Decline of common mental disorders over time in public primary care tuberculosis patients in South Africa

BackgroundScreening of patients for common mental disorders (CMDs) is needed in primary-care management programmes. This study aimed to compare the screening properties of five widely used questionnaires.MethodAdult attenders in five primary-care settings in India were recruited through systematic sampling. Four questionnaires were administered, in pairs, in random order to participants: the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ, 12 items); the Primary Health Questionnaire (PHQ, nine items); the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10, 10 items), and from which we could extract the score of the shorter 6-item K6; and the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ, 20 items). All participants were interviewed with a structured lay diagnostic interview, the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R).ResultsComplete data were available for 598 participants (participation rate 99.3%). All five questionnaires showed moderate to high discriminating ability; the GHQ and SRQ showed the best results. All five showed moderate to high degrees of correlation with one another, the poorest being between the two shortest questionnaires, K6 and PHQ. All five had relatively good internal consistency. However, the positive predictive value (PPV) of the questionnaires compared with the diagnostic interview ranged from 51% to 77% at the optimal cut-off scores.ConclusionsThere is little difference in the ability of these questionnaires to identify cases accurately, but none showed high PPVs without a considerable compromise on sensitivity. Hence, the choice of an optimum cut-off score that yields the best balance between sensitivity and PPV may need to be tailored to individual settings, with a higher cut-off being recommended in resource-limited primary-care settings.

Download Full-text

The Influence of Social Factors on Common Mental Disorders

The British Journal of Psychiatry ◽

10.1192/bjp.156.5.704 ◽

1990 ◽

Vol 156 (5) ◽

pp. 704-713 ◽

Cited By ~ 22

Author(s):

David Goldberg ◽

Keith Bridges ◽

Diane Cook ◽

Barbara Evans ◽

David Grayson

Keyword(s):

Mental Disorders ◽

Social Factors ◽

Common Mental Disorders ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Symptom Dimensions ◽

Personality Variables ◽

Over Time

This study distinguishes between processes that cause individuals to experience symptoms – destabilisation – and those that are associated with loss of symptoms over time – restitution. It is shown that different clinical, social, and personality variables are associated with each of these processes. Where destabilisation is concerned, it is shown that different variables were associated with the development of symptoms of anxiety and those of depression. Different variables were associated with restitution, and they did not show the same relationship with the symptom dimensions of anxiety and depression as those which were associated with destabilisation.

Download Full-text

Assessing and predicting adolescent and early adulthood common mental disorders using electronic primary care data: analysis of a prospective cohort study (ALSPAC) in Southwest England

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053624 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (10) ◽

pp. e053624

Author(s):

Daniel Smith ◽

Kathryn Willan ◽

Stephanie L Prady ◽

Josie Dickerson ◽

Gillian Santorelli ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Cohort Study ◽

Mental Disorders ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Prospective Cohort Study ◽

Prospective Cohort ◽

Common Mental Disorders ◽

Free Text ◽

Primary Care Data ◽

Time Point

ObjectivesWe aimed to examine agreement between common mental disorders (CMDs) from primary care records and repeated CMD questionnaire data from ALSPAC (the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children) over adolescence and young adulthood, explore factors affecting CMD identification in primary care records, and construct models predicting ALSPAC-derived CMDs using only primary care data.Design and settingProspective cohort study (ALSPAC) in Southwest England with linkage to electronic primary care records.ParticipantsPrimary care records were extracted for 11 807 participants (80% of 14 731 eligible). Between 31% (3633; age 15/16) and 11% (1298; age 21/22) of participants had both primary care and ALSPAC CMD data.Outcome measuresALSPAC outcome measures were diagnoses of suspected depression and/or CMDs. Primary care outcome measure were Read codes for diagnosis, symptoms and treatment of depression/CMDs. For each time point, sensitivities and specificities for primary care CMD diagnoses were calculated for predicting ALSPAC-derived measures of CMDs, and the factors associated with identification of primary care-based CMDs in those with suspected ALSPAC-derived CMDs explored. Lasso (least absolute selection and shrinkage operator) models were used at each time point to predict ALSPAC-derived CMDs using only primary care data, with internal validation by randomly splitting data into 60% training and 40% validation samples.ResultsSensitivities for primary care diagnoses were low for CMDs (range: 3.5%–19.1%) and depression (range: 1.6%–34.0%), while specificities were high (nearly all >95%). The strongest predictors of identification in the primary care data for those with ALSPAC-derived CMDs were symptom severity indices. The lasso models had relatively low prediction rates, especially in the validation sample (deviance ratio range: −1.3 to 12.6%), but improved with age.ConclusionsPrimary care data underestimate CMDs compared to population-based studies. Improving general practitioner identification, and using free-text or secondary care data, is needed to improve the accuracy of models using clinical data.

Download Full-text

Food insecurity and common mental disorders in perinatal women living in low socio-economic settings in Cape Town, South Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cohort study

10.21203/rs.3.rs-692244/v2 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Zulfa Abrahams ◽

Crick Lund

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

South Africa ◽

Mental Disorders ◽

Food Insecurity ◽

Common Mental Disorders ◽

Cape Town ◽

Baseline Risk ◽

Multivariable Logistic Regression Analysis ◽

Perinatal Women

Abstract Background Common mental disorders (CMDs) such as depression and anxiety are highly prevalent during the perinatal period, and are associated with poverty, food insecurity and domestic violence. We used data collected from perinatal women at two time-points during the COVID-19 pandemic to test the hypotheses that (1) socio-economic adversities at baseline would be associated with higher CMD prevalence at follow-up and (2) worse mental health at baseline would be associated with higher food insecurity prevalence at follow-up. Methods Telephonic interviews were conducted with perinatal women attending healthcare facilities in Cape Town, South Africa. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to model the associations of baseline risk factors with the prevalence of household food insecurity and CMD at 3 months follow-up. Results At baseline 859 women were recruited, of whom 217 (25%) were pregnant, 106 (12%) had probable CMD, and 375 (44%) were severely food insecure. At follow-up (n=634), 22 (4%) were still pregnant, 44 (7%) had probable CMD, and 207 (33%) were severely food insecure. In the multivariable regression model, after controlling for confounders, the odds of being food insecure at follow-up were greater in women who were unemployed [OR=2.05 (1.46-2.87); p<0.001] or had probable CMD [OR=2.37 (1.35-4.18); p=0.003] at baseline; and the odds of probable CMD at follow-up were greater in women with psychological distress [OR=2.81 (1.47-5.39); p=0.002] and abuse [OR=2.47 (1.47-4.39); p=0.007] at baseline. Conclusions This study highlights the complex bidirectional relationship between mental health and socioeconomic adversity among perinatal women during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Download Full-text

Latvian Family Physicians’ Experience and Attitude in Diagnosing and Managing Depression

Proceedings of the Latvian Academy of Sciences Section B Natural Exact and Applied Sciences ◽

10.2478/prolas-2019-0026 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 73 (2) ◽

pp. 164-170

Author(s):

Vineta Viktorija Vinogradova ◽

Jeļena Vrubļevska ◽

Elmārs Rancāns

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Mental Disorders ◽

Common Mental Disorders ◽

Current Knowledge ◽

Family Physicians ◽

Research Programme ◽

Primary Care Settings ◽

National Research Programme ◽

Management Approaches ◽

Training Programmes

Abstract Depression is among the most common mental disorders in primary care. Despite high prevalence rates it remains to be under-diagnosed in primary care settings over the world. This study was aimed to identify Latvian family physicians’ (FPs) experience and attitude in diagnosing and managing depression. It was carried out within the framework of the National Research Programme BIOMEDICINE 2014–2017. After educational seminars on diagnosing and managing depression, FPs were asked to complete a structured questionnaire. In total 216 respondents were recruited. Most of the doctors, or 72.2% (n = 156), agreed with the statement that patients with depression use primary care facilities more often than other patients. More than a half of physicians, or 66.3% (n = 143) quite often asked their patients about their psycho-emotional status and 65.7% (n = 142) of clinicians thought that they can successfully assess a patient’s psychoemotional status and possible mental disorders. The majority, or 91.6 % (n = 198), supposed that routine screening for depression is necessary in Latvia. Despite the fact that a significant number, or 62.6% (n = 135) of FPs thought that their practice was well suitable for the treatment of depressive patients, half of the respondents, or 50.9% (n = 110), assessed their ability to build a trustful contact and to motivate patients for treatment as moderate. Although FPs acknowledged the importance and necessity to treat depression, current knowledge and management approaches were far from optimal. This justifies the need to provide specific training programmes for FPs.

Download Full-text

Common Mental Disorders in Primary Care

Korean Journal of Family Practice ◽

10.21215/kjfp.2021.11.2.97 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. 97-105

Author(s):

Dae Hyun Kim

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Mental Disorders ◽

Common Mental Disorders

Download Full-text

O3.6. PREVALENCE OF AND RECOVERY FROM COMMON MENTAL DISORDERS INCLUDING PSYCHOTIC EXPERIENCES

Schizophrenia Bulletin ◽

10.1093/schbul/sbaa028.017 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S8-S8

Author(s):

Jesus Perez ◽

Clare Knight ◽

Debra A Russo ◽

Jan Stochl ◽

Peter B Jones

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Primary Care ◽

Health Care ◽

Mental Disorders ◽

Common Mental Disorders ◽

Psychotic Experiences ◽

Recovery Rates ◽

Psychological Therapies ◽

Primary Mental Health Care ◽

Threshold Score

Abstract Background Systematic reviews indicate that approximately one third of people with at-risk mental states for psychosis (ARMS) will transition to a psychotic disorder. Research in non-specialised services, such as primary care settings, has shown that far fewer make such a conversion. Nonetheless, psychotic experiences (PE) may also be linked to common mental disorders (CMD), particularly depression and anxiety, and still predict poor outcomes. Population studies modelling the co-occurrence of CMD and PE have found an underlying unitary psychopathological factor, with PE emerging towards its more severe end. We know little about the prevalence of and recovery from PE in primary mental health care, where most CMD are treated. One example of primary mental health care setting in England is the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme (https://www.england.nhs.uk/mental-health/adults/iapt/). The IAPT programme provides evidence-based psychological therapies for mild to moderate CMD across the UK National Health Service (NHS). IAPT services adhere to current diagnostic paradigms and, therefore, do not either measure or treat PE. We aimed to establish the prevalence of PE in a large sample of patients with CMD from the IAPT programme and compare recovery rates between patients with CMD and PE (CMD-P) and those without PE. Methods We used the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences - Positive 15-item Scale (CAPE-P15) to determine the prevalence of PE in patients with CMD receiving treatment from IAPT services across England. We employed the CAPE-P15 threshold score of 1.47, which identifies individuals with ARMS, and also a lower threshold of 1.30, chosen as within one standard error of measurement, in order to explore threshold effects in the association between PE and recovery. Patient-reported measures of depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7) are routinely collected in IAPT services and determine ‘caseness’ before, during and after therapy. Using recovery rates (moving from ‘caseness’ to recovery) monitored nationally in the IAPT programme, we stratified patients according to the absence and presence of PE. Multi-group growth models estimated improvement trajectories for each group. Results 2,042 patients with CMD completed the CAPE-P15. The mean age was 39.8. The overall prevalence of CMD-P was 29.68% at CAPE-P15 threshold score for ARMS, i.e. 1.47, and 48.09% at threshold score 1.30. The overall recovery rate at threshold of 1.47 was 27.87% and 36.3% at 1.30. Recovery rates for those without PE were 58.92% and 62.43% for thresholds 1.47 and 1.30, respectively. Although patients with or without PE shared similar improvement trajectories, the initial severity of patients with CMD-P impeded their likelihood of recovery during treatment. Discussion At least one in four patients receiving treatment from IAPT services in primary care experience CMD-P. This significant group of people experience a lower recovery rate, with adverse implications not only for them but also for efficiency of services. Although recovery trajectories for this group showed improvement over therapy sessions, remittance of symptoms was insufficient to meet national IAPT standards of recovery. This patient group is not well-served by current interventions in primary care. This work forms part of a nation-wide NIHR research programme (TYPPEX; https://www.nihr.ac.uk/news/innovative-mental-health-study-launchesin-eastern-region) aiming to develop innovative therapies for people with CMD-P in primary care. Preliminary results related to feasibility and effectiveness of new therapeutic approaches will also be presented.

Download Full-text

Who Should Play a Key Role in Preventing Common Mental Disorders that Affect Employees in the Workplace? Results of a Survey with Occupational Health Physicians, Primary Care Physicians, Psychotherapists, and Human Resource Managers

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ◽

10.3390/ijerph16081383 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 16 (8) ◽

pp. 1383 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Martina Michaelis ◽

Elisabeth Maria Balint ◽

Florian Junne ◽

Stephan Zipfel ◽

Harald Gündel ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Mental Disorders ◽

Occupational Health ◽

Health Professionals ◽

Primary Care Physicians ◽

Common Mental Disorders ◽

Human Resource Managers ◽

Insurance Agents ◽

Professional Groups ◽

Resource Managers

The rising burden of common mental disorders (CMDs) in employees requires strategies for prevention. No systematic data exist about how those involved perceive their roles, responsibilities, and interactions with other professional groups. Therefore, we performed a multi-professional standardized survey with health professionals in Germany. A self-administered questionnaire was completed by 133 occupational health physicians (OHPs), 136 primary care physicians (PCPs), 186 psychotherapists (PTs), and 172 human resource managers (HRMs). Inter alia, they were asked which health professionals working in the company health service and in the outpatient care or in the sector of statutory insurance agents should play a key role in the primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention of CMDs in employees. The McNemar test was used in order to compare the attributed roles among the professionals involved. With regard to CMDs, all the professional groups involved in this study declared OHPs as the most relevant pillar in the field of prevention. In primary prevention, HRMs regarded themselves, OHPs, and health insurance agents as equally relevant in terms of prevention. PTs indicated an important role for employee representatives in this field. In secondary prevention, PCPs were regarded as important as OHPs. HRMs indicated themselves as equally important as OHPs and PCPs. In tertiary prevention, only OHPs identified themselves as main protagonists. The other groups marked a variety of several professions. There is a common acceptance from the parties involved that might help the first steps be taken toward overcoming barriers, e.g., by developing a common framework for quality-assured intersectional cooperation in the field of CMD prevention in employees.

Download Full-text