Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Lancet Neurol ; 20(11): 887, 2021 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34687628
2.
Epilepsia Open ; 6(1): 127-139, 2021 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33681656

RESUMO

Objectives: The Psychology Task Force of the Medical Therapies Commission of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) has been charged with taking steps to improve global mental health care for people with epilepsy. This study aimed to inform the direction and priorities of the Task Force by examining epilepsy healthcare providers' current practical experiences, barriers, and unmet needs around addressing depression and anxiety in their patients. Methods: A voluntary 27-item online survey was distributed via ILAE chapters and networks. It assessed practices in the areas of screening, referral, management, and psychological care for depression and anxiety. A total of 445 participants, from 67 countries (68% high income), commenced the survey, with 87% completing all components. Most respondents (80%) were either neurologists or epileptologists. Results: Less than half of respondents felt adequately resourced to manage depression and anxiety. There was a lack of consensus about which health professionals were responsible for screening and management of these comorbidities. About a third only assessed for depression and anxiety following spontaneous report and lack of time was a common barrier (>50%). Routine referrals to psychiatrists (>55%) and psychologists (>41%) were common, but approximately one third relied on watchful waiting. A lack of both trained mental health specialists (>55%) and standardized procedures (>38%) was common barriers to referral practices. The majority (>75%) of respondents' patients identified with depression or anxiety had previously accessed psychotropic medications or psychological treatments. However, multiple barriers to psychological treatments were endorsed, including accessibility difficulties (52%). Significance: The findings suggest that while the importance of managing depression and anxiety in patients with epilepsy is being recognized, there are ongoing barriers to effective mental health care. Key future directions include the need for updated protocols in this area and the integration of mental health professionals within epilepsy settings.


Assuntos
Ansiedade/diagnóstico , Depressão/diagnóstico , Epilepsia/complicações , Saúde Global , Pessoal de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Programas de Rastreamento , Comitês Consultivos , Humanos , Internet , Estudos Longitudinais , Serviços de Saúde Mental/provisão & distribuição , Serviços de Saúde Mental/tendências , Neurologistas/estatística & dados numéricos , Inquéritos e Questionários
3.
Neurology ; 79(4): 371-5, 2012 Jul 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22786594

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of the Neurological Depressive Disorders Inventory for Epilepsy (NDDI-E) and the depression component of the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS-D) for identifying depression and suicide risk in adults with epilepsy. METHODS: A total of 147 (87 female [59% ]) outpatients attending a tertiary epilepsy center in Sydney Australia completed the NDDI-E and HADS-D. They then completed the depression and suicide sections of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Inventory (MINI) with a clinician blind to symptom measure scores. Receiver operator characteristic analysis was performed for the clinical cutoff scores for depression on the NDDI-E ≥ 15 and HADS-D ≥ 8 to identify MINI-determined depression and suicidality. RESULTS: The NDDI-E indicated strong sensitivity (84%) and acceptable specificity (78%), whereas the HADS-D had poor sensitivity (42%) but good specificity (97%) for identifying depression. For identifying suicide risk, the NDDI-E indicated strong sensitivity (81%) and reasonable specificity (66%), whereas the HADS-D had poor sensitivity (43%) but acceptable specificity (90%). Area under the curve comparisons for these measures were not significant. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, it is essential that screening measures have the highest possible sensitivity values to limit the chances of false-negative results. In accordance with these guidelines, the NDDI-E was a superior screening measure compared with the HADS-D. Our results demonstrate the efficacy of the NDDI-E for identifying both major and minor depression and serious suicide risk. The poor sensitivity of the HADS-D suggests that it should not be used as a screen for depression or suicidality in adults with epilepsy.


Assuntos
Transtorno Depressivo/diagnóstico , Epilepsia/complicações , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Transtorno Depressivo/complicações , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Escalas de Graduação Psiquiátrica , Psicometria , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Inquéritos e Questionários
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA