Greg Simon

A chronic disease score with empirically derived weights.

Different types of medication prescribed during a 6-month period for the treatment and management of chronic conditions were utilized in the refinement and validation of a chronic disease score. Prescription data, in addition to age and sex, were utilized to develop a chronic disease score based on empirically derived weights for each of three outcomes: total cost, outpatient cost, and primary care visits. The ability of the revised chronic disease score to predict health care utilization, costs, hospitalization, and mortality was compared to an earlier version of the chronic disease score (original) that was derived through clinical judgments of disease severity. The predictive validity of the chronic disease score is also compared to ambulatory care groups, which utilize outpatient diagnoses to form mutually exclusive diagnostic categories. Models based on a concurrent 6-month period and a 6-month prospective period (ie, the 6-month period after the chronic disease score or ambulatory care group derivation period) were estimated using a random one half sample of 250,000 managed-care enrollees aged 18 and older. The remaining one half of the enrollee population was used as a validation sample. The revised chronic disease score showed improved estimation and prediction over the original chronic disease score. The difference in variance explained prospectively by the revised chronic disease score versus the ambulatory care groups, conversely, was small. The revised chronic disease score was a better predictor of mortality than the ambulatory care groups. The combination of revised chronic disease score and ambulatory care groups showed only marginally greater predictive power than either one alone. These results suggest that the revised chronic disease score and ambulatory care groups with empirically derived weights provide improved prediction of health care utilization and costs, as well as hospitalization and mortality, over age and sex alone. We recommend the revised chronic disease score with total cost weights for general use as a severity measure because of its relative advantage in predicting mortality compared to the outpatient cost and primary care visit weights.

Chronic spinal pain and physical-mental comorbidity in the United States: Results from the national comorbidity survey replication

This paper investigates comorbidity between chronic back and neck pain and other physical and mental disorders in the US population, and assesses the contributions of chronic spinal pain and comorbid conditions to role disability. A probability sample of US adults (n=5692) was interviewed. Chronic spinal pain, other chronic pain conditions and selected chronic physical conditions were ascertained by self‐report. Mood, anxiety and substance use disorders were ascertained with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Role disability was assessed with questions about days out of role and with impaired role functioning. The 1 year prevalence of chronic spinal pain was 19.0%. The vast majority (87.1%) of people with chronic spinal pain reported at least one other comorbid condition, including other chronic pain conditions (68.6%), chronic physical conditions (55.3%), and mental disorders (35.0%). Anxiety disorders showed as strong an association with chronic spinal pain as did mood disorders. Common conditions not significantly comorbid with chronic spinal pain were diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and drug abuse. Chronic spinal pain was significantly associated with role disability after controlling for demographic variables and for comorbidities. However, comorbid conditions explained about one‐third of the gross association of chronic spinal pain with role disability. We conclude that chronic spinal pain is highly comorbid with other pain conditions, chronic diseases, and mental disorders, and that comorbidity plays a significant role in role disability associated with chronic spinal pain. The societal burdens of chronic spinal pain need to be understood and managed within the context of comorbid conditions.

Obesity and mental disorders in the general population: results from the world mental health surveys.

Objectives:(1) To investigate whether there is an association between obesity and mental disorders in the general populations of diverse countries, and (2) to establish whether demographic variables (sex, age, education) moderate any associations observed.Design:Thirteen cross-sectional, general population surveys conducted as part of the World Mental Health Surveys initiative.Subjects:Household residing adults, 18 years and over (n=62 277).Measurements:DSM-IV mental disorders (anxiety disorders, depressive disorders, alcohol use disorders) were assessed with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI 3.0), a fully structured diagnostic interview. Obesity was defined as a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m2 or greater; severe obesity as BMI 35+. Persons with BMI less than 18.5 were excluded from analysis. Height and weight were self-reported.Results:Statistically significant, albeit modest associations (odds ratios generally in the range of 1.2–1.5) were observed between obesity and depressive disorders, and between obesity and anxiety disorders, in pooled data across countries. These associations were concentrated among those with severe obesity, and among females. Age and education had variable effects across depressive and anxiety disorders.Conclusions:The findings are suggestive of a modest relationship between obesity (particularly severe obesity) and emotional disorders among women in the general population. The study is limited by the self-report of BMI and cannot clarify the direction or nature of the relationship observed, but it may indicate a need for a research and clinical focus on the psychological heterogeneity of the obese population.

Rethinking practitioner roles in chronic illness: the specialist, primary care physician, and the practice nurse

In this article, we describe an evidence-based stepped care approach to improving the care of chronic illness in organized health care systems. We review the common principles that have been found to improve the management and outcomes of patients with major depression, asthma, diabetes, and congestive heart failure. These population-based methods to improve care of chronic illness require reorganizing the roles of specialists, primary care physicians, and nurses.

Achieving Guidelines for the Treatment of Depression in Primary Care Is Physician Education Enough

OBJECTIVES The authors examine whether physician education has enduring effects on treatment of depression. METHODS Depressed primary care patients initiating antidepressant treatment from primary care clinics of a staff-model health maintenance organization were studied. Quasi-experimental and before-and-after comparisons of physician practices, supplemented with patient surveys, were used to compare the process of care and depression outcomes. Intervention consisted of extensive physician education that spanned a 12-month period. This included case-by-case consultations, didactics, academic detailing (eg, clearly stating the educational and behavioral objectives to individual physicians), and role-play of optimal treatment. Main outcome measures were divided into two groups. Quasi-experimental samples included: (1) antidepressant medication selection and (2) adequacy (dosage and duration) of pharmacotherapy. Survey samples included: (3) intensity of follow-up; (4) physician delivered educational messages regarding depression treatment; (5) patient satisfaction; and (6) depression outcomes. RESULTS No lasting educational effect was observed consistently in any of the outcomes measured. CONCLUSIONS There was no enduring improvement in the treatment of depression for primary care patients. Depression treatment guidelines were achieved contemporaneously, however, for intervention patients enrolled in a multifaceted program of collaborative care during the training period. These results suggest that continuing programs of reorganized service delivery to support the role of a primary care physician (eg, on-site mental health personnel, close monitoring of patient progress and adherence), in addition to physician training, are essential for the success of guideline implementation.

Detecting common mental disorders in primary care in India: a comparison of five screening questionnaires

BACKGROUND Screening of patients for common mental disorders (CMDs) is needed in primary-care management programmes. This study aimed to compare the screening properties of five widely used questionnaires. METHOD Adult attenders in five primary-care settings in India were recruited through systematic sampling. Four questionnaires were administered, in pairs, in random order to participants: the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ, 12 items); the Primary Health Questionnaire (PHQ, nine items); the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10, 10 items), and from which we could extract the score of the shorter 6-item K6; and the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ, 20 items). All participants were interviewed with a structured lay diagnostic interview, the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R). RESULTS Complete data were available for 598 participants (participation rate 99.3%). All five questionnaires showed moderate to high discriminating ability; the GHQ and SRQ showed the best results. All five showed moderate to high degrees of correlation with one another, the poorest being between the two shortest questionnaires, K6 and PHQ. All five had relatively good internal consistency. However, the positive predictive value (PPV) of the questionnaires compared with the diagnostic interview ranged from 51% to 77% at the optimal cut-off scores. CONCLUSIONS There is little difference in the ability of these questionnaires to identify cases accurately, but none showed high PPVs without a considerable compromise on sensitivity. Hence, the choice of an optimum cut-off score that yields the best balance between sensitivity and PPV may need to be tailored to individual settings, with a higher cut-off being recommended in resource-limited primary-care settings.

Quality adjusted life years in older adults with depressive symptoms and chronic medical disorders.

We used data from a 4-year prospective study of 2,558 primary care patients age 65 and older in a large staff model health maintenance organization to examine the association of clinically significant depressive symptoms and eight other chronic medical conditions with quality adjusted life years (QALYs). We developed linear regression models to examine the association of clinically significant depressive symptoms as defined by a score of 16 or greater on the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale and eight common chronic medical disorders at baseline with QALYs over the 4-year study period. Estimates of QALYs were derived from Quality of Well-Being Scale scores at baseline, at 2-year follow-up, and at 4-year follow-up. Individuals with clinically significant depressive symptoms at baseline had significantly lower QALYs over the 4-year study period than nondepressed subjects, even after adjusting for differences in age, gender, and the eight other chronic medical conditions. In terms of the entire study population, only arthritis and heart disease were more strongly associated with QALYs than depression.

Long‐term Effects of a Collaborative Care Intervention in Persistently Depressed Primary Care Patients

AbstractOBJECTIVE: A previous study described the effect of a collaborative care intervention on improving adherence to antidepressant medications and depressive and functional outcomes of patients with persistent depressive symptoms 8 weeks after the primary care physician initiated treatment. This paper examined the 28-month effect of this intervention on adherence, depressive symptoms, functioning, and health care costs. DESIGN: Randomized trial of stepped collaborative care intervention versus usual care. SETTING: HMO in Seattle, Wash. PATIENTS: Patients with major depression were stratified into severe and moderate depression groups prior to randomization. INTERVENTIONS: A multifaceted intervention targeting patient, physician, and process of care, using collaborative management by a psychiatrist and a primary care physician. MEASURES AND MAIN RESULTS: The collaborative care intervention was associated with continued improvement in depressive symptoms at 28 months in patients in the moderate-severity group (F1,87=8.65; P=.004), but not in patients in the high-severity group (F1,51=0.02; P=.88) Improvements in the intervention group in antidepressant adherence were found to occur for the first 6 months (χ2(1)=8.23; P<.01) and second 6-month period (χ2(1)=5.98; P<.05) after randomization in the high-severity group and for 6 months after randomization in the moderate-severity group(χ2(1)=6.10; P<.05). There were no significant differences in total ambulatory costs between intervention and control patients over the 28-month period (F1,180=0.77; P=.40). CONCLUSIONS: A collaborative care intervention was associated with sustained improvement in depressive outcomes without additional health care costs in approximately two thirds of primary care patients with persistent depressive symptoms.

Population-based care of depression: effective disease management strategies to decrease prevalence.

This paper reviews the concepts of population-based care and disease management of major depression. Population-based care and disease management strategies motivated by health care reform provide approaches for organizing health services to lower the prevalence of common medical and psychiatric illnesses in primary care populations. We apply these concepts to the organization of services for patients with major depression.

Cardiac Risk Factors in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus and Major Depression

OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of major depression is approximately 2-fold higher in patients with diabetes mellitus compared to medical controls. We explored the association of major depression with 8 cardiac risk factors in diabetic patients with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD).DESIGN: A mail survey questionnaire was administered to a population-based sample of 4,225 patients with diabetes to obtain data on depression status, diabetes self-care (diet, exercise, and smoking), diabetes history, and demographics. On the basis of automated data we measured diabetes complications, glycosylated hemoglobin, medical comorbidity, low-density lipid levels, triglyceride levels, diagnosis of hypertension, and evidence of microalbuminuria. Separate analyses were conducted for subgroups according to the presence or absence of CVD.SETTING: Nine primary care clinics of a nonprofit health maintenance organization.MAIN RESULTS: Patients with major depression and diabetes were 1.5- to 2-fold more likely to have 3 or more cardiovascular risk factors as patients with diabetes without depression (62.5% vs 38.4% in those without CVD, and 61.3% vs 45% in those with CVD). Patients with diabetes without CVD who met criteria for major depression were significantly more likely to be smokers, to have a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2, to lead a more sedentary lifestyle, and to have HbA1c levels of >8.0% compared to nondepressed patients with diabetes without heart disease. Patients with major depression, diabetes, and evidence of heart disease were significantly more likely to have a BMI ≥30 kg/m2, a more sedentary lifestyle, and triglyceride levels >400 mg/dl than nondepressed diabetic patients with evidence of heart disease.CONCLUSIONS: Patients with major depression and diabetes with or without evidence of heart disease have a higher number of CVD risk factors. Interventions aimed at decreasing these risk factors may need to address treatment for major depression in order to be effective.