The epidemiology of chronic major depressive disorder and dysthymic disorder: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions.

Department of Psychiatry, College of Physicians and Surgeons New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, New York, USA.
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 5.81). 12/2010; 71(12):1645-56. DOI: 10.4088/JCP.09m05663gry
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To examine the prevalence of chronic major depressive disorder (CMDD) and dysthymic disorder, their sociodemographic correlates, patterns of 12-month and lifetime psychiatric comorbidity, lifetime risk factors, psychosocial functioning, and mental health service utilization.
Face-to-face interviews were conducted in the 2001-2002 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (n = 43,093).
The 12-month and lifetime prevalences were greater for CMDD (1.5% and 3.1%, respectively) than for dysthymic disorder (0.5% and 0.9%, respectively). Individuals with CMDD and dysthymic disorder shared most sociodemographic correlates and lifetime risk factors for major depressive disorder. Individuals with CMDD and dysthymic disorder had almost identically high rates of Axis I and Axis II comorbid disorders. However, individuals with CMDD received higher rates of all treatment modalities than individuals with dysthymic disorder.
Individuals with CMDD and dysthymic disorder share many sociodemographic correlates, comorbidity patterns, risk factors, and course. Individuals with chronic depressive disorders, especially those with dysthymic disorder, continue to face substantial unmet treatment needs.

1 Bookmark
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Approximately 20–30% of patients with Major depressive disorder (MDD) develop a chronic course of their disease. Chronic depression is associated with increased health care utilisation, hospitalisation and a higher disease burden. We identified clinical correlates and differences in treatment response of chronic MDD (cMDD) patients compared with non-chronic episodic depression in a huge sample of depressive inpatients.Methods Data were collected from 412 inpatients who had been diagnosed with a major depressive episode (MDE; according to ICD-10) and scored 15 or higher on the 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HRSD-21). All subjects were participants in the German Algorithm Project, phase 3 (GAP3). Patients who were diagnosed with a MDE within the last two years or longer (herein referred to as CD) were compared with non-chronic depressive patients (herein referred to as non-CD). CD and non-CD patients were assessed for the following: psychosocial characteristics, symptom reduction from hospital admission to discharge, symptom severity at discharge, remission and response rates, and pharmacological treatment during inpatient treatment. The primary outcome measure was the HRSD-21.Results13.6% (n=56) of patients met the criteria for chronic depression. Compared with non-CD patients, patients with CD showed increased axis I comorbidities (74% vs. 52%, χ2 (1)=7.31, p=.02), a higher level of depressive symptoms at baseline and discharge, increased duration of inpatient treatment (64.8 vs. 53.3 days; t=2.86, p=.03) and lower response (HRSD: 60.0% vs. 72.0%; χ2 (1)=3.61, p<.04; BDI: 40.5% vs. 54.2%; χ2 (1)=3.56, p=.04) and remission rates (BDI 17.9.% vs. 29.7%; χ2 (1)=3.42, p=.05. However, both groups achieved a comparable symptom reduction during inpatient treatment. The prescribed pharmacological strategy had no significant influence on treatment outcome in patients with CD.Conclusion Inpatients with CD show higher symptom severity, lower response and remission rates and a longer duration of inpatient treatment, although they achieve comparable symptom reduction during treatment. These findings support the need to recognise CD and its defining characteristics as a distinct subclass of depression.
    Journal of Affective Disorders 11/2014; · 3.71 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dysthymic disorder and other chronic depressive disorders have recently been merged in DSM-5 into a 'persistent depressive disorder' category. As its introduction in DSM-III, the validity of dysthymic disorder has long been challenged, posing concerns regarding the validity of its successor - persistent depressive disorder. This review aims to present recent findings regarding the validity and utility of dysthymic disorder. Several recent studies raise questions regarding the validity of dysthymic disorder, namely, results indicating a significant overlap between dysthymic disorder and other mood and/or anxiety disorders, failure of such a diagnosis to predict illness outcome and the lack of any validation strategy identifying that it is a depressive entity or subtype. Research findings indicate that dysthymic disorder is a heterogeneous diagnosis encompassing many different depressive (and anxiety or personality weighted) conditions, and without clear evidence of its validity as a diagnostic entity. As dysthymic disorder is a key component of DSM-defined persistent depressive disorder - the latter is at similar risk of providing a heterogeneous domain diagnosis, and thus limiting identification of specific causative factors and preferential treatment modality.
    Current opinion in psychiatry 11/2013; · 3.55 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Problematic alcohol consumption is associated with multiple medical conditions and psychiatric comorbidities. Previous publications reported the under-recognition of alcohol-related problems in the clinical setting. The present study comprises of two objectives, 1) to examine the process use by physicians to recognize alcohol-related problems in psychiatric outpatient units, and 2) to compare the results of a CAGE interview and a written version of the CAGE questionnaire.
    04/2014; 97(4):439-46.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 30, 2014