BACKGROUND: The presence of depression after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is associated with worse prognosis and lower adherence to risk-reducing behaviors. We reported earlier that an enhanced depression care intervention reduces depression symptoms and major adverse cardiac events. This study evaluates the impact of the depression intervention on health behavior and blood pressure control. METHODS:Between 2005 and 2008, 157 patients who remained persistently depressed 3 months after ACS were randomized to a 6-month depression intervention (initial patient preference for problem-solving therapy and/or pharmacotherapy, followed by stepped care; 80 patients) or to usual care (77 patients). At randomization, and then 2, 4, and 6 months later, patients were asked if they (1) missed taking their aspirin; (2) followed a heart healthy diet; (3) exercised regularly; and (4) used tobacco products. Blood pressure was measured before randomization and 6 months later. RESULTS: At the end of the intervention, there was no significant improvement in the percentage of intervention compared to control group patients who adhered to aspirin (+3% versus -1%, P = .23), followed a healthy diet (+10% versus +8%, P = .39), exercised regularly (+5% versus +4%, P = .65), abstained from tobacco (-3% versus -1%, P = .77), or had controlled blood pressure (+6% versus +16%, P = .26). CONCLUSION: Despite improving depression, enhanced depression care after an ACS did not improve health behavior or blood pressure control compared to usual care. Research is needed to test whether adding an adherence intervention to enhanced depression care can improve adherence and cardiovascular prognosis in depressed patients post-ACS.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The presence of depression after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is associated with worse prognosis and lower adherence to risk-reducing behaviors. We reported earlier that an enhanced depression care intervention reduces depression symptoms and major adverse cardiac events. This study evaluates the impact of the depression intervention on health behavior and blood pressure control. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2008, 157 patients who remained persistently depressed 3 months after ACS were randomized to a 6-month depression intervention (initial patient preference for problem-solving therapy and/or pharmacotherapy, followed by stepped care; 80 patients) or to usual care (77 patients). At randomization, and then 2, 4, and 6 months later, patients were asked if they (1) missed taking their aspirin; (2) followed a heart healthy diet; (3) exercised regularly; and (4) used tobacco products. Blood pressure was measured before randomization and 6 months later. RESULTS: At the end of the intervention, there was no significant improvement in the percentage of intervention compared to control group patients who adhered to aspirin (+3% versus -1%, P = .23), followed a healthy diet (+10% versus +8%, P = .39), exercised regularly (+5% versus +4%, P = .65), abstained from tobacco (-3% versus -1%, P = .77), or had controlled blood pressure (+6% versus +16%, P = .26). CONCLUSION: Despite improving depression, enhanced depression care after an ACS did not improve health behavior or blood pressure control compared to usual care. Research is needed to test whether adding an adherence intervention to enhanced depression care can improve adherence and cardiovascular prognosis in depressedpatients post-ACS.
Authors: Ian M Kronish; Nina Rieckmann; Ethan A Halm; Daichi Shimbo; David Vorchheimer; Donald C Haas; Karina W Davidson Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2006-08-09 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Joost P van Melle; Peter de Jonge; Titia A Spijkerman; Jan G P Tijssen; Johan Ormel; Dirk J van Veldhuisen; Rob H S van den Brink; Maarten P van den Berg Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2004 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Elizabeth H B Lin; Wayne Katon; Carolyn Rutter; Greg E Simon; Evette J Ludman; Michael Von Korff; Bessie Young; Malia Oliver; Paul C Ciechanowski; Leslie Kinder; Edward Walker Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2006 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Michael H Antoni; Adam W Carrico; Ron E Durán; Susan Spitzer; Frank Penedo; Gail Ironson; Mary Ann Fletcher; Nancy Klimas; Neil Schneiderman Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2006 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Leah K Bauer; Mario A Caro; Scott R Beach; Carol A Mastromauro; Emma Lenihan; James L Januzzi; Jeff C Huffman Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2012-02-09 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Nina Rieckmann; Ian M Kronish; Donald Haas; William Gerin; William F Chaplin; Matthew M Burg; David Vorchheimer; Karina W Davidson Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Kim A Eagle; Michael J Lim; Omar H Dabbous; Karen S Pieper; Robert J Goldberg; Frans Van de Werf; Shaun G Goodman; Christopher B Granger; P Gabriel Steg; Joel M Gore; Andrzej Budaj; Alvaro Avezum; Marcus D Flather; Keith A A Fox Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-06-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Heather S Lett; James A Blumenthal; Michael A Babyak; Andrew Sherwood; Timothy Strauman; Clive Robins; Mark F Newman Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2004 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Vivian M Yeh; Lindsay S Mayberry; Justin M Bachmann; Kenneth A Wallston; Christianne Roumie; Daniel Muñoz; Sunil Kripalani Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-12-18 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Robby Nieuwlaat; Nancy Wilczynski; Tamara Navarro; Nicholas Hobson; Rebecca Jeffery; Arun Keepanasseril; Thomas Agoritsas; Niraj Mistry; Alfonso Iorio; Susan Jack; Bhairavi Sivaramalingam; Emma Iserman; Reem A Mustafa; Dawn Jedraszewski; Chris Cotoi; R Brian Haynes Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2014-11-20
Authors: Suzanne H Richards; Lindsey Anderson; Caroline E Jenkinson; Ben Whalley; Karen Rees; Philippa Davies; Paul Bennett; Zulian Liu; Robert West; David R Thompson; Rod S Taylor Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-04-28
Authors: Jennifer A Sumner; Ian M Kronish; Robert H Pietrzak; Daichi Shimbo; Jonathan A Shaffer; Faith E Parsons; Donald Edmondson Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 4.839