Typical disease courses of patients with unipolar depressive disorder after in-patient treatments–results of a cluster analysis of the INDDEP project

INTRODUCTION: Previously established categories for the classification of disease courses of unipolar depressive disorder (relapse, remission, recovery, recurrence) are helpful, but insufficient in describing the naturalistic disease courses over time. The intention of the present study was to identify frequent disease courses of depression by means of a cluster analysis. METHODS: For the longitudinal cluster analysis, 555 datasets of patients who participated in the INDDEP (INpatient and Day clinic treatment of DEPression) study, were used. The present study uses data of patients with at least moderate depressive symptoms (major depression) over a follow-up period of 1 year after their in-patient or day-care treatments using the LIFE (Longitudinal Interval Follow-Up Evaluation)-interview. Eight German psychosomatic hospitals participated in this naturalistic observational study. RESULTS: Considering only the Calinski–Harabatz index, a 2-cluster solution gives the best statistical results. In combination with other indices and clinical interpretations, the 5-cluster solution seems to be the most interesting. The cluster sizes are large enough and numerically balanced. The KML-cluster analyses revealed five well interpretable disease course clusters over the follow-up period: “sustained treatment response” (N = 202, 36.4% of the patients), “recurrence” (N = 80, 14.4%), “persisting relapse” (N = 115, 20.7%), “temporary relapse” (N = 95, 17.1%), and remission (N = 63, 11.4%). CONCLUSION: The disease courses of many patients diagnosed with a unipolar depression do not match with the historically developed categories such as relapse, remission, and recovery. Given this context, the introduction of disease course trajectories seems helpful. These findings may promote the implementation of new therapy options, adapted to the disease courses.