...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of primary care & community health. >Impact of Personality Disorder Cluster on Depression Outcomes Within Collaborative Care Management Model of Care
【24h】

Impact of Personality Disorder Cluster on Depression Outcomes Within Collaborative Care Management Model of Care

机译:护理协作管理模式中人格障碍簇对抑郁预后的影响

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Previous studies have suggested that having a comorbid personality disorder (PD) along with major depression is associated with poorer depression outcomes relative to those without comorbid PD. However, few studies have examined the influence of specific PD cluster types. The purpose of the current study is to compare depression outcomes between cluster A, cluster B, and cluster C PD patients treated within a collaborative care management (CCM), relative to CCM patients without a PD diagnosis. The overarching goal was to identify cluster types that might confer a worse clinical prognosis. Methods: This retrospective chart review study examined 2826 adult patients with depression enrolled in CCM. The cohort was divided into 4 groups based on the presence of a comorbid PD diagnosis (cluster Aonspecified, cluster B, cluster C, or no PD). Baseline clinical and demographic variables, along with 6-month follow-up Patient Health Questionnaire–9 (PHQ-9) scores were obtained for all groups. Depression remission was defined as a PHQ-9 score <5 at 6 months, and persistent depressive symptoms (PDS) was defined as a PHQ-9 score ≥10 at 6 months. Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) were determined for both remission and PDS using logistic regression modeling for the 6-month PHQ-9 outcome, while retaining all study variables. Results: A total of 59 patients (2.1%) had a cluster A or nonspecified PD diagnosis, 122 patients (4.3%) had a cluster B diagnosis, 35 patients (1.2%) had a cluster C diagnosis, and 2610 patients (92.4%) did not have any PD diagnosis. The presence of a cluster Aonspecified PD diagnosis was associated with a 62% lower likelihood of remission at 6 months (AOR = 0.38; 95% CI 0.20-0.70). The presence of a cluster B PD diagnosis was associated with a 71% lower likelihood of remission at 6 months (AOR = 0.29; 95% CI 0.18-0.47). Conversely, having a cluster C diagnosis was not associated with a significantly lower likelihood of remission at 6 months (AOR = 0.83; 95% CI 0.42-1.65). Increased odds of having PDS at 6-month follow-up were seen with cluster Aonspecified PD patients (AOR = 3.35; 95% CI 1.92-5.84) as well as cluster B patients (AOR = 3.66; 95% CI 2.45-5.47). However, cluster C patents did not have significantly increased odds of experiencing persistent depressive symptoms at 6-month follow-up (AOR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.45-2.00). Conclusions: Out of the 3 clusters, the presence of a cluster B PD diagnosis was most significantly associated with poorer depression outcomes at 6-month follow-up, including reduced remission rates and increased risk for PDS. The cluster Aonspecified PD group also showed poor outcomes; however, the heterogeneity of this subgroup with regard to PD features must be noted. The development of novel targeted interventions for at-risk clusters may be warranted in order to improve outcomes of these patients within the CCM model of care.
机译:背景:先前的研究表明,与没有合并症PD的人相比,患有合并症的人格障碍(PD)和重度抑郁症的抑郁症结局较差。但是,很少有研究检查特定PD簇类型的影响。本研究的目的是相对于没有PD诊断的CCM患者,比较在协作护理管理(CCM)中治疗的A组,B组和C组PD患者的抑郁结果。总体目标是确定可能导致较差的临床预后的簇类型。方法:这项回顾性图表审查研究检查了2826名入选CCM的成人抑郁症患者。根据PD合并症的诊断(群A /未指定,群B,群C或无PD)将队列分为4组。获得了所有组的基线临床和人口统计学变量,以及6个月的随访患者健康问卷9(PHQ-9)评分。抑郁缓解定义为6个月时PHQ-9得分<5,而持续抑郁症状(PDS)定义为6个月时PHQ-9得分≥10。对于6个月的PHQ-9结果,使用对数回归模型确定了缓解和PDS的校正比值比(AOR),同时保留了所有研究变量。结果:共有59例患者(2.1%)诊断为A组或未明确PD,122例患者(4.3%)诊断为B组,35例患者(1.2%)诊断为C组,2610例患者(92.4%) )没有任何PD诊断。 A组/未明确的PD诊断的存在与6个月时缓解的可能性降低62%(AOR = 0.38; 95%CI 0.20-0.70)相关。 B聚类PD诊断的存在与6个月缓解的可能性降低了71%(AOR = 0.29; 95%CI 0.18-0.47)。相反,进行C组诊断与6个月缓解的可能性明显降低无关(AOR = 0.83; 95%CI 0.42-1.65)。 A组/未指定PD患者(AOR = 3.35; 95%CI 1.92-5.84)和B组(AOR = 3.66; 95%CI 2.45-5.47)在6个月随访中发生PDS的几率增加)。但是,C组专利在6个月的随访中出现持续性抑郁症状的几率没有显着增加(AOR = 0.95; 95%CI 0.45-2.00)。结论:在3个组中,B组PD诊断的存在与6个月随访中较差的抑郁结果显着相关,包括缓解率降低和PDS风险增加。 A组/未指定PD组也显示不良预后。但是,必须注意该亚组在PD功能方面的异质性。为了在CCM护理模型中改善这些患者的结局,可能有必要针对高危人群开发新颖的针对性干预措施。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号