Improving physicians' recognition and treatment of depression in general medical care. Results from a randomized clinical trial. Systematic detection and multidisciplinary care of depression in older medical inpatients: a randomized trial. Psychosocial interventions for somatizing patients by the general practitioner: a randomized controlled trial. Recognition and treatment of depression in a family medicine practice. [A randomized trial of pharmacotherapy with telephone monitoring to improve treatment of depression in primary care in Santiago, Chile]. Telephone-delivered collaborative care for treating post-CABG depression: a randomized controlled trial. A randomized controlled trial of a close monitoring program for minor depression and distress. Outcomes of an effectiveness trial of cognitive-behavioural intervention by mental health nurses in schizophrenia. Recognition of depression by family medicine residents: the impact of screening.
A randomized clinical trial was performed to assess whether the results of a depression screening instrument, when provided to physicians, could influence their recognition and treatment of depression in a primary care setting. The intervention consisted of randomly informing or not informing physicians of the depression status of 100 patients who screened positively for depression on both the Zung Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) and a DSM-III screen. For 12 months patients were followed to assess depression status, and medical records were audited to assess depression recognition and treatment. Results show that feedback to physicians of SDS scores of previously unrecognized depressed patients makes a significant difference in greater recognition (56.2% vs. 34.6%) and treatment (56.2% vs. 42.3%) of depression over the 12-month study period. This was especially true for patients with high somatic (P less than 0.05) or low psychologic symptoms of depression (P less than 0.05). These results suggest that routine use of a depression screening instrument can improve physician recognition of depression, with increased initiation of treatment. Major depression is a frequent and serious disorder in older medical inpatients. Because the condition goes undetected and untreated in most of these patients, we conducted a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a strategy of systematic detection and multidisciplinary treatment of depression in this population.
                Consecutive patients aged 65 years or more admitted to general medical services in a primary care hospital between October 1999 and November 2002 were screened for depression with the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS) within 48 hours after admission. Patients found to have major depression were randomly allocated to receive the intervention or usual care. The intervention involved consultation and treatment by a psychiatrist and follow-up by a research nurse and the patient's family physician. Research assistants, blind to group allocation, collected data from the patients at enrollment and at 3 and 6 months later using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), the Medical Outcomes 36-item Short Form (SF-36), the DIS, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Older Americans Resources and Services (OARS) questionnaire to assess basic and instrumental activities of daily living (OARS-ADL and OARS-IADL) and the Rating Scale for Side Effects. Data on the severity of illness, length of hospital stay, health services and medication use, mortality and process of care were also collected. The primary outcome measures were the HAMD and SF-36.
                Of 1500 eligible patients who were screened, 157 were found to have major depression and consented to participate (78 in the intervention group and 79 in the usual care group). At randomization, there were no clinically or statistically significant differences between the 2 groups. Sixty-four patients completed follow-up to 6 months, 57 withdrew, and 36 died. At 6 months, there were no clinically or statistically significant differences the 2 groups in HAMD or SF-36 scores or any of the secondary outcome measures.
                We were unable to demonstrate that systematic detection and multidisciplinary care of depression was more beneficial than usual care for elderly medical inpatients. The objective of this study was to compare the effects of psychosocial interventions based on the modified reattribution model for somatizing patients in general practice (GP) with those of nonspecific psychosocial primary care (PPC) alone.
                Forty-two GPs were randomized, 23 into the intervention group (IG), who were trained in reattribution techniques, and 19 into the control group (CG). One hundred twenty-seven patients were included. Primary outcome measures were somatoform symptoms and quality of life.
                Multilevel modeling revealed a reduction of physical symptoms (P = .007), an improvement in physical functioning (P = .0172), and a reduction of depression (P = .0211) and anxiety (P = .0388) in the IG compared with the CG at the 3-month follow-up. However, results no longer remained significant after controlling for baseline and covariate variables besides a reduction of physical symptoms at 6-month follow-up (P = .029).
                Compared with nonspecific PPC, the effects of reattribution techniques were small and limited to physical symptoms. To test the hypothesis that depression is significantly underdiagnosed in general medical settings, the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale was administered to 1,086 family medicine outpatients seen during a 12-month period before their initial medical examination. The effects of such screening on clinical recognition and treatment of depression were examined. Of the 1,086 patients, 143 (13.2%) were symptomatically depressed. These patients were randomized into two groups: 102 were identified as clinically depressed to their physician, and the remaining 41 were not (control group). Physicians diagnosed depression in 15% of the control group and in 68% of the identified group. At 4-week follow-up, 64% of the identified patients who were treated with maprotiline (16 of 25) showed improvement; only 28% of the identified patients who were electively not treated improved. Improvement occurred in only 18% of the control group. It appears that the diagnosis of depression is not ordinarily made in family medicine outpatient settings and that self-rating depression scales are useful diagnostic aids, whose regular use is indicated by the high prevalence of depression in general medical populations. Depression is a public health problem, due to its high prevalence and its associated disability.
                To compare a pharmacological intervention for depression controlled by phone from a central level (TM) and the usual treatment (TH) in a randomized clinical trial.
                Three hundred and forty five women, aged 22 to 59 years were studied. They were randomly assigned to receive the usual therapy or a pharmacological intervention with periodical telephone contacts with medical collaboration personnel, to reinforce compliance with treatment and educate about the disease. Women were blindly evaluated at 3 and 6 months with the Hamilton depression rating score (HDRS) and the SF-36 to assess depressive symptoms and quality of life, respectively.
                In both evaluations, improvement was significantly greater in the TM group than the TH group. At 3 months, improvement was higher in the TM group in the subscales of physical function, pain, general health, energy, emotional role, mental health and standardized physical and psychic scales of SF-36. At 6 months, this significant difference in favour of TM was maintained for energy, mental health and the standardized psychic scale.
                A telephone reinforcement improves the outcomes of treatments for depression. Depressive symptoms commonly follow coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and are associated with less positive clinical outcomes.
                To test the effectiveness of telephone-delivered collaborative care for post-CABG depression vs usual physician care.
                Single-blind effectiveness trial at 7 university-based and community hospitals in or near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Participants were 302 post-CABG patients with depression (150, intervention; 152, usual care) and a comparison group of 151 randomly sampled post-CABG patients without depression recruited between March 2004 and September 2007 and observed as outpatients until June 2008.
                Eight months of telephone-delivered collaborative care provided by nurses working with patients' primary care physicians and supervised by a psychiatrist and primary care physician from this study.
                Mental health-related quality of life (HRQL) measured by the Short Form-36 Mental Component Summary (SF-36 MCS) at 8-month follow-up; secondary outcome measures included assessment of mood symptoms (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HRS-D]), physical HRQL (SF-36 PCS), and functional status (Duke Activity Status Index [DASI]); and hospital readmissions.
                The intervention patients reported greater improvements in mental HRQL (all P < or = .02) (SF-36 MCS: Delta, 3.2 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-6.0), physical functioning (DASI: Delta, 4.6 points; 95% CI, 1.9-7.3), and mood symptoms (HRS-D: Delta, 3.1 points; 95% CI, 1.3-4.9); and were more likely to report a 50% or greater decline in HRS-D score from baseline (50.0% vs 29.6%; number needed to treat, 4.9 [95% CI, 3.2-10.4]) than usual care patients (P < .001). Men with depression were particularly likely to benefit from the intervention (SF-36 MCS: Delta, 5.7 points; 95% CI, 2.2-9.2; P = .001). However, the mean HRQL and physical functioning of intervention patients did not reach that of the nondepressed comparison group.
                Compared with usual care, telephone-delivered collaborative care for treatment of post-CABG depression resulted in improved HRQL, physical functioning, and mood symptoms at 8-month follow-up.
                clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00091962. Minor depression is almost twice as common in primary care (PC) as major depression. Despite the high prevalence, few evidence-based algorithms exist for managing patients with minor depression or patients presenting solely with distress.
                The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of a telephone-based close monitoring program to manage PC patients with minor depression or distress.
                Subjects were randomly assigned to either the control arm (usual care; UC) or the intervention arm (close monitoring; CM). We hypothesized that those randomized to CM would exhibit less depression and be less likely to have symptoms progress to the point of meeting diagnostic criteria.
                Overall, 223 PC subjects with minor depression or distress consented to participation in this trial.
                At baseline, subjects completed a telephone-based evaluation comprised of validated diagnostic assessments of depression and other MH disorders. Outcomes were assessed at six months utilizing this same battery. Chart reviews were conducted to track care received, such as prescribed antidepressants and MH and primary care visits.
                Subjects in the CM arm exhibited fewer psychiatric diagnoses than those in the UC arm (chi(2) = 4.04, 1 df, p = 0.04). In addition, the intervention group showed improved overall physical health (SF-12 PCS scores) (M = 45.1, SD = 11.8 versus M = 41.5, SD = 12.4) (chi(2) = 5.90, 1 df, p = .02).
                Those randomized to CM exhibited less MH problems at the conclusion of the trial, indicating that the close monitoring program is effective, feasible and valuable. The findings of this study will allow us to enhance clinical care and support the integration of mental health services and primary care. Little is known about the medium-term durability of cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) in a community sample of people with schizophrenia.
                To investigate whether brief CBT produces clinically important outcomes in relation to recovery, symptom burden and readmission to hospital in people with schizophrenia at 1-year follow-up.
                Participants (336 of 422 randomised at baseline) were followed up at a mean of 388 days (s.d. = 53) by raters masked to treatment allocation (CBT or usual care).
                At 1-year follow-up, participants who received CBT had significantly more insight (P = 0.021) and significantly fewer negative symptoms (P = 0.002). Brief therapy protected against depression with improving insight and against relapse; significantly reduced time spent in hospital for those who did relapse and delayed time to admission. It did not improve psychotic symptoms or occupational recovery, nor have a lasting effect on overall symptoms or depression at follow-up.
                Mental health nurses should be trained in brief CBT for schizophrenia to supplement case management, family interventions and expert therapy for treatment resistance. Psychiatric problems are often encountered in general medical settings, yet physicians frequently fail to identify such problems. Validated questionnaires assessing psychiatric symptoms have been shown to be more sensitive than physicians in detecting cases of psychiatric morbidity. This study deals with depression, the psychiatric problem most frequently seen in primary care settings. A self-administered depression questionnaire was used to alert residents to possible cases of depression. Relay of information from the questionnaire significantly increased resident recognition of depression.
Firm conclusions on the efficacy of physical methods of treatment cannot be made as we identified only one small RCT that was of short duration. More larger and longer term RCTs are needed in this area. Current screening tools for depression are recognised to have poor specificity in the medically ill due to overlap of somatic symptoms of the medical illness. The development of a valid diagnostic tool would be helpful.