GP) care.Methods/Design: Participants were recruited from 42 general practices throughout the United Kingdom. Eligible participants had to have a history of chronic major depression, recurrent major depression or chronic dsythymia confirmed using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). They also needed to score 14 or above on the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) at recruitment.Once consented, participants were randomised to treatment as usual from their general practice (controls) or the practice nurse led intervention. The intervention includes a specially prepared education booklet and a comprehensive baseline assessment of participants' mood and any associated physical and psycho-social factors, followed by regular 3 monthly reviews by the nurse over the 2 year study period. At these appointments intervention participants' mood will be reviewed, together with their current pharmacological and psychological treatments and any relevant social factors, with the nurse suggesting possible amendments according to evidence based guidelines. This is a chronic disease management model, similar to that used for other long-term conditions in primary care. The primary outcome is the BDI-II, measured at baseline and 6 monthly by self-complete postal questionnaire. Secondary outcomes collected by self-complete questionnaire at baseline and 2 years include social functioning, quality of life and data for the economic analyses. Health service data will be collected from GP notes for the 24 months before recruitment and the 24 months of the study.Discussion: 558 participants were recruited, 282 to the intervention and 276 to the control arm. The majority were recruited via practice database searches using relevant READ codes

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

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

Patients with persistent medically unexplained symptoms in general practice: characteristics and quality of care

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) are common in general practice (GP), and are even more problematic as they become persistent. The present study examines the relationship between persistent MUPS in general practice on the one hand and quality of life, social conditions, and coping on the other hand. Additionally, it is examined how patients with persistent MUPS evaluate the quality of GP-care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data were used from a representative survey of morbidity in Dutch general practice, in which data from the electronic medical records were extracted. A random sample of patients participated in an extensive health interview and completed self-reported measures on social isolation, coping and the quality of GP-care. Patients with persistent MUPS (N = 192) were compared with general practice patients not meeting the criteria for persistent MUPS (N = 7.314), and with a group of patients that visited the GP in comparable rates for medical diagnoses (N = 2.265). Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to control for relevant socio-demographic variables and chronic diseases.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>After adjustment for demographics and chronic diseases, patients with persistent MUPS reported more psychological distress, more functional impairment, more social isolation, and they evaluated the quality of GP-care less positive than the other two patient groups. Although the majority of MUPS patients were positive about the quality of GP-care, they more often felt that they were not taken seriously or not involved in treatment decisions, and more often reported that the GP did not take sufficient time. The three groups did not differ with respect to the statement that the GP unnecessarily explains physical problems as psychological ones.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Strengthening MUPS patients' social network and encouraging social activities may be a meaningful intervention in which the GP may play a stimulating role. To further improve MUPS patients' satisfaction with GP-care, GPs may pay extra attention to taking sufficient time when treating MUPS patients, taking the problems seriously, and involving them in treatment decisions.</p

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: A pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial

Purpose Given the public health significance of poorly treatable co-morbid major depressive disorders (MDD) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) and coronary heart disease (CHD), we need to investigate whether strategies to prevent the development of major depression could reduce its burden of disease. We therefore evaluated the effectiveness of a stepped-care program for subthreshold depression in comparison with usual care in patients with DM2 and/or CHD. Methods A cluster randomized controlled trial, with 27 primary care centers serving as clusters. A total of 236 DM2 and/or CHD patients with subthreshold depression (nine item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) score ≥ 6, no current MDD according to DSM-IV criteria) were allocated to the intervention group (N = 96) or usual care group (n = 140). The stepped-care program was delivered by trained practice nurses during one year and consisted of four sequential treatment steps: watchful waiting, guided self-help, problem solving treatment and referral to the general practitioner. The primary outcome was the 12-month cumulative incidence of MDD as measured with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Secondary outcomes included severity of depression (measured by PHQ-9) at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Results Of 236 patients (mean age, 67,5 (SD 10) years; 54.7% men), 210 (89%) completed the MINI at 12 months. The cumulative incidence of MDD was 9 of 89 (10.1%) participants in the intervention group and 12 of 121 (9.9%) participants in the usual care group. We found no statistically significant overall effect of the intervention (OR = 1.21; 95% confidence interval (0.12 to 12.41)) and there were no statistically significant differences in the course or severity of depressive symptoms between the two groups. Conclusions This study suggest that Step-Dep was not more effective in preventing MDD than usual care in a primary care population with DM2 and/or CHD and subthreshold depression

Patients’ and practice nurses’ perceptions of depression in patients with type 2 diabetes and/or coronary heart disease screened for subthreshold depression

Background Comorbid depression is common in patients with type 2 diabetes (DM2) and/or coronary heart disease (CHD) and is associated with poor quality of life and adverse health outcomes. However, little is known about patients’ and practice nurses’ (PNs) perceptions of depression. Tailoring care to these perceptions may affect depression detection and patient engagement with treatment and prevention programs. This study aimed to explore patients’ and PNs’ perceptions of depression in patients with DM2/CHD screened for subthreshold depression. Methods A qualitative study was conducted as part of a Dutch stepped-care prevention project. Using a purposive sampling strategy, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 15 patients and 9 PNs. After consent, all interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed independently by two researchers with Atlas.ti.5.7.1 software. The patient and PN datasets were inspected for commonalities using a constant comparative method, from which a final thematic framework was generated. Results Main themes were: illness perception, need for care and causes of depression. Patients generally considered themselves at least mildly depressed, but perceived severity levels were not always congruent with Patient Health Questionnaire 9 scores at inclusion. Initially recognizing or naming their mental state as a (subthreshold) depression was difficult for some. Having trouble sleeping was frequently experienced as the most burdensome symptom. Most experienced a need for care; psycho-educational advice and talking therapy were preferred. Perceived symptom severity corresponded with perceived need for care, but did not necessarily match help-seeking behaviour. Main named barriers to help-seeking were experienced stigma and lack of awareness of depression and mental health care possibilities. PNs frequently perceived patients as not depressed and with minimal need for specific care except for attention. Participants pointed to a mix of causes of depression, most related to negative life events and circumstances and perceived indirect links with DM2/CHD. Conclusion Data of the interviewed patients and PNs suggest that they have different perceptions about (subthreshold) depressive illness and the need for care, although views on its causes seem to overlap more