Comorbidity between mood and substance-related disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Evidence indicates that mood disorders often co-occur with substance-related disorders. However, pooling comorbidity estimates can be challenging due to heterogeneity in diagnostic criteria and in the overall study design. The aim of this study was to systematically review and, where appropriate, meta-analyse estimates related to the pairwise comorbidity between mood disorders and substance-related disorders, after sorting these estimates by various study designs. METHODS: We searched PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science for publications between 1980 and 2017 regardless of geographical location and language. We meta-analysed estimates from original articles in 4 broadly defined mood and 35 substance-related disorders. RESULTS: After multiple eligibility steps, we included 120 studies for quantitative analysis. In general, regardless of variations in diagnosis type, temporal order or use of adjustments, there was substantial comorbidity between mood and substance-related disorders. We found a sixfold elevated risk between broadly defined mood disorder and drug dependence (odds ratio = 5.7) and fivefold risk between depression and cannabis dependence (odds ratio = 4.9) while the highest pooled estimate, based on period prevalence risk, was found between broadly defined dysthymic disorder and drug dependence (odds ratio = 11.3). Based on 56 separate meta-analyses, all pooled odds ratios were above 1, and 46 were significantly greater than 1 (i.e. the 95% confidence intervals did not include 1). CONCLUSION: This review found robust and consistent evidence of an increased risk of comorbidity between many combinations of mood and substance-related disorders. We also identified a number of under-researched mood and substance-related disorders, suitable for future scrutiny. This review reinforces the need for clinicians to remain vigilant in order to promptly identify and treat these common types of comorbidity.

Co-morbidity between mood and anxiety disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

There is consistent evidence that mood disorders often co-occur with anxiety disorders, however, the strength of the association of these two broad groups of disorders has been challenging to summarize across different studies. The aim was to conduct a meta-analysis of publications reporting on the pairwise comorbidity between mood and anxiety disorders after sorting into comparable study types. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the grey literature for publications between 1980 and 2017 regardless of geographical locations and languages. We meta-analyzed estimates from original articles after sorting by: (a) broad or narrow diagnostic criteria, (b) study time-frame, and (c) estimates with or without covariate adjustments. Over 43 000 unique studies were identified through electronic searches, of which 391 were selected for full-text review. Finally, 171 studies were eligible for inclusion, including 53 articles from additional snowball searching. In general, regardless of variations in diagnosis type, study time-frame, temporal order, or use of adjustments, there was substantial comorbidity between mood and anxiety disorders. Based on the entire 90 separate meta-analyses, the median OR was 6.1 (range 1.5-18.7). Of these estimates, all 90 were above 1, and 87 were significantly greater than 1 (i.e., the 95% confidence intervals did not include 1). Fourteen of the 90 pooled estimates had ORs that were greater than 10. This systematic review found robust and consistent evidence of comorbidity between broadly defined mood and anxiety disorders. Clinicians should be vigilant for the prompt identification and treatment of this common type of comorbidity.

Resilience Factors Important in Health-Related Quality of Life of Subjects With COPD.

BACKGROUND: Common among patients with COPD is declining health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Although results of research identified some factors associated with HRQOL, resilience factors are yet to be fully investigated. METHODS: This study examined resilience and demographic factors associated with HRQOL. Participants >40 y old were recruited from community health programs and hospitals in South East Queensland. Self-administered questionnaires were used to query subjects' HRQOL and levels of resilience. A decision tree examined the factors important to HRQOL in 159 subjects with COPD. RESULTS: Factors of importance in the HRQOL of subjects with COPD were found in 3 domains of the St George Respiratory Questionnaire. Of importance on the breathlessness domain was marital status, defensive coping, coping, number of comorbidities, relationships, decision-making, self-esteem, self-efficacy, and professional support of health and well-being. Of the symptoms domain, self-efficacy, recruitment location, anxiety/depression, decision-making, self-esteem, coping, relationships, professional support of health and well-being, and risks were important. The cough domain found recruitment location, anxiety/depression, professional support of health and well-being, coping, and defensive coping to be important for subjects' HRQOL. CONCLUSIONS: Resilience and confounding factors were of importance in the HRQOL of subjects with COPD. Thus, consultation with a medical professional, especially at discharge, who identifies, encourages, and approves of the patient's disease management abilities will enhance both resilience and HRQOL.