Demographic and need factors of early, delayed and no mental health care use in major depression: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of evidence based treatments, many people with major depression receive no or delayed professional treatment, which may put them at risk for adverse outcomes. The aim of this study was to examine which demographic and need factors distinguish early, delayed and no treatment use. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study-2 (NEMESIS-2). People with a diagnosis of major depression in the past 12 months were included (N = 434). Mental health care use was assessed during this same period and at follow up (three years later). Multinomial regression analysis was used to distinguish early, delayed and no mental health care users with respect to demographic and need factors. RESULTS: The majority of participants accessed treatment early (62%). Early treatment users were characterized by more severe and persistent symptoms and were more likely not to have a partner compared to no treatment users. The majority of those without treatment reached remission in three years (85%). Delayed treatment users were, compared to early users, characterized by relatively mild symptoms and a persistent or new major depressive disorder at follow up. CONCLUSIONS: Early access to treatment and the finding that need factors determine mental health care use among people with depression show that the filters along the pathway to treatment are not influenced by unfavorable determinants like education or age.

Is duration of psychological treatment for depression related to return into treatment?

PURPOSE: There is increasing pressure on mental health providers to reduce the duration of treatments, while retaining level of quality and effectiveness. The risk is that the population is underserved and therefore needs new treatment episodes. The primary aim of this study was to investigate whether duration of treatment and return into mental health care were related. METHODS: This study examined Dutch patients with an initial treatment episode in 2009 or 2010 in specialized mental health settings for depressive disorder (N = 85,754). Follow-up data about treatment episodes were available up until 2013. The data set included demographic (age, gender), and clinical factors (comorbidity with other DSM-IV Axis; scores on the 'Global Assessment of Functioning'). Cox regression analyses were used to assess whether duration of treatment and relapse into mental health care were related. RESULTS: The majority of patients did not return into mental health care (86 %). Patients with a shorter duration of treatment (5-250 min; 251-500 min and 751-1000 min) were slightly more likely to return (reference group: >1000 min) (HR 1.19 95 % CI 1.13-1.26; HR 1.11 95 % CI 1.06-1.17; HR 1.18 95 % CI 1.11-1.25), adjusted for demographic and clinical variables. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that a longer duration of treatment may prevent return into mental health care in some groups. However, because of the design of the study, no causal inference can be drawn. Further research, preferably in a RCT, is needed to determine whether the trend towards lower intensity treatments is associated with repeated mental health care use.

Psychometric Properties of the Dutch Depression Stigma Scale (DSS) and Associations with Personal and Perceived Stigma in a Depressed and Community Sample.

BACKGROUND: Research on depression stigma is needed to gain more insight into the underlying construct and to reduce the level of stigma in the community. However, few validated measurements of depression stigma are available in the Netherlands. Therefore, this study first sought to examine the psychometric properties of the Dutch translation of the Depression Stigma Scale (DSS). Second, we examined which demographic (gender, age, education, partner status) and other variables (anxiety and knowledge of depression) are associated with personal and perceived stigma within these samples. METHODS: The study population consisted of an adult convenience sample (n = 253) (study 1) and a community adult sample with elevated depressive symptoms (n = 264) (study 2). Factor structure, internal consistency, and validity were assessed. The associations between stigma, demographic variables and anxiety level were examined with regression analyses. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis supported the validity and internal consistency of the DSS personal stigma scale. Internal consistency was sufficient (Cronbach's alpha = .70 (study 1) and .77 (study 2)). The results regarding the perceived stigma scale revealed no clear factor structure. Regression analyses showed that personal stigma was higher in younger people, those with no experience with depression, and those with lower education. CONCLUSIONS: This study established the validity and internal consistency of the DSS personal scale in the Netherlands, in a community sample and in people with elevated depressive symptoms. However, additional research is needed to examine the factor structure of the DSS perceived scale and its use in other samples.