The prevalence and economic burden of treatment-resistant depression in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to investigate the proportion of treatment-resistant depression (TRD) among patients with diagnosed major depressive disorder (MDD) and undergoing antidepressant treatment, to estimate the economic cost of MDD, TRD, and non-treatment-resistant depression (non-TRD), and to examine the differences between TRD and non-TRD MDD in a Thai public tertiary hospital. METHODS: This was a combined study between retrospective review of medical records and a cross-sectional survey. The sample size was 500 dyads of antidepressant-treated MDD patients and their unpaid caregivers. MDD patients' medical records, the concept of healthcare resource utilization, the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: depression and mood & mental state versions (WPAI: D, MM), the Class Impairment Questionnaire (CIQ), and the Family Experiences Interview Schedule (FEIS) were applied as the tools of the study. Pearson Chi's square, Fisher's Exact test, and independent T-test were employed for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The proportion of TRD was 19.6% among antidepressant-treated MDD patients in a Thai tertiary public hospital. The results of the study indicated that several factors showed a statistically significant association with TRD criteria. These factors included younger age of MDD patients, a younger age of onset of MDD, lower body mass index (BMI), a history of suicide attempts and self-harm, as well as frequent smoking behavior. The annualized economic cost of TRD was 276,059.97 baht per person ($7,668.33), which was significantly higher than that of cost of non-TRD (173,487.04 baht or $4,819.08). The aggregated economic costs of MDD were 96.8 million baht annually ($2.69 M) if calculated from 500 MDD patients and unpaid caregivers. This contributed to the economic cost of TRD 27.05 million baht (98 respondents) and the economic cost of non-TRD 69.74 million baht (402 respondents). CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden associated with TRD was significantly higher compared to non-TRD among antidepressant-treated MDD patients. Specifically, both direct medical costs and indirect costs were notably elevated in the TRD group.

Association of supply sources of alcohol and alcohol-related harms in adolescent drinkers: the baseline characteristics of a high school cohort across Thailand.

BACKGROUND: The main objective of this study was to investigate the association between parental supply of alcohol, alcohol-related harms, and the severity of alcohol use disorder in Thai 7th grade middle school students. METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive study obtained the baseline data from the project named the Thailand Parental Supply and Use of Alcohol, Cigarettes & Drugs Longitudinal Study Cohort in Secondary School Students in 2018. The sample size was 1187 students who have ever sipped or drank alcohol in the past 12 months. Pearson's Chi square, binary logistic regression, and ordinal logistic regression are applied in the analysis. RESULTS: A single source of parental supply is not significantly associated with any alcohol-related harm and the severity of alcohol use disorder, while parental supply with peers and siblings supply of alcohol plays an important role in both outcomes. The increasing number of sources of alcohol supply increases the risk of alcohol-related harm and the severity of alcohol use disorder. Other risk factors found in both associations included binge drinking, alcohol flushing, low household economic status, distance from the student's family, and poor academic performance. Gender, exposure to alcohol ads on social media and location of residency were not associated with alcohol-related harms or severity of alcohol use disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The results did not support parental guidance in teaching or giving children a drink or sip of alcohol within family to prevent related harms when drinking outside with their peers.

The Validity and Reliability of the Chula COVID-19 Psychosocial Home Isolation Evaluation Tool (CCPHIET).

BACKGROUND: The growing number of cases presenting with COVID-19 during the pandemic has led to a significant shortage of hospital beds. Many patients may not require hospitalization and can be clinically observed in home settings. We have identified a set of psychosocial factors that correlate with unsuccessful home isolation (HI), which in turn might negatively affect the transmission control in the community. Therefore, we developed the Chula COVID-19 Psychosocial Home Isolation Evaluation Tool (CCPHIET), a new screening tool for assessing the psychosocial suitability for HI. This study examines the CCPHIET's validity and reliability. METHODS: This cross-sectional descriptive study included COVID-19 patients who were deemed to be medically safe for 14-days of HI. The CCPHIET is comprised of eight clinical domains pertinent to HI behavioral compliance and risk for non-adherence. We explored its statistical validity and reliability and discussed the potential utility of this tool. RESULTS: A total of 65 COVID-19 patients participated in this study. Most patients (58.5%) were deemed to be appropriate candidates for HI according to the CCPHIET. The results of this study demonstrate that the CCPHIET has an acceptable content validity (IOC index > 0.5), moderate internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.611) and substantial to excellent inter-rater reliability (Intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.944, Cohen's kappa= 0.627). CONCLUSIONS: CCPHIET is an easy-to-use tool for assessing the psychosocial suitability of patients advised for at-home isolation with mild and asymptomatic COVID-19. Its implementation can assist clinicians in identifying and redirecting resources to patients at the highest risk for breaking quarantine and save on unnecessary, costly absolute institutional quarantine for those deemed to be psychosocially fit for full adherence.