The Course of Depression in Adult Outpatients: Results from the Medical Outcomes Study

by M. Audrey Burnam, William H. Rogers, Ron D. Hays, Patricia Camp

Purchase Print Copy

 FormatList Price
Add to Cart Paperback7 pages Free

This study, reprinted from Archives of General Psychiatry, compares the course of depression during a 2-year period in adult outpatients (n=626) with current major depression, dysthymia, and either both current disorders ("double depression") or depressive symptoms with no current depressive disorder. Depressed patients visiting 523 clinicians (mental health specialists and general medical providers) were identified using a two-stage screening procedure including the Diagnostic Interview Schedule. The course of depression was assessed in 2 follow-up years with a structured telephone interview based on the format of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule. Baseline severity of depressive symptoms was greatest in patients with double depression, but initial functional status was poor in those with dysthymia with or without concurrent major depression. Patients with dysthymia had the worst outcomes, those with current major depression alone had intermediate outcomes, and those with subthreshold depressive symptoms had the best outcomes. Even the latter group, however, had a high incidence (25%) of major depressive episode over two years. Initial depressive severity and level of functional status accounted for more explained variance in outcomes than did type of depressive disorder. The findings emphasize the poor prognosis associated with dysthymia even in the absence of major depression; the prognostic significance of subthreshold depressive symptoms; and the clinical significance of assessing level of severity of symptoms as well as functional status and well-being, regardless of type of depressive disorder.

Originally published in: Archives of General Psychiatry, v. 49, no. 10, 1992, pp. 788-794.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Reprint series. The Reprint was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1992 to 2011 that represented previously published journal articles, book chapters, and reports with the permission of the publisher. RAND reprints were formally reviewed in accordance with the publisher's editorial policy and compliant with RAND's rigorous quality assurance standards for quality and objectivity. For select current RAND journal articles, see External Publications.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.