Scott B Patten1, Sandy Berzins, Luanne M Metz. 1. Department of Community Health Sciences and Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Canada. patten@ucalgary.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Screening has frequently been proposed as a strategy for detection of depression in multiple sclerosis (MS). In a recent study, we found a minimal impact of screening, even when this was coupled with rapidly responsive and evidence-based depression care. METHODS: In order to explore the challenges involved in screening we analyzed prospective data from the Canadian Impact of MS (CIMS) database, which provides annual ratings on a self-report depression rating scale, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Rating Scale (CES-D). RESULTS: Approximately 30% of respondents screened positive at each visit. CES-D ratings correlated fairly strongly from year to year, Pearson's r ranged from 0.65 to 0.73. Approximately 10% of those below the CES-D cut-point at each assessment exceeded the cut-point when rated 1 year later, but only about half of these cases had large (≥10 points) increases in their scores. CONCLUSIONS: Screening interventions are generally oriented towards early detection, whereas the longitudinal pattern of depressive symptoms in MS appears to be characterized more prominently by a persistent burden of depressive symptoms in a substantial proportion of the population. Resources invested in screening efforts can probably be more effectively deployed in other areas, such as improved long-term clinical management.
BACKGROUND: Screening has frequently been proposed as a strategy for detection of depression in multiple sclerosis (MS). In a recent study, we found a minimal impact of screening, even when this was coupled with rapidly responsive and evidence-based depression care. METHODS: In order to explore the challenges involved in screening we analyzed prospective data from the Canadian Impact of MS (CIMS) database, which provides annual ratings on a self-report depression rating scale, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Rating Scale (CES-D). RESULTS: Approximately 30% of respondents screened positive at each visit. CES-D ratings correlated fairly strongly from year to year, Pearson's r ranged from 0.65 to 0.73. Approximately 10% of those below the CES-D cut-point at each assessment exceeded the cut-point when rated 1 year later, but only about half of these cases had large (≥10 points) increases in their scores. CONCLUSIONS: Screening interventions are generally oriented towards early detection, whereas the longitudinal pattern of depressive symptoms in MS appears to be characterized more prominently by a persistent burden of depressive symptoms in a substantial proportion of the population. Resources invested in screening efforts can probably be more effectively deployed in other areas, such as improved long-term clinical management.
Authors: L M Stepleman; L M Penwell-Waines; M Rollock; R S Casillas; T Brands; J Campbell; B Ange; J L Waller Journal: J Clin Psychol Med Settings Date: 2014-12
Authors: Ruth Ann Marrie; Stephen Reingold; Jeffrey Cohen; Olaf Stuve; Maria Trojano; Per Soelberg Sorensen; Gary Cutter; Nadia Reider Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2015-01-12 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Ruth Ann Marrie; Jeffrey Cohen; Olaf Stuve; Maria Trojano; Per Soelberg Sørensen; Stephen Reingold; Gary Cutter; Nadia Reider Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2015-01-26 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Daniel Hind; Daphne Kaklamanou; Dan Beever; Rosie Webster; Ellen Lee; Michael Barkham; Cindy Cooper Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2016-08-04 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Ruth Ann Marrie; John D Fisk; Helen Tremlett; Christina Wolfson; Sharon Warren; Aruni Tennakoon; Stella Leung; Scott B Patten Journal: Neurology Date: 2015-10-30 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Jan Kocica; Jan Kolcava; Michaela Sladeckova; Pavel Stourac; Eva Vlckova; Filip Dosbaba; Jitka Kratochvilova; Josef Bednarik Journal: J Rehabil Med Date: 2022-03-29 Impact factor: 2.912