ABSTRACT
Not Just Right Experiences (NJREs) are considered to be a perceptually tinged phenomenon mainly related to obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). The evidence of an association between NJREs and OCD or OC symptoms have been accumulating in the last few years, whereas there is a paucity of studies about the role of this construct in other clinical conditions considered part of the "OCD spectrum". In the current study, the NJRE-Q-R Severity scale (a well-validated measure of NJREs) was administered to 41 patients with OCD, 53 with hair-pulling disorder (HPD), 38 with gambling disorder (GD) and 43 with eating disorders (ED) along with measures of OC symptoms and general distress. In each group, NJREs were consistently associated with OC symptoms; moreover, the pattern of associations appeared coherent with the main clinical features of each disorder. The OCD group reported higher levels of NJREs severity than GD and ED, whereas there were no differences between the OCD and HPD groups. However, HPD patients did not have higher scores of NJREs severity than GD and ED counterparts. NJREs appear to be specific to OCD, but further study is needed to establish the role of this construct in OCD-related disorders.
Subject(s)
Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/diagnosis , Adult , Case-Control Studies , Compulsive Personality Disorder/diagnosis , Compulsive Personality Disorder/psychology , Feeding and Eating Disorders/diagnosis , Feeding and Eating Disorders/psychology , Female , Gambling/diagnosis , Gambling/psychology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/psychology , Personality Inventory , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Surveys and Questionnaires , Trichotillomania/diagnosis , Trichotillomania/psychologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of collaborative care compared to Primary Care Physician's (PCP's) usual care in the treatment of depression, focusing on European countries. METHODS: A systematic review of English and non-English articles, from inception to March 2014, was performed using database PubMed, British Nursing Index and Archive, Ovid Medline (R), PsychINFO, Books@Ovid, PsycARTICLES Full Text, EMBASE Classic+Embase, DARE (Database of Abstract of Reviews of Effectiveness) and the Cochrane Library electronic database. Search term included depression, collaborative care, physician family and allied health professional. RCTs comparing collaborative care to usual care for depression in primary care were included. Titles and abstracts were independently examined by two reviewers, who extracted from the included trials information on participants' characteristics, type of intervention, features of collaborative care and type of outcome measure. RESULTS: The 17 papers included, regarding 15 RCTs, involved 3240 participants. Primary analyses showed that collaborative care models were associated with greater improvement in depression outcomes in the short term, within 3 months (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.19, 95% CI=-0.33; -0.05; p=0.006), medium term, between 4 and 11 months (SMD -0.24, 95% CI=-0.39; -0.09; p=0.001) and medium-long term, from 12 months and over (SMD -0.21, 95% CI=-0.37; -0.04; p=0.01), compared to usual care. CONCLUSIONS: The present review, specifically focusing on European countries, shows that collaborative care is more effective than treatment as usual in improving depression outcomes.
Subject(s)
Depression/therapy , Depressive Disorder/therapy , Patient Care Team , Primary Health Care , Adult , Europe , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Primary Health Care/methods , Primary Health Care/standards , Primary Health Care/trends , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
TRIAL DESIGN: This was a multicenter cluster-randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 227 patients ≥18 years old with a new onset of depressive symptoms who screened positive on the first two items of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) were recruited by primary care physicians (PCPs) of eight health districts of three Italian regions from September 2009 to June 2011. INTERVENTION: PCPs of the intervention group received a specific collaborative care program including 2 days of intensive training, implementation of a stepped care protocol, depression management toolkit and scheduled meetings with a dedicated consultant psychiatrist. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to determine whether a collaborative care program for depression management in primary care leads to higher remission rate than usual PCP care. OUTCOMES: Outcome was clinical remission as expressed on PHQ-9 <5 at 3 months. RANDOMIZATION: An independent researcher used computer-generated randomization to assign involved primary care groups to the two alternative arms. BLINDING: PCPs and research personnel were not blinded. RESULTS: The 223 PCPs enrolled recruited 227 patients (128 in collaborative care arm, 99 in the usual care arm). At 3 months (n=210), the proportion of patients who achieved remission was higher, though the difference was not statistically significant, in the collaborative care group. The effect size was of 0.11. When considering only patients with minor/major depression, collaborative care appeared to be more effective than usual care (P=.015). CONCLUSIONS: The present intervention for managing depression in primary care, designed to be applicable to the Italian context, appears to be effective and feasible.
Subject(s)
Cooperative Behavior , Depression/therapy , Depressive Disorder, Major/therapy , Physicians, Primary Care/education , Primary Health Care/methods , Psychiatry/methods , Adult , Aged , Depressive Disorder/therapy , Female , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Care Team , Psychiatry/education , Referral and Consultation , Remission Induction/methods , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Evidences from literature suggest that Primary Care Physicians' (PCPs) knowledge and attitude about psychological and pharmacological treatments of anxiety and depressive disorders could influence their clinical practice. The aim of the study is double: 1) to assess PCPs' opinions about antidepressants (ADs) and psychotherapy for the management of anxiety and depressive disorders; 2) to evaluate the influence of PCPs' gender, age, duration of clinical practice, and office location on their opinions and attitudes. METHODS: This cross-sectional multicentre survey involved 816 PCPs working in four Local Health Units of the Emilia Romagna Region. Participating PCPs were asked to complete a questionnaire during educational meetings between October 2006 and December 2008. RESULTS: The response rate was 65.1%. Eighty-five percent of PCPs agreed on the effectiveness of ADs for depressive disorder whereas lower agreement emerged for anxiety disorder and on psychotherapy for both anxiety and depression. Forty percent of PCPs reported to feel "very/extremely confident" in recognizing depression and 20.0% felt equally confident in treating it with pharmacotherapy. Considering anxiety disorder, these proportions increased. Female PCPs and those located in the rural/mountain areas reported to adopt more psycho-educational support compared to male and suburban colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that an effort should be made to better disseminate recent evidences about the management of anxiety and depressive disorders in Primary Care. In particular, the importance of psychological interventions and the role of drugs for anxiety disorder should be addressed.