Background: Mismatch between need and mental healthcare (MHC) use (under-and overuse) has mainly been studied with cross-sectional designs, not accurately capturing patterns of persistence or... Show moreBackground: Mismatch between need and mental healthcare (MHC) use (under-and overuse) has mainly been studied with cross-sectional designs, not accurately capturing patterns of persistence or change in clinical burden and MHC-use among persons with depressive and/or anxiety disorders. Aims: Determining and describing [mis]match of longitudinal trajectories of clinical burden and MHC-use. Methods: Six-year longitudinal burden and MHC-use data came from the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (n=2981). The sample was split into four subgroups: I) no clinical burden but constant MHC use, II) constant clinical burden but no MHC-use, III) changing clinical burden and MHC-use, and IV) healthy non-users. Within subgroups I)-III), specific clinical burden and MHC trajectories were identified (growth mixture modeling). The resulting classes' associations with predisposing, enabling, and need factors were investigated (regression analysis). Results: Subgroups I-III revealed different trajectories. I) increasing MHC without burden (4.1%). II) slightly increasing (1.9%), strongly increasing (2.4%), and decreasing (9.5%) burden without MHC. III) increasing (41.4%) or decreasing (19.4%) burden and concurrently increasing MHC use (first underuse, then matched care), thus revealing delayed MHC-use. Only having suicidal ideation (p<.001, Cohen's d=.6-1.5) was a significant determinant of being in latter classes compared to underusers (strongly increasing burden without MHC-use). Limitations: More explanatory factors are needed to explain [mis]match. Conclusion: Mismatch occurred as constant underuse or as delayed MHC-use in a high-income country (Netherlands). Additionally, no meaningful class revealed constantly matched care on average. Presence of suicidal ideation could influence the probability of symptomatic individuals receiving matched MHC or not. Show less
Background: In longitudinal research, switching between diagnoses should be considered when examining patients with depression and anxiety. We investigated course trajectories of affective... Show moreBackground: In longitudinal research, switching between diagnoses should be considered when examining patients with depression and anxiety. We investigated course trajectories of affective disorders over a nine-year period, comparing a categorical approach using diagnoses to a dimensional approach using symptom severity.Method: Patients with a current depressive and/or anxiety disorder at baseline (N = 1701) were selected from the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA). Using psychiatric diagnoses, we described 'consistently recovered,' 'intermittently recovered,' 'intermittently recurrent', and 'consistently chronic' at two-, four-, six-, and nine-year follow-up. Additionally, latent class growth analysis (LCGA) using depressive, anxiety, fear, and worry symptom severity scores was used to identify distinct classes.Results: Considering the categorical approach, 8.5% were chronic, 32.9% were intermittently recurrent, 37.6% were intermittently recovered, and 21.0% remained consistently recovered from any affective disorder at nine-year follow-up. In the dimensional approach, 66.6% were chronic, 25.9% showed partial recovery, and 7.6% had recovered.Limitations: 30.6% of patients were lost to follow-up. Diagnoses were rated by the interviewer and questionnaires were completed by the participant.Conclusions: Using diagnoses alone as discrete categories to describe clinical course fails to fully capture the persistence of affective symptoms that were observed when using a dimensional approach. The enduring, fluctuating presence of sub-threshold affective symptoms likely predisposes patients to frequent relapse. The commonness of subthreshold symptoms and their adverse impact on long-term prognoses deserve continuous clinical attention in mental health care as well further research. Show less
Background: Given the strong relationship between depression and anxiety, there is an urge to investigate their shared and specific long-term course determinants. The current study aimed to... Show moreBackground: Given the strong relationship between depression and anxiety, there is an urge to investigate their shared and specific long-term course determinants. The current study aimed to identify and compare the main determinants of the 9-year trajectories of combined and pure depression and anxiety symptom severity. Methods: Respondents with a 6-month depression and/or anxiety diagnosis (n=1,701) provided baseline data on 152 sociodemographic, clinical and biological variables. Depression and anxiety symptom severity assessed at baseline, 2-, 4-, 6- and 9-year follow-up, were used to identify data-driven course-trajectory subgroups for general psychological distress, pure depression, and pure anxiety severity scores. For each outcome (classprobability), a Superlearner (SL) algorithm identified an optimally weighted (minimum mean squared error) combination of machine-learning prediction algorithms. For each outcome, the top determinants in the SL were identified by determining variable-importance and correlations between each SL-predicted and observed outcome (rho pred) were calculated. Results: Low to high prediction correlations (rho pred: 0.41-0.91, median=0.73) were found. In the SL, important determinants of psychological distress were age, young age of onset, respiratory rate, participation disability, somatic disease, low income, minor depressive disorder and mastery score. For course of pure depression and anxiety symptom severity, similar determinants were found. Specific determinants of pure depression included several types of healthcare-use, and of pure-anxiety course included somatic arousal and psychological distress. Limitations: Limited sample size for machine learning. Conclusions: The determinants of depression- and anxiety-severity course are mostly shared. Domain-specific exceptions are healthcare use for depression and somatic arousal and distress for anxiety-severity course. Show less
