The identification, assessment and management of difficult-to-treat depression: An international consensus statement.

BACKGROUND: Many depressed patients are not able to achieve or sustain symptom remission despite serial treatment trials - often termed "treatment resistant depression". A broader, perhaps more empathic concept of "difficult-to-treat depression" (DTD) was considered. METHODS: A consensus group discussed the definition, clinical recognition, assessment and management implications of the DTD heuristic. RESULTS: The group proposed that DTD be defined as "depression that continues to cause significant burden despite usual treatment efforts". All depression management should include a thorough initial assessment. When DTD is recognized, a regular reassessment that employs a multi-dimensional framework to identify addressable barriers to successful treatment (including patient-, illness- and treatment-related factors) is advised, along with specific recommendations for addressing these factors. The emphasis of treatment, in the first instance, shifts from a goal of remission to optimal symptom control, daily psychosocial functional and quality of life, based on a patient-centred approach with shared decision-making to enhance the timely consideration of all treatment options (including pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, neurostimulation, etc.) to optimize outcomes when sustained remission is elusive. LIMITATIONS: The recommended definition and management of DTD is based largely on expert consensus. While DTD would seem to have clinical utility, its specificity and objectivity may be insufficient to define clinical populations for regulatory trial purposes, though DTD could define populations for service provision or phase 4 trials. CONCLUSIONS: DTD provides a clinically useful conceptualization that implies a search for and remediation of specific patient-, illness- and treatment obstacles to optimizing outcomes of relevance to patients.

The cross-national epidemiology of specific phobia in the World Mental Health Surveys.

BACKGROUND: Although specific phobia is highly prevalent, associated with impairment, and an important risk factor for the development of other mental disorders, cross-national epidemiological data are scarce, especially from low- and middle-income countries. This paper presents epidemiological data from 22 low-, lower-middle-, upper-middle- and high-income countries. METHOD: Data came from 25 representative population-based surveys conducted in 22 countries (2001-2011) as part of the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys initiative (n = 124 902). The presence of specific phobia as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition was evaluated using the World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview. RESULTS: The cross-national lifetime and 12-month prevalence rates of specific phobia were, respectively, 7.4% and 5.5%, being higher in females (9.8 and 7.7%) than in males (4.9% and 3.3%) and higher in high- and higher-middle-income countries than in low-/lower-middle-income countries. The median age of onset was young (8 years). Of the 12-month patients, 18.7% reported severe role impairment (13.3-21.9% across income groups) and 23.1% reported any treatment (9.6-30.1% across income groups). Lifetime co-morbidity was observed in 60.5% of those with lifetime specific phobia, with the onset of specific phobia preceding the other disorder in most cases (72.6%). Interestingly, rates of impairment, treatment use and co-morbidity increased with the number of fear subtypes. CONCLUSIONS: Specific phobia is common and associated with impairment in a considerable percentage of cases. Importantly, specific phobia often precedes the onset of other mental disorders, making it a possible early-life indicator of psychopathology vulnerability.

Sampling and methods of the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD) project.

OBJECTIVE: The European Study of Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD) project was designed to evaluate the prevalence, the impact and the treatment patterns in Europe. This paper presents an overview of the methods implemented in the project. METHOD: ESEMeD is a cross-sectional study in a representative sample of 21 425 adults, 18 or older, from the general population of Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (WMH-CIDI) was administered by home interviews from January 2001 to August 2003 using Computer Assisted Personal Interview (CAPI) technology. Data quality was controlled to ensure reliability and validity of the information obtained. RESULTS: Response rate varied from 78.6% in Spain to 45.9% in France. Less than 4% of the individuals had errors in the checking procedures performed. CONCLUSION: The sampling methodologies, comprehensive psychiatric instruments and quality control procedures used have rendered the ESEMeD database a unique and important source of information about the prevalence, the disability burden and unmet medical needs of mental disorders within Europe.

The European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD/MHEDEA 2000) project: rationale and methods.

The European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD/MHEDEA 2000) is a new cross-sectional study investigating the prevalence and the associated factors of mental disorders, as well as their effect on health-related quality of life and the use of services in six European countries. This paper describes the rationale, methods and the plan for the analysis of the project. A total of 22,000 individuals representative of the non-institutionalized population aged 18 and over from Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain are being interviewed in their homes. Trained interviewers use a computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI) including the most recent version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI, 2000), a well-established epidemiological survey for assessing mental disorders. This is the first international study using the standardized up-to-date methodology for epidemiological assessment. Sizeable differences in prevalence, impact and level of need that is met by the health services are expected. The analysis of these differences should facilitate the monitoring of ongoing mental health reform initiatives in Europe and provide new research hypotheses.