Treating Depression: What Patients Want; Findings From a Randomized Controlled Trial in Primary Care

The Effects of Patient Preference on Clinical Outcome, Satisfaction and Adherence Within the Treatment of Anxiety and Depression: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Taking patient preference into consideration has received increased attention in the last decades. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the effects of patient preference on clinical outcome, satisfaction and adherence regarding treatment of depression and anxiety.

METHODS

Pubmed, Embase, PsycINFO and Scopus were searched for (cluster) randomized controlled trials. Twenty-six randomized controlled clinical trials were included, comprising 3670 participants, examining the effect of patient preference regarding treatment of anxiety and depression on clinical outcome, satisfaction and/or adherence.

RESULTS

No effect of patient preference was found on clinical outcome [d = 0.06, 95% CI = (-0.03, 0.15), p = 0.16, n = 23 studies]. A small effect of patient preference was found on treatment satisfaction [d = 0.33, 95% CI = (0.08, 0.59), p = 0.01, n = 6 studies] and on treatment adherence [OR = 1.55, 95% CI = (1.28, 1.87), p < 0.001, n = 22 studies].

LIMITATIONS

Patient preference is a heterogeneous concept, future studies should strive to equalize operationalization of preference. Subgroup analyses within this study should be interpreted with caution because the amount of studies per analysed subgroup was generally low. Most studies included in this meta-analysis focused on patients with depression. The small number of studies (n = 6) on satisfaction, prevents us from drawing firm conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

While this meta-analysis did not find a positive effect of considering patient preference on clinical outcome, it was associated with slightly better treatment satisfaction and adherence. Accommodating preference of patients with anxiety and depression can improve treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42020172556.

Evaluation of a decision aid for the treatment of depression among college students

Objective: Depression, and its treatment, is a concern among college students. Research indicates decision aids (DA) improve patients' treatment knowledge, decision making, and decisional conflict; however, it is unknown whether they are helpful for disseminating depression treatment information to college students. This study evaluated a DA for depression and its impact on college students' knowledge and treatment decision making. Methods: College students (N = 144) completed questionnaires pre-, post-, and at 1-month follow-up after reviewing an evidence-based DA for depression. Results: Participants rated the DA as highly acceptable and useful, and their knowledge increased at post-treatment and follow-up. However, treatment option presentation order influenced decision making. Conclusions: This DA is a useful and acceptable decision-making tool, and increased knowledge of depression and its treatment among college students. This study proposes a novel tool for educating college students about depression treatment, furthering our understanding of factors influencing treatment preferences.

Antioxidant Biomolecules and Their Potential for the Treatment of Difficult-to-Treat Depression and Conventional Treatment-Resistant Depression

Major depression is a devastating disease affecting an increasing number of people from a young age worldwide, a situation that is expected to be worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic. New approaches for the treatment of this disease are urgently needed since available treatments are not effective for all patients, take a long time to produce an effect, and are not well-tolerated in many cases; moreover, they are not safe for all patients. There is solid evidence showing that the antioxidant capacity is lower and the oxidative damage is higher in the brains of depressed patients as compared with healthy controls. Mitochondrial disfunction is associated with depression and other neuropsychiatric disorders, and this dysfunction can be an important source of oxidative damage. Additionally, neuroinflammation that is commonly present in the brain of depressive patients highly contributes to the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). There is evidence showing that pro-inflammatory diets can increase depression risk; on the contrary, an anti-inflammatory diet such as the Mediterranean diet can decrease it. Therefore, it is interesting to evaluate the possible role of plant-derived antioxidants in depression treatment and prevention as well as other biomolecules with high antioxidant and anti-inflammatory potential such as the molecules paracrinely secreted by mesenchymal stem cells. In this review, we evaluated the preclinical and clinical evidence showing the potential effects of different antioxidant and anti-inflammatory biomolecules as antidepressants, with a focus on difficult-to-treat depression and conventional treatment-resistant depression.

Inflammatory Process and Immune System in Major Depressive Disorder

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is one of the most common psychiatric illnesses in the general population. In mental disorders, the activation of inflammatory pathways in the brain is a major producer of excitotoxicity and an inducer of oxidative stress. The occurrence of these 2 events is partly responsible for the neuronal damage inherent in patients with mental disorders. In the case of MDD, the release of hormone and increase in pro-inflammatory cytokines in plasma and indicators of oxidative stress have been identified as consequences of this event. The most important affectations in patients with MDD are changes in their cognitive and executive functions due to brain inflammation. Hence, these biomarkers can serve as diagnostic and severity classification tools and treatment. In this work, we described the communication pathway between the immune and neuroendocrine systems in MDD and suggested possible therapeutic options for the disease.

Association of Patient Treatment Preference With Dropout and Clinical Outcomes in Adult Psychosocial Mental Health Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Receiving a preferred treatment has previously been associated with lower dropout rates and better clinical outcomes, but this scenario has not been investigated specifically for psychosocial interventions for patients with a mental health diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of patient treatment preference with dropout and clinical outcomes in adult psychosocial mental health interventions via a systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, PsychINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Nice HDAS (Healthcare Databases Advanced Search), Google Scholar, BASE (Bielefeld Academic Search Engine), Semantic Scholar, and OpenGrey were searched from inception to July 20, 2018, and updated on June 10, 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were eligible if they (1) were a randomized clinical trial; (2) involved participants older than 18 years; (3) involved participants with mental health diagnoses; (4) reported data from a group of participants who received their preferred treatment and a group who received their nonpreferred treatment or who were not given a choice; and (5) offered at least 1 psychosocial intervention.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two researchers extracted study data for attendance, dropout, and clinical outcomes independently. Both assessed the risk of bias according to the Cochrane tool. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The following 7 outcomes were examined: attendance, dropout, therapeutic alliance, depression and anxiety outcomes, global outcomes, treatment satisfaction, and remission.

RESULTS

A total of 7341 articles were identified, with 34 eligible for inclusion. Twenty-nine articles were included in the meta-analyses comprising 5294 participants. Receiving a preferred psychosocial mental health treatment had a medium positive association with dropout rates (relative risk, 0.62; 0.48-0.80; P < .001; I2 = 44.6%) and therapeutic alliance (Cohen d = 0.48; 0.15-0.82; P = .01; I2 = 20.4%). There was no evidence of a significant association with other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This is the first review, to our knowledge, examining the association of receiving a preferred psychosocial mental health treatment with both engagement and outcomes for patients with a mental health diagnosis. Patients with mental health diagnoses who received their preferred treatment demonstrated a lower dropout rate from treatment and higher therapeutic alliance scores. These findings underline the need to accommodate patient preference in mental health services to maximize treatment uptake and reduce financial costs of premature dropout and disengagement.

Psychological Treatment of Depression in Primary Care: Recent Developments

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We give an overview of recent developments on psychological treatments of depression in primary care.

RECENT FINDINGS

In recent years, it has become clear that psychotherapies can effectively be delivered through e-health applications. Furthermore, several studies in low and middle income countries have shown that lay health counselors can effectively deliver psychological therapies. Behavioral activation, a relatively simple form of therapy, has been found to be as effective as cognitive behavior therapy. Treatment of subthreshold depression has been found to not only reduce depressive symptoms but also prevent the onset of major depression. In addition, therapies are effective in older adults, patients with general medical disorders and in perinatal depression. Psychological therapies are effective in the treatment of depression in primary care, have longer lasting effects than drugs, are preferred by the majority of patients, and can be applied flexibly with different formats and across different target groups.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of e-health interventions for depression and anxiety in primary care: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Psychological interventions are labor-intensive and expensive, but e-health interventions may support them in primary care. In this study, we systematically reviewed the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of e-health interventions for depressive and anxiety symptoms and disorders in primary care.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane library, Embase, and PsychINFO until January 2018, for randomized controlled trials of e-health interventions for depression or anxiety in primary care. Two reviewers independently screened the identified publications, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool.

RESULTS

Out of 3617 publications, we included 14 that compared 33 treatments in 4183 participants. Overall, the methodological quality was poor to fair. The pooled effect size of e-health interventions was small (standardized mean difference = -0.19, 95%CI -0.31 to -0.06) for depression compared to control groups in the short-term, but this was maintained in the long-term (standardized mean difference = -0.22, 95%CI -0.35 to -0.09). Further analysis showed that e-health for depression had a small effect compared to care as usual and a moderate effect compared to waiting lists. One trial on anxiety showed no significant results. Four trials reported on cost-effectiveness.

LIMITATIONS

The trials studied different types of e-health interventions and had several risks of bias. Moreover, only one study was included for anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

E-health interventions for depression have a small effect in primary care, with a moderate effect compared to waiting lists. The approach also appeared to be cost-effective for depression. However, we found no evidence for its effectiveness for anxiety.

Meeting Its Mission: Does Psychosomatics Align With the Mission of Its Parent Organization, the Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine?

BACKGROUND

The vision and mission statements of the Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine (APM) indicate that the APM should promote excellence in clinical care for patients with comorbid psychiatric and general medical conditions by seeking to influence research, public policy, and interdisciplinary education.

OBJECTIVE

As the APM owns the journal, Psychosomatics, we sought to assess whether the APM's journal was fulfilling the vision and mission of its parent organization by reviewing the content of articles published in the journal to determine whether it sufficiently addresses the various clinical care knowledge areas it seeks to influence.

METHODS

We categorized content in all review articles, case reports, and original research articles published in Psychosomatics in 2015 and 2016. Each article was assigned to as many categories that it covered.

RESULTS

In the 163 articles reviewed, the most frequently covered fund of knowledge area was psychiatric morbidity in medical populations (44.2%); among psychiatric disorders, mood disorders (22.1%), psychiatric disorders due to a general medical condition or toxic substance (21.5%), anxiety disorders (14.7%), and delirium (13.5) were the most frequently covered. Of the medical and surgical topics, neurology (19.6%), coping with chronic illness/psychological response to illness (17.8%), toxicology (11.7%), outpatient medicine (10.4%), and cardiology (9.8%) appeared most often.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychosomatics appears to be successfully providing content relevant to the APM's vision and mission statements and to practitioners of psychosomatic medicine.