Summary The extent to which a doctor or health professional can make a valid assessment of a patient's quality of life, anxiety and depression was investigated in a series of cancer patients. Doctors and patients filled out the same forms, viz. the Karnofsky, Spitzer, Linear Analogue Self Assessment Scales and a series of simple scales designed for this study, at the same time. Correlations between the two sets of scores were poor, suggesting that the doctors could not accurately determine what the patients felt. A further study examining the reproducibility of these scales demonstrated considerable variability in results between different doctors. It is concluded that if a reliable and consistent method of measuring quality of life in cancer patients is required, it must come from the patients themselves and not from their doctors and nurses.

Entering medical students experience distress symptoms due to the demands of the intensive curriculum, adjustment to new environments and increased responsibilities. The purpose of this controlled, randomized study was to determine the effects of a structured wellness program on measures of anxiety, depression and frequency of acute illness in 449 first year medical students. The effects of eight sessions of stress management were compared to a wait list control group. High risk students were identified based on scores on psychological inventories and number of recent life events (WLE). Results showed that depression, anxiety scores and frequency of acute illness were higher in women than in men, and were higher in students with multiple life events. Significant decreases were observed in depression in the intervention group students when WLE was the covariate (p = .045). Further, the high risk group showed consistently lower depression scores after the intervention compared to high risk wait list controls (p = .003), and these changes were maintained at the end of school year. There were no significant changes in anxiety or frequency of acute illness. Wellness programs can be implemented in medical school and may be particularly useful for entering students with elevated psychological distress.

Approximately 10 % of first year medical students have clinically relevant anxiety or depression which may affect academic success and quality of life. This study tested the effects of a stress management intervention on indicators of anxiety, depression and self-efficacy in self-selected first year medical students. Forty two medical students volunteered to participate and provided informed consent. An eight session intervention was offered and focused on building relaxation skills, adaptive coping, and basic nutrition. Anxiety, depression, and self-efficacy were assessed pre and post intervention. This group of students had significantly higher baseline values of depression and anxiety but lower self-efficacy compared to a previous study of medical students at the same institution (p < 0.03). After the intervention, statistically significant improvements were observed in anxiety (p < 0.05), and self-efficacy (p < 0.05), but not in depression. The entering levels of anxiety and depression in this group suggested that these students were at risk for later clinical syndromes. Intervention directed to decreasing the effects of stress was associated with improvement in indicators of distress and may modify the longer term risk.

Objective: Individuals visiting a primary care practice were screened to determine the prevalence of depressive disorders. The DSM-IV-TR research criteria for minor depressive disorder were used to standardize a definition for subthreshold symptoms.Method: Outpatients waiting to see their physicians at 3 community family medicine sites were invited to complete a demographic survey and the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders Patient Questionnaire (PRIME-MD PQ). Those who screened positive for depression on the PRIME-MD PQ were administered both the PRIME-MD Clinician Evaluation Guide (CEG) mood module and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) by telephone. Data were collected over a 2-year period (1996)(1997)(1998).Results: 1,752 individuals completed the PRIME-MD PQ with 478 (27.3%) scoring positive for depression. Of these 478 patients, 321 received telephone follow-up using the PRIME-MD CEG mood module and the HDRS. PRIME-MD diagnoses were major depressive disorder (n = 85, 26.5%), dysthymia (n = 31, 9.6%), minor depressive disorder (n = 51, 15.9%), and no depression diagnosis (n = 154, 48.0%). The mean HDRS scores by diagnosis were major depressive disorder (20.3), dysthymia (12.9), minor depressive disorder (11.7), and no depression diagnosis (5.8). Post hoc analyses using Dunnett's C test indicated differences between each of the 4 groups at P ≤ .05, with the exception that dysthymia and minor depressive disorder were not significantly different.Conclusions: Minor depressive disorder was more prevalent than dysthymia and had similar symptom severity to dysthymia as measured by the HDRS. More research using standardized definitions and longitudinal studies is needed to clarify the natural course and treatment indications for minor depressive disorder.

The need for treating milder forms of depression has recently been of increased interest. This was a randomized, controlled study to evaluate the effects of telephone-based problem-solving therapy for mild depression. Comparison groups were a treatment-as-usual group and another group receiving stress-management training by telephone. From 1,742 family practice patients screened for depression, 54 with mild depression entered the study. Treatment was provided by experienced family practice nurses, trained and supervised in the treatments. The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression was administered before and after the intervention period, and the Beck Depression Inventory and Duke Health Profile were administered at the end of the intervention period. Of the 36 subjects assigned to the problem-solving and stress-management groups, half dropped out early in the study. Five from the treatment-as-usual group were lost to follow-up. In the remaining subjects, there was a significant decrease in depression scores. There were no significant differences in the amount of decrease between the groups on any scores. The small sample and high dropout rate limit the interpretation of the findings. However, since all subjects tended to improve, regardless of treatment received, mild levels of depression may generally remit even without focal intervention, and watchful waiting may be a reasonable alternative for management.