Despite ample research on depression after stroke, the debate continues regarding whether symptoms such as sleep disturbances, loss of energy, changes in appetite and diminished concentration should be considered to be consequences of stroke or general symptoms of depression. By comparing symptoms in depressed and non-depressed stroke patients with patients in general practice and patients with symptomatic atherosclerotic diseases, we aim to further clarify similarities and distinctions of depression after stroke and depression in other patient populations. Based on this, it is possible to determine if somatic symptoms should be evaluated in stroke patients in diagnosing depression after stroke. An observational multicenter study is conducted in three hospitals and seven general prac- tices including 382 stroke patients admitted to hospital with a clinical diagnosis of intracere- bral hemorrhage or ischemic infarction, 1160 patients in general practice (PREDICT-NL), and 530 patients with symptomatic atherosclerotic diseases (SMART-Medea).
The timely detection of post-stroke depression is complicated by a decreasing length of hospital stay. Therefore, the Post-stroke Depression Prediction Scale was developed and validated. The Post-stroke Depression Prediction Scale is a clinical prediction model for the early identification of stroke patients at increased risk for post-stroke depression. he study included 410 consecutive stroke patients who were able to communicate adequately. Predictors were collected within the first week after stroke. Between 6 to 8 weeks after stroke, major depressive disorder was diagnosed using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted. A bootstrap-backward selection process resulted in a reduced model. Performance of the model was expressed by discrimination, calibration, and accuracy.
LINK
Research on psychological treatment of depression in inpatients is not conclusive,with some studies finding clear positive effects and other studies finding no significant benefit compared to usual care or structured pharmacotherapy. The results of a meta-analysis investigating how effective psychological treatment is for depressed inpatients are presented. A systematic search in bibliographical databases resulted in 12 studieswith a total of 570 respondents. This set of studies had sufficient statistical power to detect small effect sizes. Psychological treatments had a small (g=0.29), but statistically significant additional effect on depression compared to usual care and structured pharmacological treatments only. This corresponded with a numbersneeded- to-be-treated of 6.17. Heterogeneity was zero inmost analyses, and not significant in all analyses. There wasno indication for significant publication bias. Effectswere not associatedwith characteristics of the population, the interventions and the design of the studies. Although the number of studieswas small, and the quality ofmany studieswas not optimal, it seems safe to conclude that psychological treatments have a small but robust effect on depression in depressed inpatients. More high-quality research is needed to verify these results.
