ORCID Profile
0000-0002-6474-9980
Current Organisation
University of Oxford
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2022
DOI: 10.1016/J.JACLP.2022.04.004
Abstract: To inform the future development of consultation-liaison psychiatry services, we need accurate information on the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in the general hospital inpatient setting. Systematic reviews have summarized the literature on specific aspects of this broad topic, but there has been no high-level overview that aggregates their findings and identifies gaps in the relevant literature. We aimed to produce a comprehensive overview of the field, summarizing the research literature on the prevalence of psychiatric disorders (i.e., interview-based psychiatric diagnoses) in general hospital inpatients. We did this using a systematic umbrella review (systematic review of systematic reviews), which is the best and most efficient method for summarizing a broad area of research. We searched Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Ovid PsycINFO, EBSCO CINAHL, and Scopus from database inception to September 2021 for systematic reviews that provided a pooled prevalence estimate, or prevalence range, for interview-diagnosed psychiatric disorders in general hospital inpatients. Two reviewers independently assessed articles and extracted data. The review is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42019125574. We screened 11,728 articles and included 10 systematic reviews in our umbrella review. We were able to extract pooled prevalence estimates from these as follows: major depression 12% to 20%, any anxiety disorder 8%, generalized anxiety disorder 5%, panic disorder 3%, delirium 15%. We were only able to extract a prevalence range for dementia, which was 3% to 63%. We found no systematic reviews from which we could extract prevalence data for the other psychiatric disorders that we included in our searches, indicating important gaps. From these data, we estimated that approximately one-third of inpatients have a psychiatric disorder. Psychiatric disorders are very common in general hospital inpatients. While the planning of consultation-liaison psychiatry services will benefit from more research on the prevalence of each of the full range of disorders encountered in the inpatient setting, our findings indicate that we already know enough to justify increased and more population-based service provision.
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 19-05-2010
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291710001017
Abstract: One third of referrals from primary to secondary care are for medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). We aimed to determine the association of depression and anxiety disorders with high use of specialist services by patients with MUS. We did this by comparing their prevalence in patients who had been repeatedly referred with symptoms for which they had received repeated specialist diagnoses of MUS with that in two control groups. We also determined the adequacy of treatment received. A case-control study in five general practices in Edinburgh, UK. Data collection was by case note review and questionnaire. Cases were 193 adults with three or more referrals over 5 years, at least two of which resulted in a diagnosis of MUS. Controls were: ( a ) patients referred only once over 5 years ( n =152) ( b ) patients with three or more referrals for symptoms always diagnosed as medically explained ( n =162). In total, 93 (48%) of the cases met our criteria for current depression, anxiety or panic disorders. This compared with 38 (25%) and 52 (35.2%) of the control groups odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) of 2.6 (1.6–4.1) and 1.6 (1.01–2.4), respectively. Almost half (44%) of the cases with current depression or anxiety had not received recent minimum effective therapy. Depression, anxiety and panic disorders are common in patients repeatedly referred to hospital with MUS. Improving the recognition and treatment of these disorders in these patients has the potential to provide better, more appropriate and more cost-effective medical care.
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 08-2001
DOI: 10.1046/J.1440-1614.2001.00888.X
Abstract: Objective: We sought to compare the characteristics of patients presenting with chronic fatigue (CF) and related syndromes in eight international centres and to subclassify these subjects based on symptom profiles. The validity of the subclasses was then tested against clinical data. Method: Subjects with a clinical diagnosis of CF completed a 119-item self-report questionnaire to provide clinical symptom data and other information such as illness course and functional impairment. Subclasses were generated using a principal components-like analysis followed by latent profile analysis (LPA). Results: 744 subjects returned complete data sets (mean age 40.8 years, mean length of illness 7.9 years, female to male ratio 3:1). Overall, the subjects had a high rate of reporting typical CF symptoms (fatigue, neuropsychological dysfunction, sleep disturbance). Using LPA, two subclasses were generated. Class one (68% s le) was characterized by: younger age, lower female to male ratio shorter episode duration less premorbid, current and familial psychiatric morbidity and, less functional disability. Class two subjects (32%) had features more consistent with a somatoform illness. There was substantial variation in subclass prevalences between the study centres (Class two range 6–48%). Conclusions: Criteria-based approaches to the diagnosis of CF and related syndromes do not select a homogeneous patient group. While substratification of patients is essential for further aetiological and treatment research, the basis for allocating such subcategories remains controversial.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 12-2020
DOI: 10.1016/J.JPSYCHORES.2020.110256
Abstract: Validated diagnostic interviews are required to classify depression status and estimate prevalence of disorder, but screening tools are often used instead. We used in idual participant data meta-analysis to compare prevalence based on standard Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - depression subscale (HADS-D) cutoffs of ≥8 and ≥11 versus Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID) major depression and determined if an alternative HADS-D cutoff could more accurately estimate prevalence. We searched Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations via Ovid, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (inception-July 11, 2016) for studies comparing HADS-D scores to SCID major depression status. Pooled prevalence and pooled differences in prevalence for HADS-D cutoffs versus SCID major depression were estimated. 6005 participants (689 SCID major depression cases) from 41 primary studies were included. Pooled prevalence was 24.5% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 20.5%, 29.0%) for HADS-D ≥8, 10.7% (95% CI: 8.3%, 13.8%) for HADS-D ≥11, and 11.6% (95% CI: 9.2%, 14.6%) for SCID major depression. HADS-D ≥11 was closest to SCID major depression prevalence, but the 95% prediction interval for the difference that could be expected for HADS-D ≥11 versus SCID in a new study was -21.1% to 19.5%. HADS-D ≥8 substantially overestimates depression prevalence. Of all possible cutoff thresholds, HADS-D ≥11 was closest to the SCID, but there was substantial heterogeneity in the difference between HADS-D ≥11 and SCID-based estimates. HADS-D should not be used as a substitute for a validated diagnostic interview.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 02-10-2011
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2009
DOI: 10.1016/J.JPSYCHORES.2009.01.004
Abstract: The study aimed (a) to test a method of identifying patients who have been repeatedly referred (RR) from primary care to medical outpatient clinics where they have received multiple diagnoses of medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) and (b) to describe the prevalence and characteristics of these patients. RR patients with MUS (RRMUS) were arbitrarily defined as those with (a) five or more referrals in a 5-year period and (b) a specialist final diagnosis of MUS for at least three of these referrals. A two-stage method of identifying these patients was piloted in one primary care practice: Stage 1 used computerized health service data to identify RR Stage 2 used manual case note review to identify referrals that ended with specialist diagnoses of MUS. The RRMUS patients identified were asked to complete a questionnaire, a psychiatric diagnostic interview, and their GPs were asked to rate how "difficult to manage" they were. The process was feasible and reasonably accurate. From 6770 registered patients aged 18 to 65 years, 23 (0.3%) were identified as RRMUS. They accounted for 157 referrals over the 5-year period. Sixteen agreed to further assessment, and 8 (50%) had a current anxiety or depressive disorder. GPs rated only 8 (50%) as "difficult to manage." This two-stage procedure offers a practical method of identifying RRMUS patients in primary care as a first step in achieving more cost-effective care. These patients have substantial psychiatric morbidity.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 03-2012
DOI: 10.1016/J.JPSYCHORES.2011.12.009
Abstract: Some patients are repeatedly referred from primary to secondary care with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). We aimed to estimate the healthcare costs incurred by such referrals and to compare them with those incurred by other referred patients from the same defined primary care s le. Using a referral database and case note review, all adult patients aged less than 65 years, who had been referred to specialist medical services from one of five UK National Health Service primary care practices in a five-year period, were identified. They were placed in one of three groups: (i) repeatedly referred with MUS (N=276) (ii) infrequently referred (IRS, N=221), (iii) repeatedly referred with medically explained symptoms (N=230). Secondary care activities for each group (inpatient days, outpatient appointments, emergency department attendances and investigations) were identified from primary care records. The associated costs were allocated using summary data and the costs for each group compared. Patients who had been repeatedly referred with MUS had higher mean inpatient, outpatient and emergency department costs than those infrequently referred (£3,539, 95% CI 1458 to 5621, £778 CI 705 to 852 and £99, CI 74 to 123 respectively. The mean overall costs were similar to those of patients who had been repeatedly referred with medically explained symptoms. The repeated referral of patients with MUS to secondary medical care incurs substantial healthcare costs. An alternative form of management that reduces such referrals offers potential cost savings.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 04-2014
Publisher: The Haworth Press
Date: 1995
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 02-08-2010
Abstract: Patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are commonly referred to specialist clinics. Repeated referrals suggest unmet patient need and inefficient use of resources. How often does this happen, who are the patients and how are they referred? The design of the study is a case-control survey. The setting of the study is five general practices in Scotland, UK. The cases were 193 adults with three or more referrals over 5 years, at least two of which resulted in a diagnosis of MUS. The controls were (i) patients referred only once over 5 years and (ii) patients with three or more referrals with symptoms always diagnosed as medically explained. The measures of the study are SF-12 physical and mental component summaries symptom count and number of referrals, number of different GPs who had referred and number of specialist follow-up appointments. A total of 1.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-1.2%] of patients had repeated (median 3, range 2-6) referrals with MUS. Compared to infrequently referred controls, they were older and more likely to be female, living alone and unemployed. Compared to controls with medically explained symptoms, their health status was comparable or worse: odds ratio for SF-12 physical component summary<40, 1.2 (95% CI 0.72-2.0) SF-12 mental component summary<40, 1.8 (95% CI 1.1-3.0) reporting eight or more physical symptoms, 2.2 (95% CI 1.2-3.8). They were referred by more GPs and received less specialist follow-up. A small proportion of primary care patients are repeatedly referred to specialist clinics where they receive multiple diagnoses of MUS. The needs of these patients and how they are managed merits greater attention.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 02-2020
DOI: 10.1016/J.JPSYCHORES.2019.109892
Abstract: Two previous in idual participant data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) found that different diagnostic interviews classify different proportions of people as having major depression overall or by symptom levels. We compared the odds of major depression classification across diagnostic interviews among studies that administered the Depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D). Data accrued for an IPDMA on HADS-D diagnostic accuracy were analysed. We fit binomial generalized linear mixed models to compare odds of major depression classification for the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID), Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), controlling for HADS-D scores and participant characteristics with and without an interaction term between interview and HADS-D scores. There were 15,856 participants (1942 [12%] with major depression) from 73 studies, including 15,335 (97%) non-psychiatric medical patients, 164 (1%) partners of medical patients, and 357 (2%) healthy adults. The MINI (27 studies, 7345 participants, 1066 major depression cases) classified participants as having major depression more often than the CIDI (10 studies, 3023 participants, 269 cases) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.70 (0.84, 3.43)) and the semi-structured SCID (36 studies, 5488 participants, 607 cases) (aOR = 1.52 (1.01, 2.30)). The odds ratio for major depression classification with the CIDI was less likely to increase as HADS-D scores increased than for the SCID (interaction aOR = 0.92 (0.88, 0.96)). Compared to the SCID, the MINI may diagnose more participants as having major depression, and the CIDI may be less responsive to symptom severity.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 06-2012
DOI: 10.1016/J.JPSYCHORES.2012.03.005
Abstract: Patients with a medical condition and co-morbid depression have more symptoms and use more medical services. We aimed to determine the prevalence of depression and the adequacy of its treatment in patients who had been repeatedly referred from primary to specialist medical care for the assessment of a medical condition. All patients who had at least three referrals to medical and surgical specialists for an assessment of symptoms attributed to a medical condition, over a five year period from five primary care practices in Edinburgh, UK were identified using a referral database and review of records. Participants were sent a questionnaire which included the PHQ-9 depression scale and additional questions about depression during the preceding 5years. Details of treatment for depression were obtained from primary care records. Questionnaires were sent to 230 patients and returned by 162 (70.4%). Forty-one (25.3%) had a PHQ-9 score of 10 or more and hence probable current depressive disorder. An additional 36 (22.2%) reported depression in the previous 5years. Only eight (19.5%) of those reporting current depression and 20 (26%) of the 77 patients reporting previous depression had received minimally adequate treatment for it. Whilst we know that patients with medical conditions are often depressed and that such co-morbid depression is often undertreated, we have found that it is undertreated even in patients repeatedly referred to medical specialists. Better assessment and management of depression in such patients could both improve patients' quality of life and reduce the cost of care.
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for michael sharpe.