Performance of the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale as a Predictor of ECT Outcome.

OBJECTIVES: The presence of psychotic symptoms is an important predictor of responsiveness to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). This study investigates whether a continuous severity measure, the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS), is a more accurate predictor. METHODS: Depression severity was assessed before and after the ECT course using the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in 31 patients with psychotic depression and 34 depressed patients without psychotic symptoms. Logistic regression models for MADRS response and remission were fitted, with either the PDAS total score or the dichotomous predictors "absence/presence of psychotic symptoms" as the independent variables. Age, episode duration, and treatment resistance were added as covariates. RESULTS: Both the asserted presence of psychotic symptoms and a higher PDAS total score reflected MADRS response (areas under the curve, 0.83 and 0.85, respectively), with MADRS remission also being predicted by the presence of psychotic symptoms and higher PDAS scores (areas under the curves, 0.86 and 0.84, respectively). Age was a contributor to these prediction models, with response and remission rates being highest in the older patients. Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale scores decreased significantly during ECT: at end point, 81.5% of the patients showed significant response and 63.9% had achieved remission. CONCLUSIONS: The PDAS indeed accurately predicts response to and remission after ECT in (psychotic) depression and most pronouncedly so in older patients but seems to have no clear advantage over simply verifying the presence of psychotic symptoms. This could be the consequence of a ceiling effect, as ECT was extremely effective in patients with psychotic depression.ClinicalTrials.gov: Identifier: NCT02562846.

Clinical validation of the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) against independent global severity ratings in older adults.

OBJECTIVES: According to a recent study, ratings on the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) obtained via a dedicated semi-structured interview are valid measures of the severity of psychotic depression. This study aimed to further test the validity, scalability and responsiveness of the PDAS in older adults using independent ratings on the Clinical Global Impression Scale - Severity (CGI-S) and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) as references. METHODS: Ratings were performed at admission and discharge at two old age psychiatric wards in Flanders, Belgium. In total, 62 older adults (mean age: 74.3 years) with psychotic depression were included. The PDAS was rated by trained nurses using the semi-structured PDAS interview. Senior psychiatrists scored the participants on the CGI-S. Psychologists or experienced nurses rated participants on the MADRS. Clinical validity was assessed by correlating the PDAS total scores with CGI-S ratings and MADRS total scores. Mokken analysis was performed to assess the scalability of the PDAS. Responsiveness was assessed by comparing the proportion of participants in remission (PDAS total score <8 at study baseline and endpoint). RESULTS: The Spearman correlation coefficients were 0.76 and 0.79 for the PDAS versus CGI-S and PDAS versus MADRS, respectively. The Mokken analysis yielded a Loevinger coefficient of 0.46, which is indicative of scalability. At admission, no participants met the PDAS remission criterion. At discharge, 54% (95% confidence interval: 47%-60%) of the patients met this criterion. CONCLUSION: The PDAS appears to be a clinically valid, scalable and responsive measure of the severity of psychotic depression in older adults.

Risk Factors for Depression: Differential Across Age?

INTRODUCTION: The occurrence of well-established risk factors for depression differs across the lifespan. Risk factors may be more strongly associated with depression at ages when occurrence, and therefore expectance, is relatively low ("on-time off-time" hypothesis). This large-scale study examined absolute and relative risks of established risk factors for depression across the lifespan. METHODS: Participants were 2,215 currently or never depressed adults aged 18 to 93 years from two cohort studies: NESDA and NESDO. The occurrence of 19 established risk factors (absolute risk) was examined in different age groups. In addition, the relative risk of these risk factors for depression was compared across age groups by examining risk factor × age interaction. RESULTS: The occurrence of all risk factors differed significantly across age groups. Although most risk factors had significant associations with depression across the lifespan, for five risk factors the strength of the association was age-dependent. Stronger associations with depression in younger age were found for childhood abuse, pain, higher body mass index (BMI) and number of chronic diseases, whereas low income imposed a stronger risk in older age. Associations with depression were strongest in age groups where occurrence was lowest. CONCLUSIONS: Although the exposure to risk factors changes across the lifespan, the relative risk associating them to depression remains similar for most risk factors. Some specific risk factors (low income, and health factors pain, BMI, and number of chronic diseases), however, seem more strongly associated with depression in ages in which occurrence is lowest and least expected.

Design and methods of the Hospital Elder Life Program (HELP), a multicomponent targeted intervention to prevent delirium in hospitalized older patients: efficacy and cost-effectiveness in Dutch health care.

BACKGROUND: The Hospital Elder Life Program (HELP) has been shown to be highly efficient and (cost-)effective in reducing delirium incidence in the USA. HELP provides multicomponent protocols targeted at specific risk factors for delirium and introduces a different view on care organization, with trained volunteers playing a pivotal role. The primary aim of this study is the quantification of the (cost-)effectiveness of HELP in the Dutch health care system. The second aim is to investigate the experiences of patients, families, professionals and trained volunteers participating in HELP. METHODS/DESIGN: A multiple baseline approach (also known as a stepped-wedge design) will be used to evaluate the (cost-) effectiveness of HELP in a cluster randomized controlled study. All patients aged 70 years and older who are at risk for delirium and are admitted to cardiology, internal medicine, geriatrics, orthopedics and surgery at two participating community hospitals will be included. These eight units are implementing the intervention in a successive order that will be determined at random. The incidence of delirium, the primary outcome, will be measured with the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM). Secondary outcomes include the duration and severity of delirium, quality of life, length of stay and the use of care services up to three months after hospital discharge. The experiences of patients, families, professionals and volunteers will be investigated using a qualitative design based on the grounded theory approach. Professionals and volunteers will be invited to participate in focus group interviews. Additionally, a random sample of ten patients and their families from each hospital unit will be interviewed at home after discharge. DISCUSSION: We hypothesize that HELP will reduce delirium incidence during hospital admission and decrease the duration and severity of delirium and length of hospital stays among these older patients, which will lead to reduced health care costs. The results of this study may fundamentally change our views on care organization for older patients at risk for delirium. The stepped-wedge design was chosen for ethical, practical and statistical reasons. The study results will be generalizable to the Dutch hospital care system, and the proven cost-effectiveness of HELP will encourage the spread and implementation of this program. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial register: NTR3842.

Effects of a stepped-care intervention programme among older subjects who screened positive for depressive symptoms in general practice: the PROMODE randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: to determine (cost)-effectiveness of a stepped-care intervention programme among subjects ≥ 75 years who screened positive for depressive symptoms in general practice. DESIGN: the pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial with 12-month follow-up. SETTING: sixty-seven Dutch general practices. SUBJECTS: two hundred and thirty-nine subjects ≥ 75 years screened positive for untreated depressive symptoms (15-item Geriatric Depression Scale ≥ 5). METHODS: usual care (34 practices, 118 subjects) was compared with the stepped-care intervention (33 practices, 121 subjects) consisting of three steps: individual counselling; Coping with Depression course; and-if indicated-referral back to general practitioner to discuss further treatment. Measurements included severity of depressive symptoms [Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)], quality of life, mortality and costs. RESULTS: at baseline subjects mostly were mildly/moderately depressed. At 6 months MADRS scores had improved more in the usual care than the intervention group (-2.9 versus -1.1 points, P=0.032), but not at 12 months (-3.1 versus -4.6, P=0.084). No significant differences were found within two separate age groups (75-79 years and ≥ 80 years). In intervention practices, 83% accepted referral to the stepped-care programme, and 19% accepted course participation. The control group appeared to have received more psychological care. CONCLUSIONS: among older subjects who screened positive for depressive symptoms, an offered stepped-care intervention programme was not (cost)-effective compared with usual care, possibly due to a low uptake of the course offer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN 71142851v.

Routine use of the confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit: a multicenter study.

RATIONALE: Delirium is often unrecognized in ICU patients and associated with poor outcome. Screening for ICU delirium is recommended by several medical organizations to improve early diagnosis and treatment. The Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) has high sensitivity and specificity for delirium when administered by research nurses. However, test characteristics of the CAM-ICU as performed in routine practice are unclear. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the diagnostic value of the CAM-ICU in daily practice. METHODS: Teams of three delirium experts including psychiatrists, geriatricians, and neurologists visited 10 ICUs twice. Based on cognitive examination, inspection of medical files, and Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, Text Revision criteria for delirium, the expert teams classified patients as awake and not delirious, delirious, or comatose. This served as a gold standard to which the CAM-ICU as performed by the bedside ICU-nurses was compared. Assessors were unaware of each other's conclusions. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen delirium experts assessed 282 patients of whom 101 (36%) were comatose and excluded. In the remaining 181 (64%) patients, the CAM-ICU had a sensitivity of 47% (95% confidence interval [CI], 35%-58%); specificity of 98% (95% CI, 93%-100%); positive predictive value of 95% (95% CI, 80%-99%); and negative predictive value of 72% (95% CI, 64%-79%). The positive likelihood ratio was 24.7 (95% CI, 6.1-100) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.5 (95% CI, 0.4-0.8). CONCLUSIONS: Specificity of the CAM-ICU as performed in routine practice seems to be high but sensitivity is low. This hampers early detection of delirium by the CAM-ICU.

Yield and costs of direct and stepped screening for depressive symptoms in subjects aged 75 years and over in general practice.

OBJECTIVE: To examine yield and costs of two screening methods for depressive symptoms in subjects ≥75 years in general practice. METHODS: In 73 general practices of 12.144 registered subjects ≥75 years 10.681 could be invited for screening. In the first 31 practices we invited 3797 subjects for direct screening which implied an invitation by letter followed by a home visit to administer the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15). In the remaining 42 practices 6884 subjects were invited for stepped screening which implied that the GDS-15 was sent by post, followed by a home visit only if the self-administered GDS-15-score was ≥4 points. Being screen-positive for depressive symptoms was defined as an interviewer-administered GDS-15-score ≥5 points. Screening costs were estimated based on results in this study. RESULTS: Of all registered subjects 707 (5.8%) were already being treated for depression. The yield of direct screening was higher than of stepped screening (2.6% versus 1.9%, p = 0.009), with similar yields for subjects aged 75-79 years and for subjects aged ≥80 years. In a standard GP-practice with 160 subjects ≥75 years estimated total screening costs are about twice as high for direct screening than for stepped screening. Estimated costs per screen positive subject are €350 for direct screening and €250 for stepped screening. CONCLUSION: Direct screening has a higher yield, but is also more time consuming and more expensive. Whether the extra yield is clinically relevant and worth the extra costs, will depend on the subsequent treatment effect. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN 71142851