BACKGROUND: A recent American Heart Association (AHA) Prevention Committee report recommended depression screening of all coronary heart disease patients using 2- and 9-item instruments from the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2 and PHQ-9) to identify patients who may need further assessment and treatment. Our objective was to assess the feasibility and results of such screening on inpatient cardiac units. METHODS: In September 2007, the PHQ-2 was added to the nursing interview dataset on 3 cardiac units in a general hospital; this screen was completed as part of routine clinical care. Rates and results of depression screening, reasons for patients not being screened, and results of a nursing satisfaction survey were tabulated, and differences in baseline characteristics between screened and unscreened patients were analyzed via chi(2) and independent-samples t tests. RESULTS: For a 12-month period, 4,783 patients were admitted to the cardiac units; 3,504 (73.3%) received PHQ-2 depression screening. Approximately 9% of screened patients had a PHQ-2 score > or =3 and were approached for further depression evaluation (PHQ-9) by a social worker; 74.1% of the positive-screen patients had a PHQ-9 score of > or =10, suggestive of major depression. Nurses (n = 66) reported high satisfaction with the screening process, and mean reported PHQ-2 screening time was 1.4 (+/-1.1) minutes. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic depression screening of cardiac patients using methods outlined by the AHA Prevention Committee is feasible, well-accepted, and does not appear markedly resource-intensive. Future studies should link these methods to an efficient and effective program of depression management in this vulnerable population. 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: A recent American Heart Association (AHA) Prevention Committee report recommended depression screening of all coronary heart diseasepatients using 2- and 9-item instruments from the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2 and PHQ-9) to identify patients who may need further assessment and treatment. Our objective was to assess the feasibility and results of such screening on inpatient cardiac units. METHODS: In September 2007, the PHQ-2 was added to the nursing interview dataset on 3 cardiac units in a general hospital; this screen was completed as part of routine clinical care. Rates and results of depression screening, reasons for patients not being screened, and results of a nursing satisfaction survey were tabulated, and differences in baseline characteristics between screened and unscreened patients were analyzed via chi(2) and independent-samples t tests. RESULTS: For a 12-month period, 4,783 patients were admitted to the cardiac units; 3,504 (73.3%) received PHQ-2 depression screening. Approximately 9% of screened patients had a PHQ-2 score > or =3 and were approached for further depression evaluation (PHQ-9) by a social worker; 74.1% of the positive-screen patients had a PHQ-9 score of > or =10, suggestive of major depression. Nurses (n = 66) reported high satisfaction with the screening process, and mean reported PHQ-2 screening time was 1.4 (+/-1.1) minutes. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic depression screening of cardiac patients using methods outlined by the AHA Prevention Committee is feasible, well-accepted, and does not appear markedly resource-intensive. Future studies should link these methods to an efficient and effective program of depression management in this vulnerable population. 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Kim G Smolderen; Donna M Buchanan; Alpesh A Amin; Kensey Gosch; Karen Nugent; Lisa Riggs; Geri Seavey; John A Spertus Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2011-04-19
Authors: Michael Davis; J Michael Brennan; Nancy Vish; Jenny Adams; Mary Muldoon; Tara Renbarger; John Garner Journal: Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) Date: 2013-01
Authors: Jeff C Huffman; Christopher M Celano; Scott R Beach; Shweta R Motiwala; James L Januzzi Journal: Cardiovasc Psychiatry Neurol Date: 2013-04-07
Authors: Brett D Thombs; Michelle Roseman; James C Coyne; Peter de Jonge; Vanessa C Delisle; Erin Arthurs; Brooke Levis; Roy C Ziegelstein Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-01-07 Impact factor: 3.240