Functioning and well-being outcomes of patients with depression compared with chronic general medical illnesses

by Ron D. Hays, Kenneth B. Wells, Cathy D. Sherbourne, William H. Rogers, Karen Spritzer

Cross-sectional studies have found that depression is uniquely associated with limitations in well-being and functioning that were equal to or greater than those of chronic general medical conditions such as diabetes and arthritis. However, whether these relative limitations persist over time is not known. The authors conducted a 2-year observational study of 1790 adult outpatients with depression, diabetes, hypertension, recent myocardial infarction, and/or congestive heart failure. Change in functional status and well-being was compared for depressed patients vs. patients with chronic general medical illnesses, controlling statistically for medical comorbidity, sociodemographics, system, and specialty of care. Over 2 years of follow-up, limitations in functioning and well-being improved somewhat for depressed patients; even so, at the end of 2 years, these limitations were similar to or worse than those attributed to chronic medical illnesses. Similar patterns were observed for depressed patients in the mental health specialty sector and those in the general medical sector, but the patients in the mental health specialty sector improved more. More severely depressed patients improved more in functioning, but even initially depressed patients without depressive disorder had substantial persistent limitations. Depressed patients have substantial and long-lasting decrements in multiple domains of functioning and well-being that equal or exceed those of patients with chronic medical illnesses.

Originally published in: Archives of General Psychiatry, v. 52, no. 1, January 1995, pp. 11-19.

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.