Paul Walters

The Relationship between Asthma and Depression in Primary Care Patients: A Historical Cohort and Nested Case Control Study

Background and Objectives Asthma and depression are common health problems in primary care. Evidence of a relationship between asthma and depression is conflicting. Objectives: to determine 1. The incidence rate and incidence rate ratio of depression in primary care patients with asthma compared to those without asthma, and 2. The standardized mortality ratio of depressed compared to non-depressed patients with asthma. Methods A historical cohort and nested case control study using data derived from the United Kingdom General Practice Research Database. Participants: 11,275 incident cases of asthma recorded between 1/1/95 and 31/12/96 age, sex and practice matched with non-cases from the database (ratio 1∶1) and followed up through the database for 10 years. 1,660 cases were matched by date of asthma diagnosis with 1,660 controls. Main outcome measures: number of cases diagnosed with depression, the number of deaths over the study period. Results The rate of depression in patients with asthma was 22.4/1,000 person years and without asthma 13.8 /1,000 person years. The incident rate ratio (adjusted for age, sex, practice, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, smoking) was 1.59 (95% CI 1.48–1.71). The increased rate of depression was not associated with asthma severity or oral corticosteroid use. It was associated with the number of consultations (odds ratio per visit 1.09; 95% CI 1.07–1.11). The age and sex adjusted standardized mortality ratio for depressed patients with asthma was 1.87 (95% CI: 1.54–2.27). Conclusions Asthma is associated with depression. This was not related to asthma severity or oral corticosteroid use but was related to service use. This suggests that a diagnosis of depression is related to health seeking behavior in patients with asthma. There is an increased mortality rate in depressed patients with asthma. The cause of this needs further exploration. Consideration should be given to case-finding for depression in this population.

Ethnic density, physical illness, social deprivation and antidepressant prescribing in primary care: ecological study

BACKGROUND Antidepressant prescribing should reflect need. The Quality and Outcomes Framework has provided an opportunity to explore factors affecting antidepressant prescribing in UK general practice. AIMS To explore the relationship between physical illness, social deprivation, ethnicity, practice characteristics and the volume of antidepressants prescribed in primary care. METHOD This was an ecological study using data derived from the Quality and Outcomes Framework, the Informatics Collaboratory of the Social Sciences, and Prescribing Analyses and CosT data for 2004-2005. Associations were examined using linear regression modelling. RESULTS Socio-economic status, ethnic density, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and epilepsy explained 44% of the variance in the volume of antidepressants prescribed. CONCLUSIONS Lower volumes of antidepressants are prescribed in areas with high densities of Black or Asian people. This may suggest disparities in provision of care. Chronic respiratory disease and epilepsy may have a more important association with depression in primary care than previously thought.

Detecting Depression in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease: a Diagnostic Evaluation of the PHQ-9 and HADS-D in Primary Care, Findings From the UPBEAT-UK Study

Objective People with coronary heart disease (CHD) are at heightened risk of depression, and this co-occurrence of conditions is associated with poorer outcomes including raised mortality. This study compares the diagnostic accuracy of two depression case finding instruments in CHD patients relative to a diagnostic standard, the revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R). Methods The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression subscale (HADS-D) and the CIS-R depression module were administered to 803 patients identified from the CHD registers of GP practices in Greater London. Results Of 730 recruited patients without previously identified depression, 32 (4.4%) met ICD-10 depressive episode criteria according to the CIS-R. For the PHQ-9 and HADS-D lower cut-points than those routinely recommended were associated with improved case identifying properties. The PHQ-9 appeared the superior instrument using a cut-point of ≥8 (sensitivity=94%; specificity=84%). Using categorical scoring the PHQ-9 was 59% sensitive and 95% specific. For the HADS-D using cut-point ≥5, sensitivity was 81% and specificity was 77%. Areas under the curves (AUC) (standard error) were 0.95 (0.01) and 0.88 (0.02) for the PHQ-9 and HADS-D, and 0.91 (0.02) for PHQ-9 using the categorical algorithm. Statistically significant differences between AUCs of the PHQ-9 and the HADS-D favoured the former. Severity ratings compared across measures indicated inconsistency between recommended bandings: the PHQ-9 categorised a larger proportion of participants with mild and moderate depression. Conclusion This is the first large-scale investigation of the accuracy of these commonly used measures within a primary care CHD population. Our results suggest that although both scales have acceptable abilities and can be used as case identification instruments for depression in patients with CHD, the PHQ-9 appeared diagnostically superior. Importantly, optimal cut-off points for depression identification in this population appear to differ from standard values, and severity ratings differ between these measures.

Patients’ perceptions of depression and coronary heart disease: a qualitative UPBEAT-UK study

BackgroundThe prevalence of depression in people with coronary heart disease (CHD) is high but little is known about patients’ own perceptions and experiences of this. This study aimed to explore (i) primary care (PC) patients’ perceptions of links between their physical condition and mental health, (ii) their experiences of living with depression and CHD and (iii) their own self-help strategies and attitudes to current PC interventions for depression.MethodQualitative study using consecutive sampling, in-depth interviews and thematic analysis using a process of constant comparison. 30 participants from the UPBEAT-UK cohort study, with CHD and symptoms of depression. All participants were registered on the General Practitioner (GP) primary care, coronary register.ResultsA personal and social story of loss underpinned participants’ accounts of their lives, both before and after their experience of having CHD. This theme included two interrelated domains: interpersonal loss and loss centred upon health/control issues. Strong links were made between CHD and depression by men who felt emasculated by CHD. Weaker links were made by participants who had experienced distressing life events such as divorce and bereavement or were living with additional chronic health conditions (i.e. multimorbidity). Participants also felt ‘depressed’ by the ‘medicalisation’ of their lives, loneliness and the experience of ageing and ill health. Just under half the sample had consulted their GP about their low mood and participants were somewhat ambivalent about accessing primary care interventions for depression believing the GP would not be able to help them with complex health and social issues. Talking therapies and interventions providing the opportunity for social interaction, support and exercise, such as Cardiac Rehabilitation, were thought to be helpful whereas anti-depressants were not favoured.ConclusionsThe experiences and needs of patients with CHD and depression are diverse and include psycho-social issues involving interpersonal and health/control losses. In view of the varying social and health needs of patients with CHD and depression the adoption of a holistic, case management approach to care is recommended together with personalised support providing the opportunity for patients to develop and achieve life and health goals, where appropriate.

Depression in Primary Care Patients with Coronary Heart Disease: Baseline Findings from the UPBEAT UK Study

Background An association between depression and coronary heart disease is now accepted but there has been little primary care research on this topic. The UPBEAT-UK studies are centred on a cohort of primary patients with coronary heart disease assessed every six months for up to four years. The aim of this research was to determine the prevalence and associations of depression in this cohort at baseline. Method Participants with coronary heart disease were recruited from general practice registers and assessed for cardiac symptoms, depression, quality of life and social problems. Results 803 people participated. 42% had a documented history of myocardial infarction, 54% a diagnosis of ischaemic heart disease or angina. 44% still experienced chest pain. 7% had an ICD-10 defined depressive disorder. Factors independently associated with this diagnosis were problems living alone (OR 5.49, 95% CI 2.11–13.30), problems carrying out usual activities (OR 3.71, 95% CI 1.93–7.14), experiencing chest pain (OR 3.27, 95% CI 1.58–6.76), other pains or discomfort (OR 3.39, 95% CI 1.42–8.10), younger age (OR 0.95 per year 95% CI 0.92–0.98). Conclusion Problems living alone, chest pain and disability are important predictors of depression in this population.

The UPBEAT nurse-delivered personalized care intervention for people with coronary heart disease who report current chest pain and depression: a randomised controlled pilot study.

Background Depression is common in people with coronary heart disease (CHD) and associated with worse outcome. This study explored the acceptability and feasibility of procedures for a trial and for an intervention, including its potential costs, to inform a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a nurse-led personalised care intervention for primary care CHD patients with current chest pain and probable depression. Methods Multi-centre, outcome assessor-blinded, randomized parallel group study. CHD patients reporting chest pain and scoring 8 or more on the HADS were randomized to personalized care (PC) or treatment as usual (TAU) for 6 months and followed for 1 year. Primary outcome was acceptability and feasibility of procedures; secondary outcomes included mood, chest pain, functional status, well being and psychological process variables. Result 1001 people from 17 General Practice CHD registers in South London consented to be contacted; out of 126 who were potentially eligible, 81 (35% female, mean age = 65 SD11 years) were randomized. PC participants (n = 41) identified wide ranging problems to work on with nurse-case managers. Good acceptability and feasibility was indicated by low attrition (9%), high engagement and minimal nurse time used (mean/SD = 78/19 mins assessment, 125/91 mins telephone follow up). Both groups improved on all outcomes. The largest between group difference was in the proportion no longer reporting chest pain (PC 37% vs TAU 18%; mixed effects model OR 2.21 95% CI 0.69, 7.03). Some evidence was seen that self efficacy (mean scale increase of 2.5 vs 0.9) and illness perceptions (mean scale increase of 7.8 vs 2.5) had improved in PC vs TAU participants at 1 year. PC appeared to be more cost effective up to a QALY threshold of approximately £3,000. Conclusions Trial and intervention procedures appeared to be feasible and acceptable. PC allowed patients to work on unaddressed problems and appears cheaper than TAU. Trial Registration Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN21615909

Characteristics of people with low health literacy on coronary heart disease GP registers in South London: a cross-sectional study

Objective To explore characteristics associated with, and prevalence of, low health literacy in patients recruited to investigate the role of depression in patients on General Practice (GP) Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) registers (the Up-Beat UK study). Design Cross-sectional cohort. The health literacy measure was the Rapid Estimate of Health Literacy in Medicine (REALM). Univariable analyses identified characteristics associated with low health literacy and compared health service use between health literacy statuses. Those variables where there was a statistically significant/borderline significant difference between health literacy statuses were entered into a multivariable model. Setting 16 General Practices in South London, UK. Participants Inclusion: patients >18 years, registered with a GP and on a GP CHD register. Exclusion: patients temporarily registered. Primary outcome measure REALM. Results Of the 803 Up-Beat cohort participants, 687 (85.55%) completed the REALM of whom 106 (15.43%) had low health literacy. Twenty-eight participants could not be included in the multivariable analysis due to missing predictor variable data, leaving a sample of 659. The variables remaining in the final model were age, gender, ethnicity, Indices of Multiple Deprivation score, years of education, employment; body mass index and alcohol intake, and anxiety scores (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). Univariable analysis also showed that people with low health literacy may have more, and longer, practice nurse consultations than people with adequate health literacy. Conclusions There is a disadvantaged group of people on GP CHD registers with low health literacy. The multivariable model showed that patients with low health literacy have significantly higher anxiety levels than people with adequate health literacy. In addition, the univariable analyses show that such patients have more, and longer, consultations with practice nurses. We will collect 4-year longitudinal cohort data to explore the impact of health literacy in people on GP CHD registers and the impact of health literacy on health service use.

A pilot randomised controlled trial of personalised care for depressed patients with symptomatic coronary heart disease in South London general practices: the UPBEAT-UK RCT protocol and recruitment

BackgroundCommunity studies reveal people with coronary heart disease (CHD) are twice as likely to be depressed as the general population and that this co-morbidity negatively affects the course and outcome of both conditions. There is evidence for the efficacy of collaborative care and case management for depression treatment, and whilst NICE guidelines recommend these approaches only where depression has not responded to psychological, pharmacological, or combined treatments, these care approaches may be particularly relevant to the needs of people with CHD and depression in the earlier stages of stepped care in primary care settings.MethodsThis pilot randomised controlled trial will evaluate whether a simple intervention involving a personalised care plan, elements of case management and regular telephone review is a feasible and acceptable intervention that leads to better mental and physical health outcomes for these patients. The comparator group will be usual general practitioner (GP) care.81 participants have been recruited from CHD registers of 15 South London general practices. Eligible participants have probable major depression identified by a score of ≥8 on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression subscale (HADS-D) together with symptomatic CHD identified using the Modified Rose Angina Questionnaire.Consenting participants are randomly allocated to usual care or the personalised care intervention which involves a comprehensive assessment of each participant’s physical and mental health needs which are documented in a care plan, followed by regular telephone reviews by the case manager over a 6-month period. At each review, the intervention participant’s mood, function and identified problems are reviewed and the case manager uses evidence based behaviour change techniques to facilitate achievement of goals specified by the patient with the aim of increasing the patient’s self efficacy to solve their problems.Depressive symptoms measured by HADS score will be collected at baseline and 1, 6- and 12 months post randomisation. Other outcomes include CHD symptoms, quality of life, wellbeing and health service utilisation.DiscussionThis practical and patient-focused intervention is potentially an effective and accessible approach to the health and social care needs of people with depression and CHD in primary care.Trial registrationISRCTN21615909.

Onset of action of antidepressants

Most benefit is evident in the first two weeks, not six, as conventional wisdom says

Teaching junior doctors to manage patients who somatise: is it possible in an afternoon?

Context  Many patients in primary care somatise psychological distress. Training general practitioners (GPs) to manage somatisation has been shown to lead to improvements in their management of these patients. However, the training has been intensive and conducted by psychiatrists, making it impractical for widespread use. The aim of this research was to determine the effectiveness of a teaching package in improving the ability of GP registrars to manage patients who somatise, when taught by GP vocational course tutors within the constraints of a general practice vocational training scheme.