BACKGROUND: Late-life depression is associated with chronic illness, disability, and a poor prognosis. Primary care management may be in need of improvement. AIM: To compare the effects of an intervention programme that aims to improve the identification, diagnosis, and treatment of depression in patients aged > or =55 years with the effects of usual care. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: General practices in the Netherlands. METHOD: Trained GPs performed the intervention and their practice assistants conducted the screenings. Patients were screened with the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) and given a consultation with the GP who diagnosed depression with the mood module of the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD). Antidepressant treatment was proposed. Primary outcomes were measured with the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Trained independent research assistants performed independent evaluations in both arms. RESULTS:Eighteen practices (23 GPs) were allocated to the intervention and 16 practices (20 GPs) to usual care. From June 2000 to September 2002, 3937 patients were screened; 579 patients had a positive score on the GDS-15, 178 had major depression, of whom 145 participated in the trial. MADRS scores for the intervention group dropped from 21.66 at baseline to 9.23 at 6 months, and the usual care group from 20.94 at baseline to 11.45 at 6 months. MADRS scores decreased during the year in both arms. For the intervention group, these scores increased between 6 and 12 months. CONCLUSION: The programme resulted in lower MADRS scores in the intervention group than in the usual care group, but only at the end of the intervention, at 6 months after baseline.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Late-life depression is associated with chronic illness, disability, and a poor prognosis. Primary care management may be in need of improvement. AIM: To compare the effects of an intervention programme that aims to improve the identification, diagnosis, and treatment of depression in patients aged > or =55 years with the effects of usual care. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: General practices in the Netherlands. METHOD: Trained GPs performed the intervention and their practice assistants conducted the screenings. Patients were screened with the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) and given a consultation with the GP who diagnosed depression with the mood module of the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD). Antidepressant treatment was proposed. Primary outcomes were measured with the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Trained independent research assistants performed independent evaluations in both arms. RESULTS: Eighteen practices (23 GPs) were allocated to the intervention and 16 practices (20 GPs) to usual care. From June 2000 to September 2002, 3937 patients were screened; 579 patients had a positive score on the GDS-15, 178 had major depression, of whom 145 participated in the trial. MADRS scores for the intervention group dropped from 21.66 at baseline to 9.23 at 6 months, and the usual care group from 20.94 at baseline to 11.45 at 6 months. MADRS scores decreased during the year in both arms. For the intervention group, these scores increased between 6 and 12 months. CONCLUSION: The programme resulted in lower MADRS scores in the intervention group than in the usual care group, but only at the end of the intervention, at 6 months after baseline.
Authors: Jürgen Unützer; Wayne Katon; Christopher M Callahan; John W Williams; Enid Hunkeler; Linda Harpole; Marc Hoffing; Richard D Della Penna; Polly Hitchcock Noël; Elizabeth H B Lin; Patricia A Areán; Mark T Hegel; Lingqi Tang; Thomas R Belin; Sabine Oishi; Christopher Langston Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-12-11 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Michael P Pignone; Bradley N Gaynes; Jerry L Rushton; Catherine Mills Burchell; C Tracy Orleans; Cynthia D Mulrow; Kathleen N Lohr Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2002-05-21 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Els Licht-Strunk; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Harm W J van Marwijk; Marten de Haan; Aartjan T F Beekman Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2007-01-20 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: Martha L Bruce; Thomas R Ten Have; Charles F Reynolds; Ira I Katz; Herbert C Schulberg; Benoit H Mulsant; Gregory K Brown; Gail J McAvay; Jane L Pearson; George S Alexopoulos Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-03-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Joseph J Gallo; Hillary R Bogner; Knashawn H Morales; Edward P Post; Julia Y Lin; Martha L Bruce Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2007-05-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Spyros Kolovos; Judith E Bosmans; Johanna M van Dongen; Birre van Esveld; Dorcas Magai; Annemieke van Straten; Christina van der Feltz-Cornelis; Kirsten M van Steenbergen-Weijenburg; Klaas M Huijbregts; Harm van Marwijk; Heleen Riper; Maurits W van Tulder Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-03-04 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Antonia F H Smelt; Gerda M van der Weele; Jeanet W Blom; Jacobijn Gussekloo; Willem J J Assendelft Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Sanne Wassink-Vossen; Richard C Oude Voshaar; Paul Naarding; Rose M Collard Journal: Int J Ment Health Nurs Date: 2022-02-09 Impact factor: 5.100