Brett D. Thombs

Prevalence of depression in survivors of acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence and persistence of depression in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and the relationship between assessment modality and prevalence.DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE®, Cochrane, CINAHL®, PsycINFO®, and EMBASE®.REVIEW METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted in March 2004 to identify original research studies published since 1980 that used a standardized interview or validated questionnaire to assess depression. The search was augmented by hand searching of selected journals from October 2003 through April 2004 and references of identified articles and reviews. Studies were excluded if only an abstract was provided, if not in English, or if depression was not measured by a validated method.RESULTS: Major depression was identified in 19.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 19.1% to 20.6%) of patients using structured interviews (N=10,785, 8 studies). The prevalence of significant depressive symptoms based on a Beck Depression Inventory score ≥10 was 31.1% (CI 29.2% to 33.0%; N=2,273, 6 studies), using a Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) score ≥8%, 15.5% (CI 13.2% to 18.0%; N=863, 4 studies), and with a HADS score ≥11%, 7.3% (CI 5.5% to 9.3%; N=830, 4 studies). Although a significant proportion of patients continued to be depressed in the year after discharge, the limited number of studies and variable follow-up times precluded specification of prevalence rates at given time points.CONCLUSIONS: Depression is common and persistent in AMI survivors. Prevalence varies depending on assessment method, likely reflecting treatment of somatic symptoms.

Depression screening and patient outcomes in cardiovascular care: a systematic review

CONTEXT Several practice guidelines recommend that depression be evaluated and treated in patients with cardiovascular disease, but the potential benefits of this are unclear. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the potential benefits of depression screening in patients with cardiovascular disease by assessing (1) the accuracy of depression screening instruments; (2) the effect of depression treatment on depression and cardiac outcomes; and (3) the effect of screening on depression and cardiac outcomes in patients in cardiovascular care settings. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE, ISI, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases from inception to May 1, 2008; manual journal searches; reference list reviews; and citation tracking of included articles. STUDY SELECTION We included articles in any language about patients in cardiovascular care settings that (1) compared a screening instrument to a valid major depressive disorder criterion standard; (2) compared depression treatment with placebo or usual care in a randomized controlled trial; or (3) assessed the effect of screening on depression identification and treatment rates, depression, or cardiac outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION Methodological characteristics and outcomes were extracted by 2 investigators. RESULTS We identified 11 studies about screening accuracy, 6 depression treatment trials, but no studies that evaluated the effects of screening on depression or cardiovascular outcomes. In studies that tested depression screening instruments using a priori-defined cutoff scores, sensitivity ranged from 39% to 100% (median, 84%) and specificity ranged from 58% to 94% (median, 79%). Depression treatment with medication or cognitive behavioral therapy resulted in modest reductions in depressive symptoms (effect size, 0.20-0.38; r(2), 1%-4%). There was no evidence that depression treatment improved cardiac outcomes. Among patients with depression and history of myocardial infarction in the ENRICHD trial, there was no difference in event-free survival between participants treated with cognitive behavioral therapy supplemented by an antidepressant vs usual care (75.5% vs 74.7%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Depression treatment with medication or cognitive behavioral therapy in patients with cardiovascular disease is associated with modest improvement in depressive symptoms but no improvement in cardiac outcomes. No clinical trials have assessed whether screening for depression improves depressive symptoms or cardiac outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease.

Prognostic association of depression following myocardial infarction with mortality and cardiovascular events: a meta-analysis of 25 years of research

OBJECTIVE A meta-analysis of over 25 years of research into the relationship between post-myocardial infarction (MI) depression and cardiac prognosis was conducted to investigate changes in this association over time and to investigate subgroup effects. METHOD A systematic literature search was performed (Medline, Embase and PsycINFO; 1975–2011) without language restrictions. Studies investigating the impact of post-MI depression on cardiovascular outcome, defined as all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality and cardiac events within 24 months after the index MI, were identified. Depression had to be assessed within 3 months after MI using established instruments. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using a random effects model. RESULTS A total of 29 studies were identified, resulting in 41 comparisons. Follow-up (on average 16 months) was described for 16,889 MI patients. Post-MI depression was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality [(OR), 2.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.73-2.93; P<.001], cardiac mortality (OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.68–4.36; P<.001) and cardiac events (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.37-1.85; P<.001). ORs proved robust in subgroup analyses but declined over the years for cardiac events. CONCLUSIONS Post-MI depression is associated with a 1.6- to 2.7-fold increased risk of impaired outcomes within 24 months. This association has been relatively stable over the past 25 years.

The Effects of Preexisting Medical Comorbidities on Mortality and Length of Hospital Stay in Acute Burn Injury: Evidence From a National Sample of 31,338 Adult Patients

Objective:To determine whether and to what extent preexisting medical comorbidities influence mortality risk and length of hospitalization in patients with acute burn injury. Summary Background Data:The effects on mortality and length of stay of a number of important medical comorbidities have not been examined in acute burn injury. Existing studies that have investigated the effects of medical comorbidities on outcomes in acute burn injury have produced inconsistent results, chiefly due to the use of relatively small samples from single burn centers. Methods:Records of 31,338 adults who were admitted with acute burn injury to 70 burn centers from the American Burn Association National Burn Repository, were reviewed. A burn-specific list of medical comorbidities was derived from diagnoses included in the Charlson Index of Comorbidities and the Elixhauser method of comorbidity measurement. Logistic regression was used to assess the effects of preexisting medical conditions on mortality, controlling for demographic and burn injury characteristics. Ordinal least squares regression with a logarithmic transformation of the dependent variable was used to assess the relationship of comorbidities with length of stay. Results:In-hospital mortality was significantly predicted by HIV/AIDS (odds ratio [OR] = 10.2), renal disease (OR = 5.1), liver disease (OR = 4.8), metastatic cancer (OR = 4.6), pulmonary circulation disorders (OR = 2.9), congestive heart failure (OR = 2.4), obesity (OR = 2.1), non-metastatic malignancies (OR = 2.1), peripheral vascular disorders (OR = 1.8), alcohol abuse (OR = 1.8), neurological disorders (OR = 1.6), and cardiac arrhythmias (OR = 1.5). Increased length of hospital stay among survivors was significantly predicted by paralysis (90% increase), dementia (60%), peptic ulcer disease (53%), other neurological disorders (52%), HIV/AIDS (49%), renal disease (44%), a psychiatric diagnosis (42%), cerebrovascular disease (41%), cardiac arrhythmias (40%), peripheral vascular disorders (39%), alcohol abuse (36%), valvular disease (32%), liver disease (30%), diabetes (26%), congestive heart failure (23%), drug abuse (20%), and hypertension (17%). Conclusions:A number of preexisting medical conditions influence outcomes in acute burn injury. Patients with preburn HIV/AIDS, metastatic cancer, liver disease, and renal disease have particularly poor prognoses.

The prevalence of anxiety and depression in adults with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is used to treat life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias and in the prevention of sudden cardiac death. A significant proportion of ICD patients experience psychological symptoms including anxiety, depression or both, which in turn can impact adjustment to the device. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the prevalence of anxiety and depression or symptoms of anxiety and depression among adults with ICDs. METHODS Search of MEDLINE®, CINAHL®, PsycINFO®, EMBASE® and Cochrane® for English-language articles published through 2009 that used validated diagnostic interviews to diagnose anxiety or depression or self-report questionnaires to assess symptoms of anxiety or depression in adults with an ICD. RESULTS Forty-five studies that assessed over 5000 patients were included. Between 11% and 28% of patients had a depressive disorder and 11-26% had an anxiety disorder in 3 small studies (Ns=35-90) that used validated diagnostic interviews. Rates of elevated symptoms of anxiety (8-63%) and depression (5-41%) based on self-report questionnaires ranged widely across studies and times of assessment. Evidence was inconsistent on rates pre- versus post-implantation, rates over time, rates for primary versus secondary prevention, and for shocked versus non-shocked patients. CONCLUSION Larger studies utilizing structured interviews are needed to determine the prevalence of anxiety and depression among ICD patients and factors that may influence rates of anxiety and depressive disorders. Based on existing data, it may be appropriate to assume a 20% prevalence rate for both depressive and anxiety disorders post-ICD implant, a rate similar to that in other cardiac populations.

The Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) Cohort: protocol for a cohort multiple randomised controlled trial (cmRCT) design to support trials of psychosocial and rehabilitation interventions in a rare disease context

Introduction Psychosocial and rehabilitation interventions are increasingly used to attenuate disability and improve health-related quality of life (HRQL) in chronic diseases, but are typically not available for patients with rare diseases. Conducting rigorous, adequately powered trials of these interventions for patients with rare diseases is difficult. The Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) is an international collaboration of patient organisations, clinicians and researchers. The aim of SPIN is to develop a research infrastructure to test accessible, low-cost self-guided online interventions to reduce disability and improve HRQL for people living with the rare disease systemic sclerosis (SSc or scleroderma). Once tested, effective interventions will be made accessible through patient organisations partnering with SPIN. Methods and analysis SPIN will employ the cohort multiple randomised controlled trial (cmRCT) design, in which patients consent to participate in a cohort for ongoing data collection. The aim is to recruit 1500–2000 patients from centres across the world within a period of 5 years (2013–2018). Eligible participants are persons ≥18 years of age with a diagnosis of SSc. In addition to baseline medical data, participants will complete patient-reported outcome measures every 3 months. Upon enrolment in the cohort, patients will consent to be contacted in the future to participate in intervention research and to allow their data to be used for comparison purposes for interventions tested with other cohort participants. Once interventions are developed, patients from the cohort will be randomly selected and offered interventions as part of pragmatic RCTs. Outcomes from patients offered interventions will be compared with outcomes from trial-eligible patients who are not offered the interventions. Ethics and dissemination The use of the cmRCT design, the development of self-guided online interventions and partnerships with patient organisations will allow SPIN to develop, rigourously test and effectively disseminate psychosocial and rehabilitation interventions for people with SSc.

Rethinking recommendations for screening for depression in primary care

Screening for depression in primary care is an issue that is highly contentious and hotly debated, and recommendations have evolved over time. For example, early policy statements from the 1990s in Canada[1][1] and the United States[2][2] recommended against screening for depression in primary care[

A Validation Study of the Dutch Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-Short Form: Factor Structure, Reliability, and Known-Groups Validity.

The Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-Short Form (CTQ-SF) is a 28-item retrospective self-report questionnaire designed to assess five dimensions of childhood maltreatment: (1) Physical Abuse, (2) Emotional Abuse, (3) Sexual Abuse, (4) Physical Neglect, and (5) Emotional Neglect. A March 2009 MEDLINE search found 141 references to the CTQ-SF, whereas no other self-report measure of childhood maltreatment listed in a recent review of childhood trauma assessment tools (Roy & Perry, 2004) was referenced more than 15 times. The CTQ-SF (Bernstein & Fink, 1998; Bernstein et al., 2003) has been translated into German (Bader, Schafer, Schenkel, Nissen, & Schwander, 2007; Driessen et al., 2000; Driessen, Schroeder, Widmann, von Schonfeld, & Schneider, 2006; Gast, Rodewald, Nickel, & Emrich, 2001; Kersting et al., 2003; Krischer & Sevecke, 2008; Moehler, Biringen, & Poustka, 2007; Schafer et al., 2006, 2007; Spitzer, Barnow, Gau, Freyberger, & Grabe, 2008; Woller, Hartkamp, & Tress, 2007), Norwegian (Fosse & Holen, 2002, 2006, 2007), Turkish (Aslan & Alparslan, 1999; Mirsal, Kalyoncu, Pektas, Tan, & Beyazyurek, 2004; Sar, Akyuz, Kundakci, Kiziltan, & Dogan, 2004; Sar, Akyuz, Kugu, Ozturk, & Ertem-Vehid, 2006; Sar, Unal, & Ozturk, 2007; Ucok & Bikmaz, 2007), Spanish (Basurte, Diaz-Marsa, Martin, & Carrasco, 2004), French (Collin-Vezina, Cyr, Pauze, & McDuff, 2005; Perroud et al., 2008), Haitian Creole (Martsolf, 2004), Portuguese (Grassi-Oliveira, Stein, & Pezzi, 2006), Italian (Sarchiapone, Carli, Cuomo, & Roy, 2007), and Dutch (Arntz, 1999; Arntz, Dietzel, & Dreessen, 1999; Arntz, Meeren, & Wessel, 2002; Giesbrecht, Merckelbach, Kater, & Sluis, 2007; Lobbestael, Arntz, & Bernstein, in

Reporting of Conflicts of Interest in Meta-analyses of Trials of Pharmacological Treatments

CONTEXT Disclosure of conflicts of interest (COIs) from pharmaceutical industry study funding and author-industry financial relationships is sometimes recommended for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in biomedical journals. Authors of meta-analyses, however, are not required to report COIs disclosed in original reports of included RCTs. OBJECTIVE To investigate whether meta-analyses of pharmacological treatments published in high-impact biomedical journals report COIs disclosed in included RCTs. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION We selected the 3 most recent meta-analyses of patented pharmacological treatments published January 2009 through October 2009 in each general medicine journal with an impact factor of at least 10; in high-impact journals in each of the 5 specialty medicine areas with the greatest 2008 global therapeutic sales (oncology, cardiology, respiratory medicine, endocrinology, and gastroenterology); and in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. DATA EXTRACTION Two investigators independently extracted data on disclosed study funding, author-industry financial ties, and author employment from each meta-analysis, from RCTs included in each meta-analysis, and on whether meta-analyses reported disclosed COIs of included RCTs. RESULTS Of 29 meta-analyses reviewed, which included 509 RCTs, only 2 meta-analyses (7%) reported RCT funding sources; and 0 reported RCT author-industry ties or employment by the pharmaceutical industry. Of 318 meta-analyzed RCTs that reported funding sources, 219 (69%) were industry funded; and 91 of 132 (69%) that reported author financial disclosures had 1 or more authors with pharmaceutical industry financial ties. In 7 of the 29 meta-analyses reviewed, 100% of included RCTs had at least 1 form of disclosed COI (pharmaceutical industry funding, author-industry financial ties, or employment), yet only 1 of these 7 meta-analyses reported RCT funding sources, and 0 reported RCT author-industry ties or employment. CONCLUSION Among a group of meta-analyses of pharmacological treatments published in high-impact biomedical journals, information concerning primary study funding and author COIs for the included RCTs were only rarely reported.

Routine Screening for Depression in Patients With Coronary Heart Disease. Never Mind

A recent Science Advisory from the American Heart Association (AHA) recommended routine screening of all patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) for depression. The authors of the advisory noted that the high prevalence of depression in patients with CHD supports this strategy. A systematic review of the evidence on depression screening and treatment in CHD patients published soon after the AHA advisory found that screening tools for major depression are reasonably accurate among patients with CHD, but that the majority of patients who screen positive will not have major depression; that depression treatment in CHD patients only accounts for a small amount of variance in depression symptom change scores; and that there is no evidence that screening for depression improves CHD outcomes. We call for the AHA to reassess their recommendations in light of this systematic review and considering the potential impact of their document on clinical practice.