Measuring social environment factors of inpatients and outpatients with depression in Germany: a cross-sectional study.

IF 4.9 0 PSYCHIATRY
Petra Schoenweger, Julia Eder, Lisa Pfeiffer, Peter Falkai, Michaela Kirschneck, Maria S Simon, Claudia Ditzen-Janotta, André R Brunoni, Michaela Coenen, Mark Sen Dong, Jochen Gensichen, Catherine Glocker, Nikolaos Koutsouleris, Richard Musil, Andrea Schmitt, Caroline Jung-Sievers
{"title":"Measuring social environment factors of inpatients and outpatients with depression in Germany: a cross-sectional study.","authors":"Petra Schoenweger, Julia Eder, Lisa Pfeiffer, Peter Falkai, Michaela Kirschneck, Maria S Simon, Claudia Ditzen-Janotta, André R Brunoni, Michaela Coenen, Mark Sen Dong, Jochen Gensichen, Catherine Glocker, Nikolaos Koutsouleris, Richard Musil, Andrea Schmitt, Caroline Jung-Sievers","doi":"10.1136/bmjment-2024-301359","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Social environment characteristics, including social relationships and cultural milieus, may influence the occurrence, course and management of depression. Effective questionnaires are needed to measure these factors and improve disease management.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to (1) evaluate the social environment, such as social isolation, social disability and social cohesion of depressed inpatients and outpatients, and (2) discuss the suitability of standardised questionnaires measuring it.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study included adult patients with unipolar depression from a psychiatric hospital and general practitioner (GP) practices in Bavaria, Germany. Social isolation, disability and cohesion were measured using the <i>Lubben Social Network Scale</i> (LSNS), the <i>WHO Disability Assessment Schedule</i> (WHODAS) and the <i>Social Cohesion and Trust Scale</i> (SCTS), respectively. The suitability of these questionnaires was assessed with a context-specific quality appraisal.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Among 282 included patients (mean age 38.8 years, SD=13.3), 69.5% were inpatients and 30.5% were outpatients. Social isolation prevalence was 52.5%. Social disability was higher in our cohort than in the general population (p<0.001). LSNS and WHODAS showed no differences between inpatients and outpatients, and suggest good clinical suitability. The SCTS showed shortcomings in applicability and comparability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>People with depression, whether treated in psychiatric hospitals or in GP practices, reported more social isolation and social disability than the general population.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>Researchers and clinicians should monitor social aspects as potential intervention targets to support patient management. Social environment questionnaires should be selected carefully, ideally guided by guidelines or medical associations, to enhance the understanding, comparability and implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":72434,"journal":{"name":"BMJ mental health","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11969599/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjment-2024-301359","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Social environment characteristics, including social relationships and cultural milieus, may influence the occurrence, course and management of depression. Effective questionnaires are needed to measure these factors and improve disease management.

Objective: We aimed to (1) evaluate the social environment, such as social isolation, social disability and social cohesion of depressed inpatients and outpatients, and (2) discuss the suitability of standardised questionnaires measuring it.

Methods: This cross-sectional study included adult patients with unipolar depression from a psychiatric hospital and general practitioner (GP) practices in Bavaria, Germany. Social isolation, disability and cohesion were measured using the Lubben Social Network Scale (LSNS), the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) and the Social Cohesion and Trust Scale (SCTS), respectively. The suitability of these questionnaires was assessed with a context-specific quality appraisal.

Findings: Among 282 included patients (mean age 38.8 years, SD=13.3), 69.5% were inpatients and 30.5% were outpatients. Social isolation prevalence was 52.5%. Social disability was higher in our cohort than in the general population (p<0.001). LSNS and WHODAS showed no differences between inpatients and outpatients, and suggest good clinical suitability. The SCTS showed shortcomings in applicability and comparability.

Conclusion: People with depression, whether treated in psychiatric hospitals or in GP practices, reported more social isolation and social disability than the general population.

Clinical implications: Researchers and clinicians should monitor social aspects as potential intervention targets to support patient management. Social environment questionnaires should be selected carefully, ideally guided by guidelines or medical associations, to enhance the understanding, comparability and implementation.

Abstract Image

测量德国住院和门诊抑郁症患者的社会环境因素:一项横断面研究。
背景:社会环境特征,包括社会关系和文化环境,可能影响抑郁症的发生、病程和管理。需要有效的问卷来衡量这些因素并改善疾病管理。目的:对抑郁症住院患者和门诊患者的社会隔离、社会残疾和社会凝聚力等社会环境进行评价,探讨采用标准化问卷对其进行测量的适宜性。方法:这项横断面研究包括来自德国巴伐利亚州一家精神病院和全科医生(GP)诊所的成年单相抑郁症患者。社会隔离、残疾和凝聚力分别采用Lubben社会网络量表(LSNS)、WHO残疾评估表(WHODAS)和社会凝聚力与信任量表(SCTS)进行测量。这些问卷的适用性是根据具体情况进行质量评估的。结果:282例患者(平均年龄38.8岁,SD=13.3)中,住院患者占69.5%,门诊患者占30.5%。社会隔离患病率为52.5%。结论:抑郁症患者,无论是在精神病院还是在全科医生诊所接受治疗,都比一般人群报告更多的社会孤立和社会残疾。临床意义:研究人员和临床医生应监测社会方面作为潜在的干预目标,以支持患者管理。应仔细选择社会环境问卷,最好在指南或医学协会的指导下进行选择,以加强理解、可比性和执行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信