Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of a populace based, multifaceted shared care intervention for late life depressive disorder in residential care. the entire populace of a large residential facility. The control group received routine care. Those carrying out the intervention were not told which residents were depressed and being evaluated, and depressed residents were not informed that they had been identified. Statistical Balofloxacin supplier analysis We carried out intention to treat analyses. A Mantel-Haenszel stratification test39 compared the level of depression of the control and intervention groups at follow up after taking into account baseline levels, using the geriatric depressive disorder scale. An independent two sample test was used to compare change in geriatric depressive disorder scale score between the groups. We used multiple linear regression analysis to evaluate the effect of the intervention Balofloxacin supplier on geriatric depressive disorder scale score at follow up, while controlling for the other independent variables measured. Baseline geriatric depressive disorder scale score and then group status (control intervention) were forced in to the model first, followed by all other impartial variables using forward stepwise entry. The effect of the intervention on other clinical outcome steps was assessed with analysis of covariance for continuous variables and logistic regression for categorical variables, in each case looking at the effect of group membership on the follow up measure while controlling for the baseline measure as a covariate. All analyses were planned a priori. All statistical assessments used an level of 0.05 and two sided hypothesis testing, and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for differences in change of scores or proportions. Analyses were carried out Balofloxacin supplier with spss for Windows (release 6.0). Results Participant flow and follow up Details of participant flow through the study are included on the intervention) would have enabled the use of concurrent controls, it would have been difficult to adequately control for differences between the facilities in available resources, care cultures, and the characteristics of the populations Goat polyclonal to IgG (H+L)(PE) of residents and carers. Such bias may have been eliminated in a multicentre study using the residential facility as the unit of randomisation but this was beyond our resources. We made the decision against a classic before and after evaluation with participants as their own historical controls because it meant more interviews for participants over a longer time period, likely to Balofloxacin supplier result in greater loss to follow up. We therefore adopted a single site design, and studied control and intervention groups one after the other, given the difficulties associated with alternative designs. This serial design necessitated first randomising the population and then selecting the participants, but this is very nearly equivalent to the conventional method of first selecting the participants and then randomising them. Although Balofloxacin supplier the design is not entirely common of a randomised controlled trial, both a control group and the theory of randomisation were used. We acknowledge that this design has certain limitations. Its serial nature introduces the possibility of secular confounding, since the groups are studied over a different period of time. The delay between randomisation and the start of treatment in the intervention group does not, however, seem to have introduced bias as there are no differences at baseline on any key variables between participants in the control and intervention groups. Baseline steps for both groups were collected in winter thereby reducing the impact of seasonal factors. The age difference between the control and intervention groups caused by the serial design was not statistically significant. The possible confounding effect of age differences was resolved by including age in the regression analysis. Generalisability may be limited because only one large residential facility was studied. However, although the facilitys size was atypical the population and available resources were not. Psychogeriatric resources were scarce, staff to resident ratios were low, and the requires of residents were great. Since this was not a highly expensive intervention, replete with mental healthcare resources, the results have applicability to other settings. However, since severely cognitively impaired people were excluded the results are not applicable to patients with depressive disorder and significant dementia. It is difficult to know how far generalisability is limited by non-response bias at the initial intake interviews and by losing participants to follow up. Refusal rates were low (21% or less), and although follow up rates were only moderately high (at least 75% for the geriatric depressive disorder scale and 58% for all those measures), there were no significant differences between those who completed the study and those who decreased out. Although fewer intervention than control group residents were eligible to participate (see website), due in part to their greater attrition over the longer time.