Can enhanced acute-phase treatment of depression improve long-term outcomes? A report of randomized trials in primary care

OBJECTIVE: The authors' goal was to determine whether improved outcomes from enhanced acute-phase (3-month) treatment for depression in primary care persisted. METHOD: They conducted a 19-month follow-up assessment of 156 patients with major depression in the Collaborative Care intervention trials, which had found greater improvements in treatment adherence and depressive symptoms at 4 and 7 months for patients given enhanced acute-phase treatment than for patients given routine treatment in a primary care setting. Sixty-three of the 116 patients who completed the follow-up assessment had received enhanced treatment, and 53 had received routine treatment in primary care. The Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist were used to measure depressive symptoms. Automated pharmacy data and self-reports were used to assess adherence to and adequacy of pharmacotherapy. RESULTS: At 19 months, the patients who had received enhanced acute-phase treatment did not differ from those who had received routine primary care treatment in clinical outcomes or quality of pharmacotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Even though enhanced acute-phase treatment of depression in primary care resulted in better treatment adherence and better clinical outcomes at 4 and 7 months, these improvements failed to persist over the following year. Continued enhancement of depression treatment may be needed to ensure better long-term results.     

Screening for depression in primary care: what do we still need to know?

The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recently issued the recommendation that primary care physicians screen adult patients for depression. A policy to screen primary care patients for depression has appeal as a strategy to reduce the personal and societal costs of undiagnosed and untreated depression. Such appeal may be justified if the evidence supports the screening policy in three areas: effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and feasibility. The USPSTF recommendation leaves many issues in each of these areas unresolved and physicians are left the choice of two important program characteristics: screening instrument and screening interval. We discuss how uncertainties in the screening protocol and treatment process affect whether screening is an effective and cost-effective use of resources with respect to other health interventions. We suggest that targeting screening to groups at a higher risk for depression may lead to a more effective use of health care resources. A screening program may not be feasible even if effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are optimized. We discuss uncertainties in the USPSTF recommendation that affect the feasibility of implementing such a program in physicians' practices.     

Quality improvement for depression in primary care: do patients with subthreshold depression benefit in the long run?

OBJECTIVE: Quality improvement programs for depression can improve outcomes, but the utility of including patients with subthreshold depression in quality improvement programs is unclear. The authors examined 57-month effects of quality improvement on clinical outcomes and mental health care utilization of primary care patients with depressive disorder and subthreshold depression. METHOD: In a group-level, randomized, controlled trial, 46 primary care clinics were randomly assigned to provide usual care or care with a quality improvement intervention that included provider training and other resources for either medication management (medications quality improvement) or evidence-based psychotherapy (therapy quality improvement). Among 1,356 enrolled depressed patients, 991 completed the 57-month follow-up interview (604 patients with depressive disorder and 387 with subthreshold depression). Outcomes measured at 57 months were presence of probable depressive disorder, unmet need for appropriate care (untreated probable disorder), and mental health care utilization in the prior 6 months. RESULTS: Among patients with subthreshold depression at baseline, those seen in clinics with quality improvement programs with special resources for therapy were less likely to have probable depressive disorder and unmet need for care at follow-up, compared with those seen in clinics that provided usual care. Among patients with depressive disorder at baseline, those seen in clinics with quality improvement programs with special resources for medication management were less likely to have unmet need for care at follow-up, compared with those seen in clinics that provided usual care. Patients with subthreshold depression at baseline seen in clinics with a quality improvement intervention were less likely at follow-up to have had a mental health visit (in primary care or specialty care, depending on the intervention) in the prior 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Relative to usual care, quality improvement interventions improved 57-month outcomes (probable depression, unmet need, or both) for primary care patients with depressive disorder and subthreshold depression and lowered use of mental health visits for those with subthreshold depression. The results highlight the feasibility and utility of including patients with subthreshold depression in such programs.     

Are antidepressants effective in the acute and long-term treatment of depression? Sic et Non

The efficacy of antidepressant treatment of major depression remains a matter of controversy. A review of acute treatment studies suggests that for relatively more severe episodes of major depression, antidepressants are superior to treatment in the "placebo group;" however, there are numerous methodological confounds in the available literature. (Some recent, preliminary evidence suggests that antidepressants may also be of benefit in some less severely depressed populations).There is moderately strong evidence that, compared with placebo, maintenance antidepressant treatment reduces six-month relapse rates in major depression; however, it is less clear that antidepressants prevent actual recurrence of depression in the longer term. There is evidence of both over-use and under-use of antidepressant treatment, and there appears to be a "mismatch" between diagnosis and optimal treatment of depression in some clinical settings. Better designed studies are needed to resolve these uncertainties and to investigate such putative conditions as "oppositional tolerance" to long-term antidepressant treatment. The author advocates a conservative approach to antidepressant treatment, as well as a substantially extended "tapering" period when antidepressants are discontinued.     

Treatment of obesity in the primary care setting: are we there yet?

Obesity is a significant public health issue in the US constituting an independent risk factor for morbidity and mortality as well as complicating the management of other medical conditions. Yet, traditionally most physicians receive little training in evidence-based obesity interventions. Previous literature suggests many physicians believe they do not have effective tools to address obesity and/or that obesity management is not within their scope of practice. Given the new emphasis from NIH and AAFP urging physicians to conceptualize and treat obesity as a chronic medical condition, we examined obesity-related knowledge and practices among military and civilian primary care physicians. Results were similar across these two physician groups in suggesting many physicians still may be ill-prepared to manage obesity in the primary care setting. Implications for patient care and future research are discussed.     

Does a coexisting anxiety disorder predict persistence of depressive illness in primary care patients with major depression?

We assessed whether a coexisting anxiety disorder predicts risk for persistent depression in primary care patients with major depression at baseline. Patients with major depression were identified in a 12-month prospective cohort study at a University-based family practice clinic. Presence of an anxiety disorder and other potential prognostic factors were measured at baseline. Persistent depressive illness (major depression, minor depression, or dysthymia) was determined at 12 months. Of 85 patients with major depression at baseline, 43 had coexisting anxiety disorder (38 with social phobia). The risk for persistent depression at 12 months was 44% greater [Risk Ratio (RR) = 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-2.04] in those with coexisting anxiety. This risk persisted in stratified analysis controlling for other prognostic factors. Patients with coexisting anxiety had greater mean depressive severity [repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), p < 0.04] and total disability days (54.9 vs 19.8, p < 0.02) over the 12-month study. Patients with social phobia had similar increased risk for persistent depression (RR = 1.40, 95% CI 0.98-2.00). A coexisting anxiety disorder indicates risk for persistent depression in primary care patients with major depression. Social phobia may be important to recognize in these patients. Identifying anxiety disorders can help primary care clinicians target patients needing more aggressive treatment for depression.     

Do stressful life events predict medical treatment outcome in first episode of depression?

Background  

It is unclear whether medical treatment outcome in first episode depression differ for patients with and without stressful life events prior to onset of depression.     

Prevention of late-life depression in primary care: do we know where to begin?

OBJECTIVE: This study attempted to compare two models for selective (people at elevated risk) and indicated (those with subsyndromal depressive symptoms) prevention and to determine the optimal strategy for prevention of late-life depression. METHOD: Onset was assessed at 3 years with the Geriatric Mental State AGECAT in a randomly selected cohort of 1,940 nondepressed and nondemented older people in Amsterdam. Risk factors that can easily be identified in primary care were used. RESULTS: The association of risk factors with depression incidence was expressed in absolute and relative risk estimates, number needed to treat, and population-attributable fractions. Prevention models were identified with classification and regression tree analyses. In the indicated prevention model, subsyndromal symptoms of depression were associated with a risk of almost 40% of developing depression and a number needed to treat of 5.8, accounting for 24.6% of new cases. Adding more risk factors raised the absolute risk to 49.3%, with a lower number needed to treat but also lower attributable fraction values. In the selective prevention model, spousal death showed the highest risk, becoming even higher if the subjects also had a chronic illness. Overall, the attributable fraction values in the indicated model were higher, identifying more people at risk. CONCLUSIONS: Consideration of the costs and benefits of both models in the context of the availability of evidence-based preventative interventions indicated that prevention aimed at elderly people with depressive symptoms is preferred. The focus on treatment should be readdressed; a new approach is needed, with a stronger emphasis on prevention.     

Have some guidelines for the treatment of acute bipolar depression gone too far in the restriction of antidepressants?

This paper gives a critical review of recommendations concerning the drug treatment of acute bipolar depression. The suggestions of different guidelines and consensus papers, especially in US-American and Canadian psychiatry, have a strong tendency against antidepressants in bipolar depression; they prefer mono-therapy with mood stabilizers and, in the case of co-medication with mood stabilizers and antidepressants in severe depression, to withdraw the antidepressant as early as possible. The intention of this restrictive use is to avoid the risk of mania and the risk of rapid cycling induced by antidepressants. However, apparently the risk of suicidal acts, which is as prominent in bipolar depression as in unipolar depression, has been totally neglected. Furthermore, the fact that none of the mood stabilizers have proven their antidepressive efficacy leads not only to the risk of depression-related suicidal behavior but also to the risk of chronicity of depressive symptoms due to undertreatment. Altogether the view expressed in some guidelines and consensus papers appears not well balanced. Furthermore, the fact that apparently the selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors and possibly some other modern antidepressants have only a low risk of inducing a switch to mania should stimulate a rewriting of the guidelines on drug treatment in acute bipolar depression in a less restrictive way concerning the use of antidepressants. Received: 3 January 2000 / Accepted: 2 February 2000     

Are anxiety and depression addressed in primary care patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease? A chart review

Objective: Screening for mental illness in primary care is widely recommended, but little is known about the evaluation, treatment, and long-term management processes that follow screening. The aim of this study was to examine and describe the quality of mental health care for persons with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and anxiety/depressive disorders, as measured by adherence to practice guidelines. Method: This retrospective chart review examined data for 102 primary care and mental health care patients with COPD who were diagnosed, using Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV criteria, with major depressive disorder, dysthymia, depression not otherwise specified, generalized anxiety disorder, or anxiety not otherwise specified. Data were gathered from primary care progress notes from the year prior to enrollment in a randomized controlled trial (enrollment was from July 2002 to April 2004). We compared the care received by these patients over 1 year with that recommended by practice guidelines. Charts were abstracted using a checklist of recommended practice guidelines for diagnostic evaluation, acute treatment, and long-term management of anxiety and depressive disorders. Results: Fifty (49%) of the 102 patients were recognized during the review year as having an anxiety or depressive disorder. Eighteen patients were newly assessed for depressive or anxiety disorders during the chart review year. Patients followed in primary care alone, compared with those who were comanaged by mental health care providers, were less likely to have guideline-adherent care. Conclusion: Depressive and anxiety disorders are recognized in about half of patients; however, guideline-supported diagnostic evaluation, acute treatment (except for medications), and long-term management rarely occur in the primary care setting. To improve the treatment of depressive and anxiety disorders in primary care, the process of care delivery must be understood and changed.     

Do health professionals' attitudes interfere with the treatment of depression?

Might the attitudes of health care professionals help to explain why most persons with a depressive disorder do not receive adequate care? To assess this question, the authors surveyed the faculty and staff of a midwestern university. One hundred percent of the social workers who responded found psychotherapy or counseling to be extremely or quite effective in treating persons with a major depressive episode, compared to 55% of the psychologists and 31% of the psychiatrists. For medication, the corresponding figures were 88% of psychiatrists, 64% of psychologists, and 46% of social workers. Many respondents noted problems with interprofessional communication, while most psychiatrists felt that individuals treated by two or more professionals for their depression usually receive poorer care. If future studies indicate that nonmedical therapists who view antidepressants as relatively ineffective are less likely to refer depressed clients for medication evaluation, these findings might help to explain why many depressed individuals who could benefit from medication do not receive it. Concerns about interprofessional communication, as well as psychiatrists' beliefs about the quality of care received by persons treated by more than one professional, might also explain why joint treatment occurs less often than would be desirable. The authors discuss some of the implications that these findings may have for the education of health care professionals.     

No melancholia in poststroke depression? A phenomenologic comparison of primary and poststroke depression

The present study aimed at the phenomenologic comparison of depressive symptoms in elderly patients with poststroke depression (PSD) or primary depression (depression without a known neuropathology). We investigated 20 patients with PSD and 41 patients with primary depression. A structured clinical interview based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, self- and observer-based depression rating scales, a clinical neurologic examination, and neuroradiologic analysis based on standardized computed tomographic scan analysis were applied. The Cornell Depression Scale was used to compare mood-related signs, behavioral disturbances, physical signs, disturbances of cyclic signs, and ideational disturbances in both groups of patients. Those with PSD exhibited no melancholia and fewer cyclic and ideational disturbances but more physical signs of depression. These findings are in line with those of endocrinologic studies. Differences between both groups of patients indicate that careful considerations and further research are needed before treatment strategies developed for and evaluated in patients with primary depression are applied to patients with PSD.