Brodaty Henry, Draper Brian M, Millar Joanne, Low Lee-Fay, Lie David, Sharah Simone, Paton Helen
School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales and the Academic Department for Old Age Psychiatry, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
J Clin Psychiatry. 2003 Jan;64(1):63-72. doi: 10.4088/jcp.v64n0113.
To compare the outcomes of 3 interventions for the management of dementia complicated by depression or psychosis: psychogeriatric case management, general practitioners with specialist psychogeriatric consultation, and standard care for nursing home residents.
The sample for this 12-week randomized controlled trial consisted of 86 subjects with dementia from 11 Sydney, Australia, nursing homes, of whom 34 had depression, 33 had depression and psychosis, and 19 had psychosis. All participants received full psychiatric assessments and physical examinations. Information was obtained from the residents' families and nursing home staff. Depression measures included the Even Briefer Assessment Scale for Depression, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia, and Geriatric Depression Scale. Psychosis measures included the Behavioral Pathology in Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale, Neuropsychiatric Inventory, and Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms. Data were obtained from nursing home records on prescription of psychotropic medication and demographic information. Management plans were formulated by a multidisciplinary team before random assignment to interventions.
All 3 groups improved from pretreatment to posttreatment on depression scales for depression groups and psychosis scales for psychosis groups. Mode of management appeared to make no difference in rate or amount of improvement; neither of the treatment group-by-time interactions were significant. Neither use of antidepressants nor use of antipsychotics predicted depression or psychosis outcomes.
Participation in the study was associated with improvement in depression and psychosis, perhaps because of the presence of a psychogeriatric team, the increased attention focused on residents, or the generalization of active intervention techniques to control subjects. A formula-driven psychogeriatric team case management approach was not significantly more effective than a consultative approach or standard care. This study demonstrates the difficulties and feasibility of conducting service-oriented research in nursing homes.
比较三种针对痴呆合并抑郁或精神病的干预措施的效果:老年精神科病例管理、接受老年精神科专家会诊的全科医生,以及疗养院居民的标准护理。
这项为期12周的随机对照试验的样本包括来自澳大利亚悉尼11家疗养院的86名痴呆患者,其中34人患有抑郁症,33人患有抑郁症和精神病,19人患有精神病。所有参与者均接受了全面的精神科评估和体格检查。信息来自居民家属和疗养院工作人员。抑郁测量包括简明抑郁评估量表、汉密尔顿抑郁量表、痴呆抑郁康奈尔量表和老年抑郁量表。精神病测量包括阿尔茨海默病行为病理学评定量表、神经精神科问卷和阳性症状评估量表。数据来自疗养院关于精神药物处方和人口统计学信息的记录。在随机分配干预措施之前,由多学科团队制定管理计划。
抑郁症组的抑郁量表和精神病组的精神病量表在治疗前到治疗后,所有三组均有改善。管理模式似乎对改善率或改善程度没有影响;两个治疗组与时间的交互作用均不显著。抗抑郁药的使用和抗精神病药的使用均不能预测抑郁或精神病的结果。
参与研究与抑郁和精神病的改善有关,这可能是因为有老年精神科团队、对居民的关注增加,或积极干预技术推广到了对照受试者。公式驱动的老年精神科团队病例管理方法并不比咨询方法或标准护理显著更有效。本研究证明了在疗养院开展以服务为导向的研究的困难和可行性。