The usability of daytime and night-time heart rate dynamics as digital biomarkers of depression severity

BACKGROUND

Alterations in heart rate (HR) may provide new information about physiological signatures of depression severity. This 2-year study in individuals with a history of recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) explored the intra-individual variations in HR parameters and their relationship with depression severity.

METHODS

Data from 510 participants (Number of observations of the HR parameters = 6666) were collected from three centres in the Netherlands, Spain, and the UK, as a part of the remote assessment of disease and relapse-MDD study. We analysed the relationship between depression severity, assessed every 2 weeks with the Patient Health Questionnaire-8, with HR parameters in the week before the assessment, such as HR features during all day, resting periods during the day and at night, and activity periods during the day evaluated with a wrist-worn Fitbit device. Linear mixed models were used with random intercepts for participants and countries. Covariates included in the models were age, sex, BMI, smoking and alcohol consumption, antidepressant use and co-morbidities with other medical health conditions.

RESULTS

Decreases in HR variation during resting periods during the day were related with an increased severity of depression both in univariate and multivariate analyses. Mean HR during resting at night was higher in participants with more severe depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that alterations in resting HR during all day and night are associated with depression severity. These findings may provide an early warning of worsening depression symptoms which could allow clinicians to take responsive treatment measures promptly.

Assessment of a Primary Support Program: family physicians and mental health professionals' perspective

BACKGROUND

Mental health (MH) disorders are increasingly prevalent in primary care (PC) and this has generated, in recent years, the development of strategies based on the collaborative model and the stepped care model. The Primary Support Program (PSP) was implemented in the community of Catalonia (Spain) during 2006 to improve, from the first level of care, treatment of the population with mild-moderate complexity MH problems along with identification and referral of severe cases to specialized care. The aim of the present study was to identify the strengths and limitations of the PSP from the perspective of health professionals involved in the programme.

METHODS

An explanatory qualitative study based on Grounded Theory. We conducted group semistructured interviews with 37 family physicians and 34 MH professionals. A constant comparative method of analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Operation of the PSP is influenced by internal factors, such as the programme framework, MH liaison, management of service supply and demand, and the professional team involved. Additionally, external factors which had an impact were related to the patient, the professionals, the Health System, and community resources.

CONCLUSIONS

The operation of the PSP could benefit from a review of the programme framework and optimization of MH liaison. Improvements are also proposed for MH training in PC, intraprofessional coordination, use of community resources, and creation of efficient continuous assessment systems.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of antidepressant treatment in primary health care: a six-month randomised study comparing fluoxetine to imipramine

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, studies of the effectiveness of pharmacological treatment for depression have often been based on research designs intended to measure efficacy, and for this reason the results are of limited generalizability. Research is needed comparing the clinical and economic outcomes of antidepressants in day-to-day clinical practice.

METHODS

A six-month randomised prospective naturalistic study comparing fluoxetine to imipramine carried out in three primary care health centres. Outcome measures were the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), direct costs, indirect costs and total costs. Subjects were evaluated at the beginning of treatment and at one, three and six months thereafter.

RESULTS

Of the 103 patients, 38.8% (n = 40) were diagnosed with major depressive disorder, 14.6% (n = 15) with dysthymic disorder, and 46.6% (n = 48) with depressive disorder not otherwise specified. Patients with major depressive disorder or dysthymic disorder achieved similar clinical improvement in both treatment groups (mean MADRS ratings decrease in major depressive disorder from baseline to 6 months of 18.3 for imipramine and 18.8 for fluoxetine). For patients with major depressive disorder and dysthymic disorder, the imipramine group had fewer treatment-associated costs (imipramine 469.66 Euro versus fluoxetine 1,585.93 Euro in major depressive disorder, p < 0.05; imipramine 175.39 Euro versus fluoxetine 2,929.36 Euro in dysthymic disorder, p < 0.05). The group with depressive disorder not otherwise specified did not experience statistically significant differences in clinical and costs outcomes between treatment groups.

LIMITATIONS

Exclusion criteria, participating physicians may not represent GPs.

CONCLUSIONS

In a primary care context, imipramine may represent a more cost-effective treatment option than fluoxetine for treating major depressive disorder or dysthymic disorder. There were no differences in cost-effectiveness in the treatment of depressive disorder not otherwise specified.