4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

The clinical significance of subsyndromal depression in older primary care patients

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY
卷 15, 期 3, 页码 214-223

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1097/01.JGP.0000235763.50230.83

关键词

depression; geriatrics; primary care

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [R01 MH61429, K24 MH71509] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Many seniors experience depressive symptoms not meeting standard diagnostic criteria. The authors sought to examine the clinical correlates of older primary care patients with subsyndromal depression (SSD), hypothesizing that SSD subjects have greater symptoms and functional impairment than nondepressed patients, but not as severe as those with major or minor depression, and to explore the characteristics of subjects captured by three different definitions of SSD used in prior published work. Methods: The authors conducted a cross-sectional case comparison study that enrolled 662 primary care patients age >= 65 years. Outcomes were validated measures of psychopathology, medical illness burden, and functional status. Results: All three SSD groups captured patients with greater symptoms and functional impairment than the nondepressed group. SSD subjects were as ill as those with minor or major depression on some measures (e.g., medical burden). Each SSD group definition captured some subjects unique to that group. Conclusions: Sub-syndromal depression is common and associated with symptoms or impairments of clinical importance. Sole reliance on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition definitions of major or minor depression omits a substantial proportion of seniors with clinically significant depressive symptoms. Longitudinal study is needed to help clinicians identify those at greatest risk for poor outcomes, while researchers testing mechanistic models should include patients with SSD to determine whether they share pathogenetic underpinnings with more severe mood disorders.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据