Anna Muntingh

Is the beck anxiety inventory a good tool to assess the severity of anxiety? A primary care study in The Netherlands study of depression and anxiety (NESDA)

BackgroundAppropriate management of anxiety disorders in primary care requires clinical assessment and monitoring of the severity of the anxiety. This study focuses on the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) as a severity indicator for anxiety in primary care patients with different anxiety disorders (social phobia, panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, agoraphobia or generalized anxiety disorder), depressive disorders or no disorder (controls).MethodsParticipants were 1601 primary care patients participating in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA). Regression analyses were used to compare the mean BAI scores of the different diagnostic groups and to correct for age and gender.ResultsPatients with any anxiety disorder had a significantly higher mean score than the controls. A significantly higher score was found for patients with panic disorder and agoraphobia compared to patients with agoraphobia only or social phobia only. BAI scores in patients with an anxiety disorder with a co-morbid anxiety disorder and in patients with an anxiety disorder with a co-morbid depressive disorder were significantly higher than BAI scores in patients with an anxiety disorder alone or patients with a depressive disorder alone. Depressed and anxious patients did not differ significantly in their mean scores.ConclusionsThe results suggest that the BAI may be used as a severity indicator of anxiety in primary care patients with different anxiety disorders. However, because the instrument seems to reflect the severity of depression as well, it is not a suitable instrument to discriminate between anxiety and depression in a primary care population.

Collaborative stepped care for anxiety disorders in primary care: aims and design of a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundPanic disorder (PD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) are two of the most disabling and costly anxiety disorders seen in primary care. However, treatment quality of these disorders in primary care generally falls beneath the standard of international guidelines. Collaborative stepped care is recommended for improving treatment of anxiety disorders, but cost-effectiveness of such an intervention has not yet been assessed in primary care. This article describes the aims and design of a study that is currently underway. The aim of this study is to evaluate effects and costs of a collaborative stepped care approach in the primary care setting for patients with PD and GAD compared with care as usual.Methods/designThe study is a two armed, cluster randomized controlled trial. Care managers and their primary care practices will be randomized to deliver either collaborative stepped care (CSC) or care as usual (CAU). In the CSC group a general practitioner, care manager and psychiatrist work together in a collaborative care framework. Stepped care is provided in three steps: 1) guided self-help, 2) cognitive behavioral therapy and 3) antidepressant medication. Primary care patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of PD and/or GAD will be included. 134 completers are needed to attain sufficient power to show a clinically significant effect of 1/2 SD on the primary outcome measure, the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). Data on anxiety symptoms, mental and physical health, quality of life, health resource use and productivity will be collected at baseline and after three, six, nine and twelve months.DiscussionIt is hypothesized that the collaborative stepped care intervention will be more cost-effective than care as usual. The pragmatic design of this study will enable the researchers to evaluate what is possible in real clinical practice, rather than under ideal circumstances. Many requirements for a high quality trial are being met. Results of this study will contribute to treatment options for GAD and PD in the primary care setting. Results will become available in 2011.Trial registrationNTR1071

Collaborative stepped care v. care as usual for common mental disorders: 8-month, cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND Thus far collaborative stepped care (CSC) studies have not incorporated self-help as a first step. AIMS To evaluate the effectiveness of CSC in the treatment of common mental disorders. METHOD An 8-month cluster randomised controlled trial comparing CSC to care as usual (CAU) (Dutch Trial Register identifier NTR1224). The CSC consisted of a stepped care approach guided by a psychiatric nurse in primary care with the addition of antidepressants dependent on the severity of the disorder, followed by cognitive-behavioural therapy in mental healthcare. RESULTS Twenty general practitioners (GPs) and 8 psychiatric nurses were randomised to provide CSC or CAU. The GPs recruited 163 patients of whom 85% completed the post-test measurements. At 4-month mid-test CSC was superior to CAU: 74.7% (n = 68) v. 50.8% (n = 31) responders (P = 0.003). At 8-month post-test and 12-month follow-up no significant differences were found as the patients in the CAU group improved as well. CONCLUSIONS Treatment within a CSC model resulted in an earlier treatment response compared with CAU.

Effectiveness of collaborative stepped care for anxiety disorders in primary care: a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.

Background: Collaborative stepped care (CSC) may be an appropriate model to provide evidence-based treatment for anxiety disorders in primary care. Methods: In a cluster randomised controlled trial, the effectiveness of CSC compared to care as usual (CAU) for adults with panic disorder (PD) or generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) in primary care was evaluated. Thirty-one psychiatric nurses who provided their services to 43 primary care practices in the Netherlands were randomised to deliver CSC (16 psychiatric nurses, 23 practices) or CAU (15 psychiatric nurses, 20 practices). CSC was provided by the psychiatric nurses (care managers) in collaboration with the general practitioner and a consultant psychiatrist. The intervention consisted of 3 steps, namely guided self-help, cognitive behavioural therapy and antidepressants. Anxiety symptoms were measured with the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) at baseline and after 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Results: We recruited 180 patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of PD or GAD, of whom 114 received CSC and 66 received usual primary care. On the BAI, CSC was superior to CAU [difference in gain scores from baseline to 3 months: -5.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.28 to -1.94; 6 months: -4.65, 95% CI -7.93 to -1.38; 9 months: -5.67, 95% CI -8.97 to -2.36; 12 months: -6.84, 95% CI -10.13 to -3.55]. Conclusions: CSC, with guided self-help as a first step, was more effective than CAU for primary care patients with PD or GAD.

Cost utility analysis of a collaborative stepped care intervention for panic and generalized anxiety disorders in primary care.

OBJECTIVE Generalized anxiety and panic disorders are a burden on the society because they are costly and have a significant adverse effect on quality of life. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-utility of a collaborative stepped care intervention for panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder in primary care compared to care as usual from a societal perspective. METHODS The design of the study was a two armed cluster randomized controlled trial. In total 43 primary care practices in the Netherlands participated in the study. Eventually, 180 patients were included (114 collaborative stepped care, 66 care as usual). Baseline measures and follow-up measures (3, 6, 9 and 12 months) were assessed using questionnaires. We applied the TiC-P, the SF-HQL and the EQ-5D respectively measuring health care utilization, production losses and health related quality of life. RESULTS The average annual direct medical costs in the collaborative stepped care group were 1854 Euro (95% C.I., 1726 to 1986) compared to €1503 (95% C.I., 1374 to 1664) in the care as usual group. The average quality of life years (QALYs) gained was 0.05 higher in the collaborative stepped care group, leading to an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 6965 Euro per QALY. Inclusion of the productivity costs, consequently reflecting the full societal costs, decreased the ratio even more. CONCLUSION The study showed that collaborative stepped care was a cost effective intervention for panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder and was even dominant when a societal perspective was taken. TRIAL REGISTRATION trialregister.nl, Netherlands Trial Register NTR107.

Stepped care for depression is easy to recommend, but harder to implement: results of an explorative study within primary care in the Netherlands

BackgroundDepression is a common mental disorder with a high burden of disease which is mainly treated in primary care. It is unclear to what extent stepped care principles are applied in routine primary care. The first aim of this explorative study was to examine the gap between routine primary depression care and optimal care, as formulated in the depression guidelines. The second aim was to explore the facilitators and barriers that affect the provision of optimal care.MethodsOptimal care was operationalised by indicators covering the entire continuum of depression care: from prevention to chronic depression. Routine care was investigated by interviewing general practitioners (GPs) individually and together with other mental health care providers about the depression care they delivered collaboratively. Qualitative analysis of transcripts was performed using thematic coding. Additionally, the GPs completed a self-report questionnaire.ResultsSix GPs and 22 other (mostly primary) mental health care providers participated. The GPs and their primary care colleagues embraced a general stepped care approach. They offered psycho-education and counselling to mildly depressed patients. When the treatment effects were not satisfactory or patients were more severely depressed, the GPs offered, or referred to, psychotherapy or pharmacotherapy. Patients with a complex and severe depressive disorder were directly referred to specialised mental health care. However, GPs relied on their clinical judgment and rarely used instruments to assess and monitor the severity of depressive symptoms. Structured, evidence based interventions such as self-management and e-health were rarely offered to patients with depressive symptoms. Specific psychological interventions for relapse prevention or for chronically depressed patients were not available. A wide range of influencing factors for the provision of optimal depression care were put forward. Close collaboration with other mental health care professionals was considered an important factor for improvement by nearly all GPs.ConclusionsThe management of depression in primary care seems in line with stepped care principles, although it can be improved by applying more elements of a stepped care approach. Collaboration between GPs and mental health care providers in primary care and secondary care should be enhanced.

Screening high-risk patients and assisting in diagnosing anxiety in primary care: the Patient Health Questionnaire evaluated.

BackgroundQuestionnaires may help in detecting and diagnosing anxiety disorders in primary care. However, since utility of these questionnaires in target populations is rarely studied, the Patient Health Questionnaire anxiety modules (PHQ) were evaluated for use as: a) a screener in high-risk patients, and/or b) a case finder for general practitioners (GPs) to assist in diagnosing anxiety disorders.MethodsA cross-sectional analysis was performed in 43 primary care practices in the Netherlands. The added value of the PHQ was assessed in two samples: 1) 170 patients at risk of anxiety disorders (or developing them) according to their electronic medical records (high-risk sample); 2) 141 patients identified as a possible ‘anxiety case’ by a GP (GP-identified sample). All patients completed the PHQ and were interviewed using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric interview to classify DSM-IV anxiety disorders. Psychometric properties were calculated, and a logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the diagnostic value of the PHQ.ResultsUsing only the screening questions of the PHQ, the area under the curve was 83% in the high-risk sample. In GP-identified patients the official algorithm showed the best characteristics with an area under the curve of 77%. Positive screening questions significantly increased the odds of an anxiety disorder diagnosis in high-risk patients (odds ratio = 23.4; 95% confidence interval 6.9 to 78.8) as did a positive algorithm in GP-identified patients (odds ratio = 13.9; 95% confidence interval 3.8 to 50.6).ConclusionsThe PHQ screening questions can be used to screen for anxiety disorders in high-risk primary care patients. In GP-identified patients, the benefit of the PHQ is less evident.

Risk of relapse after antidepressant discontinuation in anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis of relapse prevention trials

Objectives To examine the risk of relapse and time to relapse after discontinuation of antidepressants in patients with anxiety disorder who responded to antidepressants, and to explore whether relapse risk is related to type of anxiety disorder, type of antidepressant, mode of discontinuation, duration of treatment and follow-up, comorbidity, and allowance of psychotherapy. Design Systematic review and meta-analyses of relapse prevention trials. Data sources PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and clinical trial registers (from inception to July 2016). Study selection Eligible studies included patients with anxiety disorder who responded to antidepressants, randomised patients double blind to either continuing antidepressants or switching to placebo, and compared relapse rates or time to relapse. Data extraction Two independent raters selected studies and extracted data. Random effect models were used to estimate odds ratios for relapse, hazard ratios for time to relapse, and relapse prevalence per group. The effect of various categorical and continuous variables was explored with subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses respectively. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. Results The meta-analysis included 28 studies (n=5233) examining relapse with a maximum follow-up of one year. Across studies, risk of bias was considered low. Discontinuation increased the odds of relapse compared with continuing antidepressants (summary odds ratio 3.11, 95% confidence interval 2.48 to 3.89). Subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses showed no statistical significance. Time to relapse (n=3002) was shorter when antidepressants were discontinued (summary hazard ratio 3.63, 2.58 to 5.10; n=11 studies). Summary relapse prevalences were 36.4% (30.8% to 42.1%; n=28 studies) for the placebo group and 16.4% (12.6% to 20.1%; n=28 studies) for the antidepressant group, but prevalence varied considerably across studies, most likely owing to differences in the length of follow-up. Dropout was higher in the placebo group (summary odds ratio 1.31, 1.06 to 1.63; n=27 studies). Conclusions Up to one year of follow-up, discontinuation of antidepressant treatment results in higher relapse rates among responders compared with treatment continuation. The lack of evidence after a one year period should not be interpreted as explicit advice to discontinue antidepressants after one year. Given the chronicity of anxiety disorders, treatment should be directed by long term considerations, including relapse prevalence, side effects, and patients’ preferences.

Pathways to experiencing mental problems and need for mental support in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) affects the physical and emotional wellbeing of patients. More information is needed regarding mental problems and preferences for support. Qualitative interviews were used to explore mental problems and preference for support of PAH patients. Additionally, a survey was used to assess the presence of mental problems (Problem List), distress (Distress Thermometer) and the need for mental support. In 24 semi-structured interviews, the following problem themes were identified: energy balance; loss of abilities; feeling misunderstood; and handling of worries and emotions. Need for support was based on an interplay between resilience to psychological distress, additional life problems, age, disease status, attitude towards professional help, and experienced support from significant others. The results from the survey highlight the need for professional support, as 50.8% of the 67 patients who completed the survey would consider support when offered, specifically when offered by a pulmonary hypertension (PH) professional. Younger age (odds ratio [OR] = 0.97, P = 0.04), depression (OR = 11.435, P = 0.001) and possibly anxiety (OR = 3.831, P = 0.069) were related to need for support. In conclusion, many patients with PAH are in need of mental support, which should be offered by a PH professional and tailored to phase of the disease and personal characteristics.

Psycho-educatiecursus voor volwassenen met OCS en hun omgeving

GGZ inGeest ontwikkelde in samenwerking met de Angst Dwang en Fobie (ADF) Stichting een psycho-educatiecursus voor patiënten met een obsessieve-compulsieve stoornis (OCS) en hun partners, familieleden of vrienden. Deze cursus is beschikbaar voor alle behandelaren. Onder begeleiding van een GZ-psycholoog deden we er in het voorjaar van 2013 de eerste ervaringen mee op. Dit artikel beschrijft de inhoud van de cursus, een eerste evaluatie, alsmede de ervaringen van twee deelnemers en hun familieleden.