Differences in course and comorbidity of recurrent depression in primary care and psychiatric populations

Indicators of patients with major depressive disorder in need of highly specialized care: A systematic review

Objectives

Early identification of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) that cannot be managed by secondary mental health services and who require highly specialized mental healthcare could enhance need-based patient stratification. This, in turn, may reduce the number of treatment steps needed to achieve and sustain an adequate treatment response. The development of a valid tool to identify patients with MDD in need of highly specialized care is hampered by the lack of a comprehensive understanding of indicators that distinguish patients with and without a need for highly specialized MDD care. The aim of this study, therefore, was to systematically review studies on indicators of patients with MDD likely in need of highly specialized care.

Methods

A structured literature search was performed on the PubMed and PsycINFO databases following PRISMA guidelines. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and determined the quality of the identified studies. Three reviewers independently executed data extraction by using a pre-piloted, standardized extraction form. The resulting indicators were grouped by topical similarity, creating a concise summary of the findings.

Results

The systematic search of all databases yielded a total of 7,360 references, of which sixteen were eligible for inclusion. The sixteen papers yielded a total of 48 unique indicators. Overall, a more pronounced depression severity, a younger age of onset, a history of prior poor treatment response, psychiatric comorbidity, somatic comorbidity, childhood trauma, psychosocial impairment, older age, and a socioeconomically disadvantaged status were found to be associated with proxies of need for highly specialized MDD care.

Conclusions

Several indicators are associated with the need for highly specialized MDD care. These indicators provide easily measurable factors that may serve as a starting point for the development of a valid tool to identify patients with MDD in need of highly specialized care.

Factors associated with recurrent depression: a prospective study in family practice

BACKGROUND

Depression has a high rate of recurrence. Finding the variables that predict which patients are at higher risk of experiencing a recurrent episode of depression would benefit an individual patient.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the factors associated with recurrent depression >12 months.

METHODS

Consecutive patients (N = 1094), aged 18-75 years, were recruited from 23 family practices across Estonia. The patients were followed up at 6- and 12-month intervals as suggested in the PredictD study. Depression was assessed using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Each participant filled in a questionnaire to assess their risk factors for depression.

RESULTS

Major depression was diagnosed in 13% of the patients. Twenty-eight per cent of the depressed patients had a recurrent episode of depression 12 months later. The odds of having recurrent depression were significantly higher for patients who had a history of drug abuse, odds ratio (OR) 7.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.42-39.43), for patients who had experienced discrimination, OR 2.92 (95% CI = 1.05-8.11) and for patients with a history of childhood abuse, OR 1.58 (95% CI = 1.05-2.38).

CONCLUSIONS

One-third of the patients developed recurrent depression. Drug abuse, discrimination and childhood abuse predicted recurrent depression. These factors should be taken into consideration by family doctors when managing patients with depression.

Clinical differences between first and recurrent episodes in depressive patients

BACKGROUND

Depressive disorder is one of the most common mental disorders in primary care. Depression is often a chronic disorder with recurrent episodes. Little is known about the differences in clinical profile between first and recurrent episodes. The aim of the study is to analyze the differences between clinical presentation of first and subsequent episodes of depressive disorders in primary care patients.

METHOD

A cross-sectional epidemiologic study in primary care centers in Spain was designed. A total of 10,257 primary care patients having a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition major depressive episode were analyzed. Clinical symptoms were measured using the Montgomery Asberg Depression Scale. Patient Health Questionnaire was used to assess somatic symptoms.

RESULTS

There were 40.6% of patients who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria for recurrent depression. Compared with those diagnosed of their first major depressive disorder, recurrent patients had greater rates and severity of depressive (t = -7.85, P < .001) and somatic symptoms (t = 5.64, P < .001). The severity of symptoms also increases with number of episodes (F = 40.2, P < .001, for depressive symptoms; F = 27.8, P < .001, for somatic symptoms). First-episode patients were more likely to experience reduced appetite (adjusted odds ratio, 1.2) and suicidal thoughts (adjusted odds ratio, 1.2).

CONCLUSION

There are differences in the clinical profile of initial and recurrent episodes in primary care depressive patients. Each recurrent depressive episode seems to have a greater impact on symptoms and well-being. The identification of a specific depression symptom profile in first or recurrent episodes is needed to improve the long-term management of major depressive episode patients in primary care settings.

Depression and comorbid panic in primary care patients

BACKGROUND

Comorbid panic symptoms may complicate depression treatment. However, most research focuses on specialty care, and the evidence in primary care is mixed.

METHODS

We analyzed data from a randomized trial investigating Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor (SSRI) Treatment, a longitudinal effectiveness study comparing 3 SSRIs for the treatment of depression in primary care (n = 573). Depression at month 6 was measured using the Symptom Checklist-20; remission was defined as a score < or = 0.5; partial response was defined as > or = 50% improvement but not to a level of < or = 0.5. Nonresponse, the referent level for all analyses, was defined as patients who do not meet either of these criteria. Panic symptoms (yes/no) were measured using a screening question.

RESULTS

Rates of remission vs. nonresponse [OR=1.06 (95% confidence interval 0.67, 1.67)] or partial response vs. nonresponse [OR=0.92 (95% CI 0.54, 1.57)] were similar among patients with baseline panic symptoms, adjusting for baseline depression severity. However, patients with persistent panic symptoms were less likely to experience remission (OR=0.38, 95% CI 0.18, 0.81), while the lower likelihood of partial response did not achieve statistical significance (0.66, 95% CI 0.33, 1.33). Results were similar using complete case, last observation carried forward, and multiple imputation methods, and were robust to varying the sensitivity and specificity of the panic screening question.

CONCLUSION

Panic symptoms that persist are associated with worse depression outcomes in the maintenance phase. Consequently, improvement in panic symptoms may be important for improved depression outcomes and primary care physicians should be attuned to the presence of panic symptoms when making treatment decisions.