Health-related quality of life and tuberculosis: a longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Active tuberculosis (TB) disease can impose substantial morbidity, while treatment for latent TB infection (LTBI) has frequent side effects. We compared health-related quality of life (HRQOL) between persons diagnosed and treated for TB disease, persons treated for LTBI, and persons screened but not treated for TB disease or LTBI, over one year following diagnosis/initial assessment. METHODS: Participants were recruited at two hospitals in Montreal (2008-2011), and completed the Short Form-36 version 2 (SF-36) at baseline, and at 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, and 12 months thereafter. Eight domain scores and physical and mental component summary (PCS and MCS, respectively) scores were calculated from responses. Linear mixed models were used to compare mean scores at each evaluation and changes in scores over consecutive evaluations, among participants treated for TB disease and those treated for LTBI, each compared to the control group. RESULTS: Of the 263 participants, 48 were treated for TB disease, 105 for LTBI, and 110 were control participants. Fifty-four percent were women, mean age was 35 years, and 90% were foreign-born. Participants treated for TB disease reported significantly worse mean scores at baseline compared to control participants (mean PCS scores: 50.0 vs. 50.7; mean MCS scores: 46.4 vs. 51.1), with improvement in mean MCS scores throughout the study period. Scores reported by participants treated for LTBI and control participants were comparable throughout the study. CONCLUSION: TB disease is associated with decrements in HRQOL as measured by the SF-36. This is most pronounced during the weeks after diagnosis and treatment initiation, but is no longer evident after two months.

The impact of tuberculosis on health utility: a longitudinal cohort study.

PURPOSE: To estimate health utility derived from the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire and Standard Gamble instrument for persons diagnosed and treated for tuberculosis (TB) disease, those diagnosed and treated for latent TB infection (LTBI), and those screened but not treated for TB disease or LTBI over the year following their diagnosis/initial assessment. METHODS: Participants were recruited at two Montreal hospitals (2008-2011) and completed the SF-36 and Standard Gamble at baseline and at follow-up visits 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, and 12 months thereafter. SF-6D health utility scores were derived from SF-36 responses. Linear mixed models were used to compare mean health utility at each evaluation and changes in health utility between participants treated for TB disease, those treated for LTBI, and those in the control group. RESULTS: Of the 263 participants, 48 were treated for TB disease, 105 for LTBI, and 110 were control participants. Fifty-four percent were women, mean age was 35 years, and 90% were foreign-born. Participants treated for TB disease reported worse health utility compared with control participants at the baseline visit (mean SF-6D: 0.69 vs. 0.81; mean Standard Gamble: 0.64 vs. 0.96). They reported successive improvement at months 1 and 2 that was then sustained throughout follow-up. Health utility reported by participants treated for LTBI and control participants was comparable throughout the study. CONCLUSION: Treatment for TB disease had a substantial negative impact on health utility, particularly during the first 2 months of treatment. However, treatment for LTBI did not have a substantial impact.

Depression screening and patient outcomes in pregnancy or postpartum: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical practice guidelines disagree on whether health care professionals should screen women for depression during pregnancy or postpartum. The objective of this systematic review was to determine whether depression screening improves depression outcomes among women during pregnancy or the postpartum period. METHODS: Searches included the CINAHL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases through April 1, 2013; manual journal searches; reference list reviews; citation tracking of included articles; and trial registry reviews. RCTs in any language that compared depression outcomes between women during pregnancy or postpartum randomized to undergo depression screening versus women not screened were eligible. RESULTS: There were 9,242 unique titles/abstracts and 15 full-text articles reviewed. Only 1 RCT of screening postpartum was included, but none during pregnancy. The eligible postpartum study evaluated screening in mothers in Hong Kong with 2-month-old babies (N=462) and reported a standardized mean difference for symptoms of depression at 6 months postpartum of 0.34 (95% confidence interval=0.15 to 0.52, P<0.001). Standardized mean difference per 44 additional women treated in the intervention trial arm compared to the non-screening arm was approximately 1.8. Risk of bias was high, however, because the status of outcome measures was changed post-hoc and because the reported effect size per woman treated was 6-7 times the effect sizes reported in comparable depression care interventions. CONCLUSION: There is currently no evidence from any well-designed and conducted RCT that screening for depression would benefit women in pregnancy or postpartum. Existing guidelines that recommend depression screening during pregnancy or postpartum should be re-considered.

Influence of somatic symptoms on Patient Health Questionnaire-9 depression scores among patients with systemic sclerosis compared to a healthy general population sample.

OBJECTIVE: Depression symptom measures that include somatic symptoms may inflate severity estimates among medically ill patients, including patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc; scleroderma). The 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) is increasingly used to assess depressive symptoms in medical settings, but it is not known whether PHQ-9 scores are influenced by somatic symptoms common in medical illness. The objective was to assess whether SSc patients had higher somatic symptom scores on the PHQ-9 than non-medically ill respondents from the general population matched on cognitive/affective scores. METHODS: SSc patients from the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group Registry were matched with respondents from a random population survey of Alberta, Canada residents who were without chronic disease on total PHQ-9 cognitive/affective scores (5 items), sex, and, as close as possible, age. PHQ-9 somatic scores (4 items) were compared between SSc patients and healthy Alberta survey respondents using t-tests for unadjusted analyses and analysis of covariance to adjust for age differences that remained after matching. RESULTS: Somatic symptoms accounted for 64% of the total PHQ-9 scores for 762 matched SSc patients (n = 837 total) compared to 56% for 762 matched Alberta population survey respondents (n = 3,304 total), a mean difference of 1.0 point, or 19% of the total scores for the SSc patients (Hedges's g = 0.38). After adjusting for age, the mean difference increased to 1.4 points, reflecting 25% of the SSc patients' total scores (Hedges's g = 0.55). CONCLUSION: PHQ-9 scores among patients with SSc may include a small to moderate amount of variance from somatic symptoms that are not necessarily related to depression.

New directions for patient-centred care in scleroderma: the Scleroderma Patient-centred Intervention Network (SPIN).

Systemic sclerosis (SSc), or scleroderma, is a chronic multisystem autoimmune disorder characterised by thickening and fibrosis of the skin and by the involvement of internal organs such as the lungs, kidneys, gastrointestinal tract, and heart. Because there is no cure, feasibly-implemented and easily accessible evidence-based interventions to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are needed. Due to a lack of evidence, however, specific recommendations have not been made regarding non-pharmacological interventions (e.g. behavioural/psychological, educational, physical/occupational therapy) to improve HRQoL in SSc. The Scleroderma Patient-centred Intervention Network (SPIN) was recently organised to address this gap. SPIN is comprised of patient representatives, clinicians, and researchers from Canada, the USA, and Europe. The goal of SPIN, as described in this article, is to develop, test, and disseminate a set of accessible interventions designed to complement standard care in order to improve HRQoL outcomes in SSc.

Depression screening and patient outcomes in cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Several practice guidelines recommend screening for depression in cancer care, but no systematic reviews have examined whether there is evidence that depression screening benefits cancer patients. The objective was to evaluate the potential benefits of depression screening in cancer patients by assessing the (1) accuracy of depression screening tools; (2) effectiveness of depression treatment; and (3) effect of depression screening, either alone or in the context of comprehensive depression care, on depression outcomes. METHODS: Data sources were CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and SCOPUS databases through January 24, 2011; manual journal searches; reference lists; citation tracking; trial registry reviews. Articles on cancer patients were included if they (1) compared a depression screening instrument to a valid criterion for major depressive disorder (MDD); (2) compared depression treatment with placebo or usual care in a randomized controlled trial (RCT); (3) assessed the effect of screening on depression outcomes in a RCT. RESULTS: There were 19 studies of screening accuracy, 1 MDD treatment RCT, but no RCTs that investigated effects of screening on depression outcomes. Screening accuracy studies generally had small sample sizes (median = 17 depression cases) and used exploratory methods to set sample-specific cutoff scores that varied substantially across studies. A nurse-delivered intervention for MDD reduced depressive symptoms moderately (effect size = 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: The one treatment study reviewed reported modest improvement in depressive symptoms, but no evidence was found on whether or not depression screening in cancer patients, either alone or in the context of optimal depression care, improves depression outcomes compared to usual care. Depression screening in cancer should be evaluated in a RCT in which all patients identified as depressed, either through screening or via physician recognition and referral in a control group, have access to comprehensive depression care.