Canadian Psychiatric Association

Editorial Credits/ Crédits éditorials

Subscription Rates /Prix d'abonnements

Advertising Rates / Tarifs publicitaires (PDF)

Editorial
Geriatric Psychiatry: Complex Challenges, Promising Treatments
Kenneth I Shulman
(PDF)

In Review
Cognitive Pharmacotherapy of Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Dementias
Nathan Herrmann

(PDF)

Brief Screening Tests for Dementia
Wendy J Lorentz, James M Scanlan, Soo Borson

(PDF)

Effective Use of Electroconvulsive Therapy in Late-Life Depression
Alastair J Flint, Nadine Gagnon

(PDF)

Review Papers
Are Leptin and Cytokines Involved in Body Weight Gain During Treatment With Antipsychotic Drugs?

Trino Baptista, Serge Beaulieu

(PDF)

Original Research
Strategies of Collaboration Between General Practitioners and Psychiatrists: A Survey of Practitioners’ Opinions and Characteristics

Ricardo J M Lucena, Alain Lesage, Robert Élie, Yves Lamontagne, Marc Corbière

(PDF)

A Test of the Phase Model of Psychotherapy Change
Anthony S Joyce, John Ogrodniczuk, William E Piper, Mary McCallum

(PDF)

Brief Communication
Lamotrigine Use in Geriatric Patients With Bipolar Depression

Matthew Robillard, David K Conn

(PDF)

Dissolution Profile, Tolerability, and Acceptability of the Orally Disintegrating Olanzapine Tablet in Patients With Schizophrenia
Pierre Chue, Barry Jones, Cindy C Taylor, Ruth Dickson

(PDF)

Progress Against Major Depression in Canada
Scott B Patten MD

(PDF)


Book Reviews
(PDF)

Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder: A Practical Guide
Reviewed by
Arun V. Ravindran

We Fly, We Cry: Our Lives With Manic Depression
Reviewed by
Paul Grof

Geriatric Consultation Liaison Psychiatry
Reviewed by
Ron Keren

Psychotherapy With Children and Adolescents
Reviewed by
Allan Frankland

The Early Stages of Schizophrenia
Reviewed by
Mary V. Seeman



Letters to the Editor
(PDF)

Re: Atypical Antipsychotic Use in Treating Adolescents and Young Adults With Developmental Disabilities

Reply: Atypical Antipsychotic Use in Treating Adolescents and Young Adults With Developmental Disabilities

Evidence Supports Validity of Seasonal Affective Disorder

Reply: Evidence Supports Validity of Seasonal Affective Disorder

Seasonal Affective Disorder: The Latitude Hypothesis Revisited

Treatment Of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder With Tiagabine

Assessing Pain Tolerance in a Patient With Acute Psychosis

Musical Hallucinations During a Treatment With Benzodiazepine

Bupropion-Methylphenidate Combination and Grand Mal Seizures

The Association of Depressed Affect and Stroke in Institutionalized Canadians

Quetiapine and Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome

Brief Communication

Progress Against Major Depression in Canada

Scott B Patten MD, FRCPC, PhD1

 

Background: Generally, public health strategies for major depression have focused on case-finding, public and professional education, and disease-management strategies. In principle, increased rates of treatment utilization and improved treatment outcomes should lead to improved mental health at the population level. Progress of this sort, however, has been difficult to confirm.

Method:The National Population Health Survey (NPHS) is a large-scale longitudinal study of a representative sample drawn from the Canadian population. To date, Statistics Canada has released data from 3 NPHS cycles: 1994–1995, 1996–1997, and 1998–1999. Treatment utilization and major depression measures were employed in the NPHS survey, providing a unique source of longitudinal Canadian data. In this study, major depression point prevalence (defined using a predictive instrument for annual major depressive episode [MDE] prevalence and responses from a distress scale) and associated treatment utilization were evaluated over time.

Results: Between 1994–1995 and 1995–1996, the proportion of persons with depression receiving antidepressant treatment increased dramatically, from 18.2% (12.3% to 22.1%) in 1994–1995 to 32.6% (23.0% to 42.2%) in 1998–1999. Point prevalence of major depression was 2.4%, 1.8%, and 1.9% in the 3 NPHS iterations.

Conclusions: Data from the NPHS suggest public health progress against major depression in Canada. More people with major depression in Canada are receiving treatment, and these changes may have been associated with improved population health status. However, both random variation and extraneous societal factors could account for the observed trends in prevalence. It is impossible to relate changes in utilization directly to population health status using the NPHS data.

(Can J Psychiatry 2002;47:775–780)

Click here for author affiliations.

Click here for research funding and support.

Clinical Implications

  • The National Population Health Survey (NPHS) provides a unique national perspective on the mental health of the Canadian population.

  • The survey adopted rigorous methodological standards.

  • Improved treatment utilization may be contributing to declining major depression point prevalence.

Limitations

  • As a population survey, the NPHS used crude measures of mood status and treatment utilization.

  • The NPHS, so far, is not definitive in documenting reduced prevalence of major depression.

  • Observational survey data cannot directly link changes in population health to improved treatment utilization.


Key Words
: major depression, depressive disorders, epidemiology, treatment utilization, antidepressive medications

Résumé : Progrès de la lutte à la dépression majeure au Canada

Using disability adjusted life years (DALYs), a composite measure incorporating premature mortality and years lived with disability, the Global Burden of Disease study developed a ranking of conditions contributing to disease burden around the world (1). Of the top 10 conditions, 5 were mental disorders, and of these, major depression ranked first. Overall, unipolar major depression ranked fourth as a cause of disease burden on a worldwide basis. In economically developed countries such as Canada, major depression ranked second. The impact of major depression was projected to increase in upcoming decades (1).

Major depression is an important determinant of population health status for 3 reasons. First, it is extremely common. Recent Canadian estimates have placed the 12-month prevalence of major depression between 4% and 10%, consistently demonstrating that this is a highly prevalent disorder within the population (2–8). Second, major depression causes substantial disability, at a level that compares with other major medical conditions (9). In fact, impaired functioning is an intrinsic feature of the disorder, according to contemporary definitions (10). Third, major depression is an important cause of premature mortality. In particular, suicide (which ranks among the top 10 causes of mortality in Canada) is the fourth leading cause of potential years of life lost (PYLL) in Canada (11). PYLL due to 2 other prominent conditions—ischemic heart disease and accidents—is declining rapidly, whereas PYLL due to suicide is increasing (11). Declining PYLL for heart disease and accidents represent important success stories for public health in Canada. Public health progress against major depression must also be pursued energetically.

On a clinical level, pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies are available for treatment of this condition. Much attention has focused on these advances. A disturbing lack of evidence exists, however, with respect to the mental health of the population improving due to these clinical advances. This has recently attracted the attention of commentators in the field, one of whom has commented that antidepressants may be “overrated” (12).

An example of a population-based approach to major depression may be found in a public health initiative in the US called “National Major Depression Screening Day.” This initiative targets several key aspects of the interface between the health care system and mood disorders in the community, using approaches based on public education, case-finding, and educating professionals (13). Many other population-based studies have incorporated similar principles but in different ways. Based on the idea that improved access to treatment and improved outcomes of treatment should impact favourably on population health, many studies have attempted to increase treatment utilization and to improve clinical outcomes, using methods such as professional education and disease management (14). In Canada, we hope that diminishing stigma, barrier-free access to health care services, and improved clinical care will accomplish these objectives, but previously we have lacked the ability to evaluate this.

This paper’s objective is to report changes in major depression point prevalence over time, in treatment utilization, and in long-term antidepressant use.

Methods

Data from the National Population Health Survey (NPHS) were used in this analysis. The NPHS is a longitudinal study of a Canadian national sample. The original survey included 17 626 subjects sampled in 1994–1995, but additional provincial “buy-ins” resulted in a larger sample in 1996–1997. A third iteration of data collection occurred in 1998–1999.

The NPHS employed a brief predictive instrument, designed to identify probable episodes of major depression in the year preceding the interview. Kessler and others developed the instrument called the Composite International Diagnostic Interview Short Form for Major Depression (CIDI-SFMD) (15). Validation studies suggest that the instrument is sensitive but somewhat nonspecific for major depressive episodes (MDEs) (16,17). The CIDI-SFMD provides a 12-month period prevalence estimate. Period prevalence refers to the proportion of the population meeting DSM-IV criteria for major depression at any time in the preceding year. Period prevalence is a problematic way of measuring prevalence, because it is not sensitive to the impact of treatment on population health. An individual who develops an MDE and then promptly seeks and receives effective treatment will be recorded in a period prevalence calculation in the same way as a person who does not seek treatment and remains ill. For this reason, an indicator of point prevalence was derived for this study by combining the CIDI-SFMD output with responses to a distress scale included in the NPHS interview. The distress scale comprised various CIDI items that inquired into feelings of sadness, nervousness, restlessness, hopelessness, worthlessness, and feelings that “everything was an effort” (18). Additional items clarified whether these symptoms occurred “a lot,” “somewhat,” “a little,” “more than usual,” “the same,” or “less than usual” in the preceding month. In this analysis, subjects with a CIDI-SFMD score indicating an 80% or greater chance of having had an MDE in the preceding year, combined with reporting distress at greater-than-usual levels in the preceding month, were regarded as a measure of point prevalence of major depression.

The NPHS measured treatment utilization in various ways. Two questions were considered most pertinent to treatment utilization for major depression: one that referred to the use of antidepressants in the preceding month and another that asked about consultations with health professionals for purposes of emotional or mental health in the past year. In the current analysis, the proportion of subjects reporting antidepressant use, the proportion reporting that they consulted a professional about their emotional or mental health, and the proportion reporting both or either type of utilization were calculated.


1 | 2 | 3


CJP Archives in English | Archives RCP en français
Supplements and Position Paper Inserts |
Lignes directrices cliniques, énoncés de principe et communiqués
Author Index to 2001 | Index RCP des auteurs 2001
Subject Index to 2001 | Index RCP des sujets 2001
Information for Contributors | Information à l'intention des auteurs
Style Notes for Contributors
Subscription Rates | Prix d'abonnements
Advertising Rates | Tarifs publicitaires
CPA Home | Page d'accueil