Making the diagnosis of depression in the primary care setting

Depression Treatment Initiation Among Patients With Versus Without Chronic Pain

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which the presence of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) impacts the likelihood that patients with diagnoses of depression will initiate depression treatment compared with those without CNCP.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of Kaiser Permanente of Georgia members older than 18 years who received a diagnosis of depression. Demographics and medical history were extracted from the electronic health record database. Members were further classified by the presence or absence of a CNCP diagnosis. Outcomes of interest were treated as time dependent and included ( 1 ) time to fulfillment of a new antidepressant medication and ( 2 ) time to a follow-up mental health encounter. Outcomes were compared between members with and without a CNCP diagnosis using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox proportional hazard regression models.

RESULTS

During the study period, 22,996 members met the inclusion criteria and 27.4% had a diagnosis of CNCP. In the matched sample, there was no difference in the time to a new antidepressant fill among members with and without CNCP (hazard ratio = 0.96; 95% confidence interval = 0.90-1.02; p = .18). In contrast, members with CNCP were significantly less likely to have a new mental health encounter after diagnosis (hazard ratio = 0.87; 95% confidence interval = 0.81-0.94; p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with CNCP were significantly less likely to have a new mental health encounter after a depression diagnosis compared with patients without CNCP. Additional outreach and consideration may be needed to improve initiation of depression treatment for newly diagnosed patients with comorbid depression and CNCP.

Exploring the Role of the Internet, Care Quality and Communication in Shaping Mental Health: An Analysis of the Health Information National Trends Survey

Determinants of user mental health are diverse, interrelated, and often multifaceted. This study explores how internet use, perceived care quality, patient education, and patient centered communication influence mental health, using structural equation modeling. Findings suggest that increased internet use even for health purposes negatively impacts mental health (= -0:087; = -0:065; P < 0:001). On the other hand, education level, patient centered-communication (PC-Com) and perception of care quality impact mental health positively (= 0:082; = 0:146; = 0:077; P < 0:001; respectively). Moreover, we also explored the changes across various demographics. The influence of patient education on PC-Com was only significant for Hispanic respondents (= -0:160; P < 0:001). Internet use for health purposes influenced P C-Com negatively for White American respondents (= -0:047; P = 0:015). The study reinstated that the internet use, patient centered communication, patient education, and perceived care quality might influence mental health. The society will increasingly seek health information from online sources, so our study provides recommendations to make online health information sources more user friendly and trustworthy, ultimately to minimize negative impact on mental health.

An Ethnic/Racial Comparison of Causal Beliefs and Treatment Preferences for the Symptoms of Depression Among Patients with Diabetes

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to explore African American, Latino, and Non-Hispanic White adult patients with type 2 diabetes cultural perceptions of symptoms of depression and factors that predict depression care treatment preferences between these groups.

Methods

A community sample of African Americans, Latinos, and White diabetic adults receiving services in 1 of 2 central Austin, Texas facilities participated in the study. Each participant was given a survey, which consisted of the following 5 components: (1) illness screener questions, (2) demographic questions, (3) Patient Health Questionnaire, (4) Depression Treatment Questionnaire, and (5) Illness Perception Questionnaire. A binary logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between cultural perceptions of symptoms and the predictor variables. A multinomial logistic regression analyses was used to examine the relationship between treatment and provider preferences for the symptoms of depression and ethnicity.

Results

The first research question addressed whether there were differences across ethnicity in how symptoms of depression are attributed among patients with diabetes. There were 7 causal beliefs that were associated with differences in cultural endorsements of the causes of depressive symptoms. In addition, culture was associated with treatment preferences but not with provider preferences.

Conclusions

The utility of assessing a patient’s understanding of symptoms of depression to determine how personal illness models impact treatment preferences and clinical implications of how knowledge of patient’s causal attributions can aid medical and behavioral health providers working in collaborative management of diabetes and depression are discussed.

The effects of a shared decision-making intervention in primary care of depression: a cluster-randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Patient-centred depression care approaches should better address barriers of insufficient patient information and involvement in the treatment decision process. Additional research is needed to test the effect of increased patient participation on outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess, if patient participation in decision-making via a shared decision-making intervention leads to improved treatment adherence, satisfaction, and clinical outcome without increasing consultation time.

METHODS

Cluster-randomized controlled intervention study based on physician training and patient-centered decision aid compared to usual care in primary care settings in Südbaden region of Germany. Twenty-three primary care physicians treating 405 patients with newly diagnosed depression were enrolled. Patient involvement was measured with the patient perceived involvement in care scale (PICS) and a patient participation scale (MSH-scale). Patient satisfaction was measured by the CSQ-8 questionnaire. Treatment adherence was evaluated by patient and provider self-report. Depression severity and remission outcomes were assessed with the Brief PHQ-D.

RESULTS

Physician facilitation of patient participation improved significantly and to a greater extent in the intervention compared to the control group. There was no intervention effect for depression severity reduction. Doctor facilitation of patient participation, patient-rated involvement, and physician assessment of adherence improved only in the intervention group. Patient satisfaction at post-intervention was higher in the intervention group compared to the control group. The consultation time did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

A shared decision-making intervention was better than usual care for improving patient participation in treatment decision-making, and patient satisfaction without increasing consultation time. Additional research is needed to model causal linkages in the decision-making process in regard to outcomes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The study results encourage the implementation of patient participation in primary care of depression.

Depressed patients' perceptions of depression treatment decision-making

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about the feasibility and effects of patient-clinician shared decision-making (SDM) for depression treatment. Within a goal of informing the design of a SDM intervention, the objective of this study was to investigate depressed patients' perceptions of the treatment decision-making process with general practitioners (GPs).

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Data were gathered from a convenience sample of 40 depressed patients to understand key aspects of treatment decision-making from the patient perspective. The sample varied in depression severity and type of setting in which treatment was sought.

MAIN VARIABLES STUDIED

Semi-structured interview questions focused on patients' prior experiences with depression and treatment, perceptions of the treatment decision-making process, and needs and expectations about treatment. Current depression severity was also assessed.

RESULTS

Patient lack of insight regarding depression severity substantially delayed patient engagement in treatment seeking and decision-making. Patients expected their GPs to be a first and main source of objective information and discussion about depression and treatment and to provide emotional support for decision-making. Patients also identified needs for additional information about depression and its treatment, as well as concerns about certain aspects of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The depression treatment context has some aspects that differ from treatment decision-making for other types of health conditions. SDM approaches for depression treatment should be adapted based on depression severity and patient-identified needs.

Panic disorder in primary care: patients' attributions of illness causes and willingness to accept psychiatric treatment

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the causes that primary care patients with panic disorder (PD) attribute to their panic symptoms, and their acceptance of various psychiatric treatment options.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional assessment of 306 patients treated at two primary care clinics, 42 met criteria for DSM-IV PD in the past year. The authors classified these 42 PD-positive patients to one of two groups: those receiving both primary and specialty mental health care (PC+MH; n = 19) and those receiving only primary care (PC-only; n = 23). Patients rated the probability of four possible causes of their panic symptoms, and level of acceptability of three psychiatric and two medical treatments for PD. To place primary care patients' ratings into a broader context, a third contrast group of PD-positive patients, recruited from clinical trials of investigational PD pharmacotherapies (n = 31), also rated causes and treatment acceptability.

RESULTS

Participants of the three treatment groups attributed psychiatric causes for their panic symptoms in approximately the same proportion (78 percent to 90 percent; p = ns). PC-only participants attributed medical causes for panic symptoms more frequently than PC+MH and PD Clinical Trials participants (48 percent vs. 5 percent and 32 percent; p = .01). Remarkably, the great majority of patients across all groups expressed willingness to see psychiatrists (84 percent to 94 percent) and psychotherapists (95 percent to 100 percent), and to take psychotropic medications (87 percent to 100 percent).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study most patients attributed a psychiatric cause for panic symptoms and communicated strong acceptance of psychiatric treatment. Thus, we recommend that primary care clinicians more assertively inform their patients of PD diagnoses and recommend psychiatric treatments with less fear about stigmatizing and alienating them.

Optimal antidepressant dosing. Practical framework for selection, titration, and duration of therapy

Appropriate antidepressant dosing and trial duration are crucial for successful treatment of depression. Before prescribing an antidepressant, primary care physicians should take into account each patient's history, responses to previous antidepressants, depressive symptoms, coexisting illnesses, and current prescriptions. Physicians must be able to help patients manage side effects and know when to discontinue treatment, switch antidepressants, or refer patients to a psychiatrist.