Chris Hooijer

Major and minor depression in later life: a study of prevalence and risk factors

In this paper, the results of a community-based study into the prevalence and risk factors associated with depression in the older (55-85 years) population of The Netherlands are presented. The prevalence of major depression was 2.02%, that of minor depression 12.9%, while 14.9% had clinically relevant levels of depressive symptoms. Associations with a comprehensive set of risk factors were not affected dramatically by age or sex. However, comparing major to minor depression, risks were substantially differently distributed. It appears that major depression is more often an exacerbation of a chronic mood disturbance, with roots in long-standing vulnerability factors; while minor depression is more often a reaction to the stresses commonly experienced in later life.

Subjective memory complaints may announce dementia

Article abstract-Whether subjective memory complaints in the absence of objective memory decline can predict future dementia has been investigated only in highly selected clinical and volunteer cohorts. Our study examines this question in a subsample of AMSTEL (Amsterdam Study of the Elderly), a longitudinal population study on cognitive decline and dementia. Subjects (aged 65 to 84 years; n = 357) without dementia or other psychiatric disorders at baseline were followed for 3 years. After this interval, 16 of 203 re-examined patients developed a dementia. Logistic regression analyses indicated that memory complaints at baseline contributed a small but significant amount of diagnostic information. However, the most powerful predictor of future dementia was deficient memory performance. We conclude that subjective memory complaints may predict dementia within 3 years, particularly when there are objective signs of memory deterioration. NEUROLOGY 1996;46: 121-125

Reliability, validity and follow-up of the EEG in senile dementia: sequelae of sequential measurement.

In a longitudinal study, slowing of the EEG in SDAT patients and elderly controls is investigated using both visual and power spectral analyses. For this a reliability study in 20 SDAT patients is performed and results for intra-rater, inter-rater and test-retest reliability (in 24 h) are used in the selection of parameters. Next, the diagnostic efficacy of the chosen parameters for SDAT is confirmed in a validity study in 43 SDAT patients, 41 elderly non-organic psychiatric patients and 51 elderly normals. In the longitudinal study 78 of these subjects could be retested after 20 months. The parameter for visual analysis appeared to be superior in actually showing a progress of slowing of the EEG in 20/21 SDAT patients over time. The parameter for power spectral analysis was superior in measuring the more subtle processes in the normal elderly. Results of these studies are used to discuss some problems in the measurement of EEG in SDAT over time.

Depressogenic medication as an aetiological factor in major depression: an analysis in a clinical population of depressed elderly people

To study the role of depressogenic medication in the aetiology of major depression in the elderly.

The Different Versions of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale

The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) was published in 1960. Although many other depression rating scales have since become available, the first scale for the rating of depression severity has remained the most popular. Hamilton elucidated the meaning of the items and the way in which they have to be scored in a number of papers (e.g., Hamilton 1967, 1980). Of these, his paper from 1967 was the most influential. Hamilton himself never published a new version of his scale, i.e., a version in which the items are formulated in another way. Others, however, have done so. The first new version we know about was published in 1976 in the ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology (hereafter abbreviated as ECDEU, Guy 1976). This version differs from the 1960 version in many respects and several aspects are not in accordance with the explanations given by Hamilton in 1967. Nevertheless, in the ECDEU it is stated: “The present version is, we believe, the author’s version.” In 1985 Miller et al. published a Modified Hamilton Rating Scale for depression. Another version was published in 1986 by Bech et al. in their minicompendium for rating scales. Griffiths et al. (1987) and Williams (1988) published a complete text of the HAM-D as a structured interview. In our search using Medline (including 1200 titles), we did not find other published versions of the HAM-D.