Prevalence and prediction of dropout during depression treatment in routine outpatient care: an observational study.

Efficacious treatments are available for major depressive disorder (MDD), but treatment dropout is common and decreases their effectiveness. However, knowledge about prevalence of treatment dropout and its risk factors in routine care is limited. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of and risk factors for dropout in a large outpatient sample. In this retrospective cohort analysis, routinely collected data from 2235 outpatients with MDD who had a diagnostic work-up between 2014 and 2016 were examined. Dropout was defined as treatment termination without achieving remission before the fourth session within six months after its start. Total and item scores on the Dutch Measure for Quantification of Treatment Resistance in Depression (DM-TRD) at baseline, and demographic variables were analyzed for their association with dropout using logistic regression and elastic net analyses. Data of 987 subjects who started routine outpatient depression treatment were included in the analyses of which 143 (14.5%) dropped out. Higher DM-TRD-scores were predictive for lower dropout odds [OR = 0.78, 95% CI = (0.70-0.86), p < 0.001]. The elastic net analysis revealed several clinical variables predictive for dropout. Higher SES, higher depression severity, comorbid personality pathology and a comorbid anxiety disorder were significantly associated with less dropout in the sample. In this observational study, treatment dropout was relatively low. The DM-TRD, an easy-to-use clinical instrument, revealed several variables associated with less dropout. When applied in daily practice and combined with demographical information, this instrument may help to reduce dropout and increase treatment effectiveness.

Worse off by waiting for treatment? The impact of waiting time on clinical course and treatment outcome for depression in routine care.

BACKGROUND: Long-term untreated major depressive disorder (MDD) is associated with a less favorable clinical course. Waiting time, defined as the interval between diagnostic workup and treatment initiation, may be clinically relevant given the prolongation of the pre-existing duration of untreated MDD. However, it is currently unknown whether and to what extent waiting time affects treatment course in routine outpatient care. METHODS: Retrospectively extracted data from 715 outpatients with MDD who received naturalistic outpatient MDD treatment were examined. Treatment outcome was defined as the difference in depression severity at the start of treatment and six months thereafter. Clinical course during waiting time was defined by the difference in severity at diagnostic workup and at treatment initiation. We analyzed the association between waiting time and treatment outcome and between waiting time and clinical course during this waiting time using multivariable regression analyses. We adjusted for severity and suicidality as potential confounders. RESULTS: An increased duration of the waiting time was associated with a less favorable treatment outcome (B = 0.049, SE = 0.019, p = 0.01). This association persisted after adjustment for potential confounders (B = 0.053, SE = 0.02, p = 0.01). No association was found between length of waiting time and clinical course during waiting time. LIMITATIONS: Strict definitions resulted in smaller sample sizes for the final analyses. The uncontrolled design may be questionable to definitively establish the impact of waiting time on treatment outcome. CONCLUSIONS: A prolonged waiting time is significantly associated with less favorable treatment outcome. Reduction of waiting time deserves priority in depression treatment planning to improve clinical outcomes.

Predicting clinical course in major depressive disorder: The association between DM-TRD score and symptom severity over time in 1115 outpatients.

BACKGROUND: The Dutch Measure for Quantification of Treatment Resistance in Depression (DM-TRD) is a promising prediction tool for major depressive disorder (MDD) based on variables associated with treatment outcome. The objective of our study was to examine the association between the DM-TRD and clinical course in a large cohort of MDD outpatients receiving treatment as usual. Furthermore, we examined whether the addition of an item measuring the presence of childhood adversity improved this association. METHODS: We included 1115 subjects with MDD (according to the DSM-IV) who were naturalistically treated at seven outpatient departments of a secondary mental healthcare center in the Netherlands. Data on subjects who had a diagnostic work-up between June 2014 and June 2016 were analyzed. Multilevel analyses were performed to examine the association between the DM-TRD score at baseline and clinical course, defined by symptom severity according to scores on the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report (QIDS-SR) over time. We also investigated whether an extra item measuring childhood adversity improved the model. RESULTS: The model including the DM-TRD and its interaction with time was superior to previous models. The addition of childhood adversity and its interaction with time did not improve the model. CONCLUSIONS: In depressed outpatients receiving treatment as usual, the solid longer-term association between higher DM-TRD scores and worse clinical course supports its usefulness in clinical practice. Childhood adversity did not improve the model value indicating that-counterintuitively-this parameter offers no additional predictive power to the variables included.

Family history is neglected in the work-up of patients with colorectal cancer: a quality assessment using cancer registry data.

In the diagnostic work-up of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC, Lynch syndrome), high-risk patients can be identified using information from the family history on cancer ('Amsterdam criteria' and 'Bethesda guidelines'). To investigate to what extent the medical specialists apply these criteria to patients with colorectal carcinoma and a suspicion of HNPCC, we collected information on diagnostic work-up of 224 patients of seven hospitals in the region of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre West in Leiden, The Netherlands. These patients were diagnosed with colorectal cancer between 1999 and 2001 and satisfied at least one of the Bethesda guidelines. A complete family history was recorded for 38 of the 244 patients (16%). Patients with a complete family history were more likely to be referred to the Clinical Genetic Centre than those with an incomplete or absent family history (53% vs. 13% and 4%, respectively; P < 0.0001), and more likely to be analyzed for microsatellite instability (MSI), which is a characteristic of HNPCC (34% vs. 6% and 1%, respectively; P < 0.0001). We conclude that the family history is neglected in the majority of patients with colorectal cancer and MSI-analysis is only performed in a small proportion of the patients that meet the guidelines for this analysis.