Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, England2Hull York Medical School, University of York, Heslington, England.
Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, England.
JAMA. 2017 Feb 21;317(7):728-737. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.0130.
There is little evidence to guide management of depressive symptoms in older people.
To evaluate whether a collaborative care intervention can reduce depressive symptoms and prevent more severe depression in older people.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized clinical trial conducted from May 24, 2011, to November 14, 2014, in 32 primary care centers in the United Kingdom among 705 participants aged 65 years or older with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) subthreshold depression; participants were followed up for 12 months.
Collaborative care (n=344) was coordinated by a case manager who assessed functional impairments relating to mood symptoms. Participants were offered behavioral activation and completed an average of 6 weekly sessions. The control group received usual primary care (n=361).
The primary outcome was self-reported depression severity at 4-month follow-up on the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9; score range, 0-27). Included among 10 prespecified secondary outcomes were the PHQ-9 score at 12-month follow-up and the proportion meeting criteria for depressive disorder (PHQ-9 score ≥10) at 4- and 12-month follow-up.
The 705 participants were 58% female with a mean age of 77 (SD, 7.1) years. Four-month retention was 83%, with higher loss to follow-up in collaborative care (82/344 [24%]) vs usual care (37/361 [10%]). Collaborative care resulted in lower PHQ-9 scores vs usual care at 4-month follow-up (mean score with collaborative care, 5.36 vs with usual care, 6.67; mean difference, -1.31; 95% CI, -1.95 to -0.67; P < .001). Treatment differences remained at 12 months (mean PHQ-9 score with collaborative care, 5.93 vs with usual care, 7.25; mean difference, -1.33; 95% CI, -2.10 to -0.55). The proportions of participants meeting criteria for depression at 4-month follow-up were 17.2% (45/262) vs 23.5% (76/324), respectively (difference, -6.3% [95% CI, -12.8% to 0.2%]; relative risk, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.61-1.27]; P = .25) and at 12-month follow-up were 15.7% (37/235) vs 27.8% (79/284) (difference, -12.1% [95% CI, -19.1% to -5.1%]; relative risk, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.46-0.91]; P = .01).
Among older adults with subthreshold depression, collaborative care compared with usual care resulted in a statistically significant difference in depressive symptoms at 4-month follow-up, of uncertain clinical importance. Although differences persisted through 12 months, findings are limited by attrition, and further research is needed to assess longer-term efficacy.
isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN02202951.
针对老年人抑郁症状的管理,目前几乎没有证据可循。
评估协作式护理干预是否可以减轻老年人的抑郁症状,并预防更严重的抑郁。
设计、地点和参与者:这是一项于 2011 年 5 月 24 日至 2014 年 11 月 14 日在英国 32 个初级保健中心开展的随机临床试验,纳入了 705 名年龄在 65 岁及以上、符合《精神障碍诊断与统计手册(第四版)》亚阈值抑郁诊断标准的参与者;参与者的随访时间为 12 个月。
协作式护理(n=344)由一名负责评估与情绪症状相关的功能障碍的病例管理员协调。参与者接受行为激活治疗,平均完成 6 次每周治疗。对照组接受常规初级保健(n=361)。
主要结局为 4 个月时使用 9 项患者健康问卷(PHQ-9;评分范围为 0-27)评估的自我报告的抑郁严重程度。10 项预设次要结局包括 12 个月时的 PHQ-9 评分以及 4 个月和 12 个月时 PHQ-9 评分≥10 分(诊断为抑郁障碍)的比例。
705 名参与者中 58%为女性,平均年龄为 77(SD,7.1)岁。4 个月的保留率为 83%,协作式护理组的失访率更高(82/344 [24%]),而常规护理组的失访率较低(37/361 [10%])。与常规护理相比,协作式护理在 4 个月时的 PHQ-9 评分较低(协作式护理组平均 PHQ-9 评分为 5.36,常规护理组为 6.67;平均差异为-1.31;95%CI,-1.95 至-0.67;P<0.001)。12 个月时治疗差异仍存在(协作式护理组平均 PHQ-9 评分为 5.93,常规护理组为 7.25;平均差异为-1.33;95%CI,-2.10 至-0.55)。在 4 个月时,分别有 17.2%(45/262)和 23.5%(76/324)的参与者符合抑郁诊断标准(差异,-6.3%[95%CI,-12.8%至 0.2%];相对风险,0.83[95%CI,0.61-1.27];P=0.25),在 12 个月时,分别有 15.7%(37/235)和 27.8%(79/284)的参与者符合抑郁诊断标准(差异,-12.1%[95%CI,-19.1%至-5.1%];相对风险,0.65[95%CI,0.46-0.91];P=0.01)。
在亚阈值抑郁的老年患者中,与常规护理相比,协作式护理在 4 个月随访时的抑郁症状有统计学意义上的显著差异,但临床重要性不确定。尽管差异持续到 12 个月,但由于失访,研究结果受到限制,需要进一步研究以评估长期疗效。
isrctn.org 标识符:ISRCTN02202951。