The Association between Physical Morbidity and Subtypes of Severe Depression
ABSTRACT Background: Physical illness and depression are related, but the association between specific physical diseases and diagnostic subtypes of depression remains poorly understood. This study aimed to clarify the relationship between a number of physical diseases and the nonpsychotic and psychotic subtype of severe depression. Methods: This is a historical prospective cohort study. The study population consisted of all patients diagnosed with ICD-10 severe depression, either nonpsychotic or psychotic subtype, in Danish psychiatric hospitals between 1994 and 2008. The patients' history of physical disease was assessed using the Danish National Patient Register. Using logistic regression it was investigated whether specific physical diseases were associated with relative increased risk for subsequent development of either the nonpsychotic or psychotic depressive subtype. Results: A total of 24,173 patients with severe depression were included in the study. Of those, 8,260 (34%) were of the psychotic subtype. A history of the following physical diseases, as opposed to their absence, increased the relative risk for subsequent development of the nonpsychotic compared to the psychotic depressive subtype [adjusted incidence odds ratio (AIOR) nonpsychotic vs. psychotic]: ischemic heart disease (AIOR = 1.3, p < 0.001), hypertension (AIOR = 1.2, p = 0.008), stroke (AIOR = 1.2, p = 0.042) and chronic lower pulmonary disease (AIOR = 1.2, p = 0.005). The total load of physical disease also increased the relative risk of nonpsychotic depression [AIOR = 1.05 (per disease), p = 0.001]. Conclusions: This study revealed that, in severe depression, a history of physical disease increased the relative risk of the nonpsychotic rather than the psychotic subtype.
- SourceAvailable from: Holger J Sørensen
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "From Statistics Denmark we obtained information about educational background and early retirement pension of cohort members and these variables were coded as described elsewhere (Uggerby et al., 2011). From the Danish National Patient Register we obtained information about physical illness and used a composite physical disease score (CPDS) measuring the total load of physical morbidity in the Danish population (Ostergaard et al., 2013). The CPDS is an integer score with a theoretical range from 0 to 17 calculated by adding each physical disease (a patient diagnosed with psoriasis would receive a CPDS of 1 while a patient diagnosed with Parkinson's disease known to be quite strongly associated with falling and hip fracture (Vestergaard et al., 2007) would also receive a CPDS of 1). "
ABSTRACT: In a nationwide study using linkage of Danish hospital registers we examined predictors of hip fracture (ICD-10: S72) in 15,431 patients with schizophrenia (ICD-10: F20 or ICD-8: 295) and 3,807,597 population controls. Shorter education, disability pension, lifetime alcohol abuse, somatic co-morbidity, antipsychotics (IRR=1.19; 95% CI 1.15-1.24), antidepressant (IRR=1.18; 95% CI 1.16-1.20), anticholinergics (IRR=1.29; 95% CI 1.22-1.36), benzodiazepines (IRR=1.06; 95% CI 1.04-1.08) and corticosteroids (IRR=1.44; 95% CI 1.36-1.53) were significant predictors. In 556 persons with schizophrenia and hip fracture (matched to 1:3 to schizophrenia controls without hip fracture), antipsychotic polypharmacy predicted hip fracture. Analyses among antipsychotic monotherapy patients showed no differential effect of individual antipsychotics. A dose-response relationship of hip fracture and lifetime antipsychotics consumption was found (IRR=1.13 95% CI 1.07-1.19) and both prolactin-increasing and non-prolactin-increasing antipsychotics contributed to the effect. In conclusion, several factors, including complex psychopharmacological treatment, contribute in the prediction of hip fracture in large populations. Preventive strategies should focus attention to severely ill patients with high likelihood of a receiving complex psychopharmacologic treatment and high doses of antipsychotics.European neuropsychopharmacology: the journal of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology 05/2013; 23. DOI:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2013.04.002 · 5.40 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Severe unipolar depression can be classified as either psychotic depression (PD) or non-psychotic depression (non-PD). A number of biological and clinical differences have been detected between PD and non-PD, but it remains unknown whether risk factors for the two subtypes also differ. The aim of the present study was therefore to investigate whether a number of potential risk factors influenced the risk of developing PD and non-PD to different extents. METHODS: This is a register-based historical prospective cohort study following all 2.4 million individuals born in Denmark between 1955 and 1990. During follow-up 2183 and 9101 individuals were registered in the Danish Psychiatric Central Research Register with PD and non-PD respectively. The association between risk factors and the development of PD and non-PD was estimated by survival analysis (Poisson regression) and expressed as incidence rate ratios (IRR). RESULTS: The most consistent finding of the study was that of a general overlap in familial and environmental risk factors for PD and non-PD. However, a parental history of bipolar disorder was a risk factor for PD (mother, IRR=1.66, p=0.003. Father, IRR=1.56, p=0.040) and not for non-PD (mother, IRR=0.92, p=0.430. Father, IRR=1.08, p=0.552). Conversely, a positive family history of schizophrenia was associated with neither PD nor non-PD LIMITATIONS: Diagnoses were assigned as part of routine clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Our findings justify the distinction between PD and non-PD in the current diagnostic manuals. Furthermore, the fact that parental bipolar disorder and not schizophrenia was a risk factor for PD supports the Kraepelinian dichotomy.Journal of Affective Disorders 12/2012; 147(1-3). DOI:10.1016/j.jad.2012.11.009 · 3.71 Impact Factor
Article: Measuring psychotic depression[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Psychotic depression (PD) is a highly debilitating condition, which needs intensive monitoring. However, there is no established rating scale for evaluating the severity of PD. The aim of this analysis was to assess the psychometric properties of established depression rating scales and a number of new composite rating scales, covering both depressive and psychotic symptoms, in relation to PD. The psychometric properties of the rating scales were evaluated based on data from the Study of Pharmacotherapy of Psychotic Depression. A rating scale consisting of the 6-item Hamilton melancholia subscale (HAM-D6 ) plus five items from the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), named the HAMD-BPRS11 , displayed clinical validity (Spearman's correlation coefficient between HAMD-BPRS11 and Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) scores = 0.79-0.84), responsiveness (Spearman's correlation coefficient between change in HAMD-BPRS11 and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) scores = -0.74--0.78) and unidimensionality (Loevinger's coefficient of homogeneity = 0.41) in the evaluation of PD. The HAM-D6 fulfilled the same criteria, whereas the full 17-item Hamilton Depression Scale failed to meet criteria for unidimensionality. Our results suggest that the HAMD-BPRS11 is a more valid measure than pure depression scales for evaluating the severity of PD.Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 06/2013; 129(3). DOI:10.1111/acps.12165 · 5.55 Impact Factor