4.5 Article

Treatment preferences for depression in the elderly

Journal

INTERNATIONAL PSYCHOGERIATRICS
Volume 29, Issue 3, Pages 389-398

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1041610216001885

Keywords

depression; old age; treatment; late-life; shared decision making

Funding

  1. Federal Ministry of Education and Research (AgeMooDestudy, BMBF) [01GY1155A - D]
  2. Federal Ministry of Health (AgeMooDe+Synergie, BMG/BVA) [II A 5-2513 FSB 014]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: If patients are treated according to their personal preferences, depression treatment success is higher. It is not known which treatment options for late-life depression are preferred by patients aged 75 years and over and whether there are determinants of these preferences. Methods: The data were derived from the German Late-life depression in primary care: needs, health care utilization, and costs (AgeMooDe) study. Patients aged 75+ years (N = 1,230) were recruited from primary care practices. Depressive symptoms were determined using the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS15). Support for eight treatment options was determined. Results: Medication, psychotherapy, talking to friends and family, and exercise were the preferred treatment options. Having a GDS score = 6 significantly lowered the endorsement of some treatment options. For each treatment option, the probability of choosing the indecisive category I do not know was significantly increased in participants with moderate depressive symptoms. Conclusions: Depressive symptoms influence the preference for certain treatment options and also increase indecision in patients. The high preference for psychotherapy suggests a much higher demand for late-life psychotherapy in the future. Healthcare systems should begin to prepare to meet this anticipated need. Future studies should include previous experience with treatment methods as a confounding variable.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available