Centre for Outcomes Research and Effectiveness (CORE), Research Department of Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
iCope Camden & Islington NHS Foundation Trust, St Pancras Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
JAMA Psychiatry. 2022 May 1;79(5):406-416. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2022.0100.
Socioeconomic factors are associated with the prevalence of depression, but their associations with prognosis are unknown. Understanding this association would aid in the clinical management of depression.
To determine whether employment status, financial strain, housing status, and educational attainment inform prognosis for adults treated for depression in primary care, independent of treatment and after accounting for clinical prognostic factors.
The Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane (CENTRAL) databases were searched from database inception to October 8, 2021.
Inclusion criteria were as follows: randomized clinical trials that used the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R; the most common comprehensive screening and diagnostic measure of depressive and anxiety symptoms in primary care randomized clinical trials), measured socioeconomic factors at baseline, and sampled patients with unipolar depression who sought treatment for depression from general physicians/practitioners or who scored 12 or more points on the CIS-R. Exclusion criteria included patients with depression secondary to a personality or psychotic disorder or neurologic condition, studies of bipolar or psychotic depression, studies that included children or adolescents, and feasibility studies. Studies were independently assessed against inclusion and exclusion criteria by 2 reviewers.
Data were extracted and cleaned by data managers for each included study, further cleaned by multiple reviewers, and cross-checked by study chief investigators. Risk of bias and quality were assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tools, respectively. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses-Individual Participant Data (PRISMA-IPD) reporting guidelines.
Depressive symptoms at 3 to 4 months after baseline.
This systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis identified 9 eligible studies that provided individual patient data for 4864 patients (mean [SD] age, 42.5 (14.0) years; 3279 women [67.4%]). The 2-stage random-effects meta-analysis end point depressive symptom scale scores were 28% (95% CI, 20%-36%) higher for unemployed patients than for employed patients and 18% (95% CI, 6%-30%) lower for patients who were homeowners than for patients living with family or friends, in hostels, or homeless, which were equivalent to 4.2 points (95% CI, 3.6-6.2 points) and 2.9 points (95% CI, 1.1-4.9 points) on the Beck Depression Inventory II, respectively. Financial strain and educational attainment were associated with prognosis independent of treatment, but unlike employment and housing status, there was little evidence of associations after adjusting for clinical prognostic factors.
Results of this systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that unemployment was associated with a poor prognosis whereas home ownership was associated with improved prognosis. These differences were clinically important and independent of the type of treatment received. Interventions that address employment or housing difficulties could improve outcomes for patients with depression.
社会经济因素与抑郁症的患病率有关,但它们与预后的关系尚不清楚。了解这种关联将有助于抑郁症的临床管理。
确定在初级保健中接受抑郁症治疗的成年人的就业状况、经济压力、住房状况和教育程度是否与预后相关,独立于治疗,并在考虑临床预后因素后。
从数据库创建到 2021 年 10 月 8 日,在 Embase、国际药学文摘、MEDLINE、PsycINFO 和 Cochrane(CENTRAL)数据库中进行了搜索。
纳入标准如下:使用修订后的临床访谈时间表(CIS-R;初级保健随机临床试验中最常用的抑郁和焦虑症状综合筛查和诊断测量)进行的随机临床试验,在基线时测量社会经济因素,以及采样患有单相抑郁症的患者,这些患者向全科医生/医生寻求抑郁症治疗,或在 CIS-R 上得分为 12 分或以上。排除标准包括抑郁症继发于人格或精神病或神经疾病、双相或精神病性抑郁症研究、包括儿童或青少年的研究、可行性研究。两名审查员独立评估研究是否符合纳入和排除标准。
数据经理为每项纳入的研究提取和清理数据,由多名审查员进一步清理,并由研究首席调查员交叉检查。使用预后研究质量(QUIPS)和推荐评估、制定和评估(GRADE)工具分别评估风险偏倚和质量。本研究遵循系统评价和荟萃分析-个体参与者数据(PRISMA-IPD)报告指南的首选报告项目。
基线后 3 至 4 个月时的抑郁症状。
这项系统评价和个体参与者数据荟萃分析确定了 9 项符合条件的研究,这些研究提供了 4864 名患者的个体参与者数据(平均[SD]年龄,42.5[14.0]岁;3279 名女性[67.4%])。2 阶段随机效应荟萃分析终点抑郁症状量表评分显示,失业患者比就业患者高 28%(95%CI,20%-36%),而自住房患者比与家人或朋友同住的患者、宿舍居住者或无家可归者低 18%(95%CI,6%-30%)%),相当于贝克抑郁量表 II 的 4.2 分(95%CI,3.6-6.2 分)和 2.9 分(95%CI,1.1-4.9 分)。经济压力和教育程度与预后相关,独立于治疗,但与就业和住房状况不同,在调整临床预后因素后,证据很少。
这项系统评价和荟萃分析的结果表明,失业与预后不良有关,而拥有住房与预后改善有关。这些差异具有临床意义,且独立于所接受的治疗类型。解决就业或住房困难的干预措施可以改善抑郁症患者的结局。