Abstract:PURPOSE Indicators of prognosis should be considered to fully inform clinical decision making in the treatment of depression. This study examines whether self-rated health predicts long-term depression outcomes in primary care.
METHODSOur analysis was based on the first 5 years of a prospective 10-year cohort study underway since January 2005 conducted in 30 randomly selected Australian primary care practices. Participants were 789 adult patients with a history of depressive symptoms. Main outcome measures inc… Show more
“…Overall, we found strong relationships between all three measures and self-rated health status, which is considered a valid predictor for mortality (DeSalvo et al, 2006), consistent with other studies in primary care settings (Ambresin et al, 2014).…”
“…Overall, we found strong relationships between all three measures and self-rated health status, which is considered a valid predictor for mortality (DeSalvo et al, 2006), consistent with other studies in primary care settings (Ambresin et al, 2014).…”
“…Further, self-rated health has been associated with depression in mixed-age adults (Herrman et al, 2002; Goldney et al, 2010; Gunn et al, 2012). Specifically, one longitudinal study reported that self-rated health predicted recurrence of major depressive disorder up to five years later (Ambresin et al, 2014). However, the direction of the relationship between self-rated health and depression remains uncertain as depression has also been reported to be a risk factor for subsequent decline in self-rated health (Han & Jylha, 2006).…”
Objectives
Favorable attitudes, emotions, personality characteristics, and self-rated health have been associated with successful aging in late life. However, less is known regarding these constructs and their relationships to mental health outcomes in the oldest old persons. This study examined cross-sectional relationships of these psychological factors to depressive symptoms in centenarians and near-centenarians.
Methods
A selected sample of Ashkenazi Jewish older adults ages 98 to 107 (n = 54, 78% female) without significant cognitive impairment participated. Cognitive function was assessed by Mini Mental Status Exam (MMSE), Positive Attitude Towards Life and Emotional Expression by the Personality Outlook Profile Scale (POPS), self-rated health by participants’ subjective rating of their present health, and depressive symptoms by the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS).
Results
Results demonstrated inverse associations of the Positive Attitude Towards Life domain of the POPS and self-rated health with participants’ levels of depressive symptoms even after adjusting for the effects of history of medical illnesses, cognitive function, and demographic variables. Additionally, participants with high levels of care showed higher levels of depressive symptoms. Path analysis supported the partially mediating role of Positive Attitude Towards Life in the relationship between self-rated health and depressive symptoms.
Conclusion
These findings emphasized the important roles of positive attitudes and emotions as well as self-rated health in mental health outcomes in the oldest old. Although, limited by its cross-sectional design, findings suggest these psychological factors may exert protective effects on mental health outcomes in advanced age.
“…In this context, SRH could offer an easy and efficient way to identify patients at risk for poor long-term depression outcomes [2]. According to one previous study from Australia [2], cross-sectional analysis of baseline data showed that participants reporting poor or fair SRH had greater odds of chronic illness, MDD, and lower socioeconomic status than those reporting good to excellent SRH.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, numerous studies suggesting the relation between self-rated health (SRH) and depression have been reported [2, 6–8]. SRH is able to measure one’s perception of one’s general health status.…”
BackgroundNumerous studies suggesting the relation between self-rated health (SRH) and depression have been reported using different measures. Therefore, we attempted to determine the difference in a depressive scale based on the different ways of measuring health between global SRH (SRH-global) and age-comparative SRH (SRH-age). Then, the combined effect of SRH-global and SRH-age on depressive symptoms was further investigated.MethodsData from the Korean Longitudinal Study of Ageing (KLoSA) from 2008 to 2012 were analyzed. We divided the SRH-global and SRH-age into three levels—high, middle, and low—and combined each into nine new categories (SRH-combi). The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale-10 Korean edition was used as the dependent variable.ResultsA total of 8621 participant were enrolled at baseline. Individuals with lower SRHs-age compared to SRH-global tended to be more vulnerable to depressive symptoms. Low SRH-global with low (b = 0.654, p < 0.001) and middle SRH-age (b = 0.210, p = 0.003) showed association with higher CESD scores. Participants with high SRH-global × low SRH-age also had higher scores (b = 0.536, p < 0.001) compared to the “middle SRH-global × middle SRH-age” reference group. In contrast, among the middle (b = −0.696, p < 0.001) and high SRH-global (b = −0.545, p < 0.001) groups, participants with superior SRH-age had statistically lower CESD scores than the reference group.ConclusionsAlthough a sole general SRH has historically been widely used, it has been suggested that use of both general and age-comparative SRH would be more powerful and easy when we consider analyzing depression in old age.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12888-016-1098-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.