Adrienne Withall1, Lynne M Harris, Steven R Cumming. 1. Primary Dementia Collaborative Research Centre, School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, 45 Beach Street (cnr Battery Street), Coogee 2034, Australia. a.withall@unsw.edu.au
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research concerning cognition in depression has often yielded inconsistent findings. The presence of mixed melancholic and non-melancholic subtypes of major depressive disorder (MDD) in most previous research may explain some of the contradictory results (Hickie, 1996). METHODS: This longitudinal study compared the cognitive performance of people with melancholic (n=17) and non-melancholic (n=17) MDD admitted to one of two university hospitals. Participants received an extensive clinical and cognitive assessment at admission and again 3 months after recovery and discharge. RESULTS: Overall, participants with melancholia had selective memory deficits with broader impairment of executive control skills. Specifically, after correcting for depression severity, they performed more poorly on tests requiring memory acquisition, mental flexibility, set-shifting, selective attention, concept-formation and multi-tasking compared to those with non-melancholic depression. These deficits were present at both assessments suggesting that the increased initial severity of cognitive deficits for those with melancholia mean that they require a longer time to recovery. LIMITATIONS: The clinical homogeneity of the study sample may underestimate the extent of cognitive impairment for those presenting with comorbid illness and/or significant drug/alcohol histories. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the depressed group with melancholia have a distinctly different and more impaired cognitive profile to those without melancholic features and suggest that these clinical subtypes should be considered separately in future research concerning MDD. Furthermore, the melancholic group appears to require longer periods for cognitive recovery and this has implications for return to work and daily functioning following clinical discharge. Crown Copyright 2009. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Research concerning cognition in depression has often yielded inconsistent findings. The presence of mixed melancholic and non-melancholic subtypes of major depressive disorder (MDD) in most previous research may explain some of the contradictory results (Hickie, 1996). METHODS: This longitudinal study compared the cognitive performance of people with melancholic (n=17) and non-melancholic (n=17) MDD admitted to one of two university hospitals. Participants received an extensive clinical and cognitive assessment at admission and again 3 months after recovery and discharge. RESULTS: Overall, participants with melancholia had selective memory deficits with broader impairment of executive control skills. Specifically, after correcting for depression severity, they performed more poorly on tests requiring memory acquisition, mental flexibility, set-shifting, selective attention, concept-formation and multi-tasking compared to those with non-melancholic depression. These deficits were present at both assessments suggesting that the increased initial severity of cognitive deficits for those with melancholia mean that they require a longer time to recovery. LIMITATIONS: The clinical homogeneity of the study sample may underestimate the extent of cognitive impairment for those presenting with comorbid illness and/or significant drug/alcohol histories. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the depressed group with melancholia have a distinctly different and more impaired cognitive profile to those without melancholic features and suggest that these clinical subtypes should be considered separately in future research concerning MDD. Furthermore, the melancholic group appears to require longer periods for cognitive recovery and this has implications for return to work and daily functioning following clinical discharge. Crown Copyright 2009. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Authors: Saray Monzón; Margalida Gili; Margalida Vives; Maria Jesus Serrano; Natalia Bauza; Rosa Molina; Mauro García-Toro; Joan Salvà; Joan Llobera; Miquel Roca Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2010-06-17 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Giovanni Cizza; Donna S Ronsaville; Hayley Kleitz; Farideh Eskandari; Sejal Mistry; Sara Torvik; Nina Sonbolian; James C Reynolds; Marc R Blackman; Philip W Gold; Pedro E Martinez Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-01-03 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jussi Seppälä; Hannu Koponen; Hannu Kautiainen; Johan G Eriksson; Olli Kampman; Jaana Leiviskä; Satu Männistö; Pekka Mäntyselkä; Heikki Oksa; Yrjö Ovaskainen; Merja Viikki; Mauno Vanhala; Jussi Seppälä Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2013-05-24 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Young Sup Woo; Joshua D Rosenblat; Ron Kakar; Won-Myong Bahk; Roger S McIntyre Journal: Clin Psychopharmacol Neurosci Date: 2016-02-29 Impact factor: 2.582