Recommendations on screening for depression in adults

Beyond Screening: A Stepped Care Pathway for Managing Postpartum Depression in Pediatric Settings

The negative consequences of untreated postpartum depression (PD) for both the woman and her infant are well established. The impact of maternal depression has led to recommendations on systematic perinatal depression screening. Unfortunately, large-scale initiatives on PD screening have found no benefit unless systems are in place to facilitate appropriate interventions for women who screen positive. Pediatric primary care has been a focus of efforts to support screening and management of PD because pediatric providers, unlike adult healthcare providers, have the most frequent contact with postpartum women through well-child visits. Well-child visits thus present an unparalleled opportunity to detect and intervene with PD. Literature reviews suggest that specific strategies are feasible within pediatric settings and could benefit both the woman and her child. In this article, we present a stepped care approach for screening and managing PD, integrating common elements found in existing pediatric-based models. A stepped care approach is ideal because PD is a heterogeneous condition, with a range of presentations and hence responsiveness to various interventions. This care pathway begins with systematic screening for depression symptoms, followed by a systematic risk assessment for women who screen positive and care management based on risk profiles and responsiveness. This approach allows pediatric providers to be optimally flexible and responsive in addressing the majority of women with PD within the context of the family-centered medical home to improve child well-being. Challenges to managing PD within pediatrics are discussed, including strategies for addressing them. Implications for research, policy, and practice are discussed.

Awareness of treatment history in family and friends, and mental health care seeking propensity

PURPOSE

Many adults suffering from mental disorders never receive the care they need. The role of family and friends in overcoming mental health treatment barriers is poorly understood. We investigated the association between awareness of lifetime mental health treatment history in one's family or friends, and likelihood of having recently received mental health care for oneself.

METHODS

Using Canadian Community Health Survey 2012-Mental Health data, we defined care seekers as individuals who talked about mental health issues to at least one health professional in the past 12 months. Seekers were matched to non-seekers based on estimated care seeking propensity, and 1933 matched pairs were created. Reported awareness of lifetime treatment history in family and friends was compared between seekers and non-seekers.

RESULTS

There were no differences in the distribution of any confounder of interest between seekers and non-seekers. 73% of seekers were aware of treatment history in family or friends, compared to only 56% of non-seekers (RR 1.3; 95% CI 1.2, 1.3). Awareness of treatment history in family members had nearly identical associations with care seeking as awareness of treatment history in friends.

CONCLUSIONS

We have found a social clustering of mental health care seeking behavior; individuals who were aware of lifetime treatment history in family or friends were more likely to have recently sought care for themselves. These novel results are consistent with a social learning model of care seeking behavior, and could inform efforts to bridge the current mental health treatment gap.

Depression screening and treatment recall in male and female coronary artery disease inpatients: Association with symptoms one year later

BACKGROUND

This study examined whether cardiac inpatients recall depression screening and how it is related to depressive symptoms and treatment one year later.

METHODS

2635 cardiac inpatients from 11 hospitals completed a survey and were mailed a follow-up survey one year later; both surveys included the BDI-II.

RESULTS

Of the 1809 (68.7%) retained participants, 513 (30.0%) recalled depression screening. Recall was not significantly related to depressive symptoms at either time point (P > 0.05). Participants who were recommended antidepressants had higher BDI-II scores than those who were not, both as inpatients (P < 0.01) and one year later (P < 0.05). There was no significant change in depressive symptoms over time in patients who received any type of therapy.

CONCLUSION

Less than one-third of cardiac inpatients recalled being screened for depression. Recall of screening was not significantly related to depressive symptoms, and use of treatment was related to greater symptoms.

Screening for depression in hospitalized medical patients

Depression among hospitalized patients is often unrecognized, undiagnosed, and therefore untreated. Little is known about the feasibility of screening for depression during hospitalization, or whether depression is associated with poorer outcomes, longer hospital stays, and higher readmission rates. We searched PubMed and PsycINFO for published, peer-reviewed articles in English (1990-2016) using search terms designed to capture studies that tested the performance of depression screening tools in inpatient settings and studies that examined associations between depression detected during hospitalization and clinical or utilization outcomes. Two investigators reviewed each full-text article and extracted data. The prevalence of depression ranged from 5% to 60%, with a median of 33%, among hospitalized patients. Several screening tools identified showed high sensitivity and specificity, even when self-administered by patients or when abbreviated versions were administered by individuals without formal training. With regard to outcomes, studies from several individual hospitals found depression to be associated with poorer functional outcomes, worse physical health, and returns to the hospital after discharge. These findings suggest that depression screening may be feasible in the inpatient setting, and that more research is warranted to determine whether screening for and treating depression during hospitalization can improve patient outcomes. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2017;12:118-125.

Depression Outcomes in Adults Attending Family Practice Were Not Improved by Screening, Stepped-Care, or Online CBT during a 12-Week Study when Compared to Controls in a Randomized Trial

There is uncertainty regarding possible benefits of screening for depression in family practice, as well as the most effective treatment approach when depression is identified. Here, we examined whether screening patients for depression in primary care, and then treating them with different modalities, was better than treatment-as-usual (TAU) alone. Screening was carried out for depression using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), with a score of ≥10 indicating significant depressive symptoms. PHQ-9 scores were given to family physicians prior to patients being seen (except for the Control group). Patients (n = 1,489) were randomized to one of four groups. Group #1 were controls (n = 432) in which PHQ-9 was administered, but results were not shared. Group #2 was screening followed by TAU (n = 426). Group #3 was screening followed by both TAU and the opportunity to use an online cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) treatment program (n = 440). Group #4 utilized an evidence-based Stepped-care pathway for depression (n = 191, note that this was not available at all clinics). Of the study sample 889 (60%) completed a second PHQ-9 rating at 12 weeks. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline PHQ-9 scores between these groups. Compared to baseline, mean PHQ-9 scores decreased significantly in the depressed patients over 12 weeks, but there were no statistically significant differences between any groups at 12 weeks. Thus, for those who were depressed at baseline Control group (Group #1) scores decreased from 15.3 ± 4.2 to 4.0 ± 2.6 (p < 0.001), Screening group (Group #2) scores decreased from 15.5 ± 3.9 to 4.6 ± 3.0 (p < 0.001), Online CBT group (Group #3) scores decreased from 15.4 ± 3.8 to 3.4 ± 2.7 (p < 0.01), and the Stepped-care pathway group (Group #4) scores decreased from 15.3 ± 3.6 to 5.4 ± 2.8 (p < 0.05). In conclusion, these findings from this controlled randomized study do not suggest that using depression screening tools in family practice improves outcomes. They also suggest that much of the depression seen in primary care spontaneously resolves and do not support suggestions that more complex treatment programs or pathways improve depression outcomes in primary care. Replication studies are required due to study limitations.

Assessing Depression in the Primary Care Setting

Depression affects almost 10% of the adult population in the United States but often goes unrecognized and untreated. The World Health Organization predicts depression soon to be the second leading cause of disability. Recognizing the signs and symptoms of depression and then feeling confident to treat are limitations many primary care providers acknowledge. In this study, significantly more patients were identified as moderately to severely depressed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) screening tool as compared to the clinic's usual care practice of patient self-report. This study examines the PHQ-9, an evidence-based screening tool, to assist primary care providers in identifying depression. It also offers evidenced-based algorithms and websites to assist primary care providers with treatment protocols. The purpose of this article is to evaluate whether screening patients for depression using the PHQ-9 questionnaire is an effective tool in identifying patients with depression compared to the clinic's usual care practice of self-report. Implementing an evidence-based screening tool in the primary care setting assisted identifying those at risk for depression. This study of 200 patients in the primary care setting demonstrated the effectiveness of using the PHQ-9 as an efficient and accurate depression screening tool. Results of this study were chi-square analysis revealed that a significantly higher proportion of patients were newly diagnosed with depression in the study group than in the comparison group, χ²(1, N = 200) = 9.96, p < .01.

Accuracy of Depression Screening Tools to Detect Major Depression in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Depression screening among children and adolescents is controversial, and no clinical trials have evaluated benefits and harms of screening programs. A requirement for effective screening is a screening tool with demonstrated high accuracy. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the accuracy of depression screening instruments to detect major depressive disorder (MDD) in children and adolescents.

METHOD

Data sources included the MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, PsycINFO, HaPI, and LILACS databases from 2006 to September 30, 2015. Eligible studies compared a depression screening tool to a validated diagnostic interview for MDD and reported accuracy data for children and adolescents aged 6 to 18 years. Risk of bias was assessed with QUADAS-2.

RESULTS

We identified 17 studies with data on 20 depression screening tools. Few studies examined the accuracy of the same screening tools. Cut-off scores identified as optimal were inconsistent across studies. Width of 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for sensitivity ranged from 9% to 55% (median 32%), and only 1 study had a lower bound 95% CI ≥80%. For specificity, 95% CI width ranged from 2% to 27% (median 9%), and 3 studies had a lower bound ≥90%. Methodological limitations included small sample sizes, exploratory data analyses to identify optimal cut-offs, and the failure to exclude children and adolescents already diagnosed or treated for depression.

CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence that any depression screening tool and cut-off accurately screens for MDD in children and adolescents. Screening could lead to overdiagnosis and the consumption of scarce health care resources.

Reporting quality in abstracts of meta-analyses of depression screening tool accuracy: a review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE

Concerns have been raised regarding the quality and completeness of abstract reporting in evidence reviews, but this had not been evaluated in meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy. Our objective was to evaluate reporting quality and completeness in abstracts of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of depression screening tool accuracy, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) for Abstracts tool.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

We searched MEDLINE and PsycINFO from 1 January 2005 through 13 March 2016 for recent systematic reviews with meta-analyses in any language that compared a depression screening tool to a diagnosis based on clinical or validated diagnostic interview.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently assessed quality and completeness of abstract reporting using the PRISMA for Abstracts tool with appropriate adaptations made for studies of diagnostic test accuracy. Bivariate associations of number of PRISMA for Abstracts items complied with (1) journal abstract word limit and (2) A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) scores of meta-analyses were also assessed.

RESULTS

We identified 21 eligible meta-analyses. Only two of 21 included meta-analyses complied with at least half of adapted PRISMA for Abstracts items. The majority met criteria for reporting an appropriate title (95%), result interpretation (95%) and synthesis of results (76%). Meta-analyses less consistently reported databases searched (43%), associated search dates (33%) and strengths and limitations of evidence (19%). Most meta-analyses did not adequately report a clinically meaningful description of outcomes (14%), risk of bias (14%), included study characteristics (10%), study eligibility criteria (5%), registration information (5%), clear objectives (0%), report eligibility criteria (0%) or funding (0%). Overall meta-analyses quality scores were significantly associated with the number of PRISMA for Abstracts scores items reported adequately (r=0.45).

CONCLUSIONS

Quality and completeness of reporting were found to be suboptimal. Journal editors should endorse PRISMA for Abstracts and allow for flexibility in abstract word counts to improve quality of abstracts.

Identifying depression with the PHQ-2: A diagnostic meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is interest in the use of very brief instruments to identify depression because of the advantages they offer in busy clinical settings. The PHQ-2, consisting of two questions relating to core symptoms of depression (low mood and loss of interest or pleasure), is one such instrument.

METHOD

A systematic review was conducted to identify studies that had assessed the diagnostic performance of the PHQ-2 to detect major depression. Embase, MEDLINE, PsychINFO and grey literature databases were searched. Reference lists of included studies and previous relevant reviews were also examined. Studies were included that used the standard scoring system of the PHQ-2, assessed its performance against a gold-standard diagnostic interview and reported data on its performance at the recommended (≥3) or an alternative cut-off point (≥2). After assessing heterogeneity, where appropriate, data from studies were combined using bivariate diagnostic meta-analysis to derive sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and diagnostic odds ratios.

RESULTS

21 studies met inclusion criteria totalling N=11,175 people out of which 1529 had major depressive disorder according to a gold standard. 19 of the 21 included studies reported data for a cut-off point of ≥3. Pooled sensitivity was 0.76 (95% CI =0.68-0.82), pooled specificity was 0.87 (95% CI =0.82-0.90). However there was substantial heterogeneity at this cut-off (I(2)=81.8%). 17 studies reported data on the performance of the measure at cut-off point ≥2. Heterogeneity was I(2)=43.2% pooled sensitivity at this cut-off point was 0.91 (95% CI =0.85-0.94), and pooled specificity was 0.70 (95% CI =0.64-0.76).

CONCLUSION

The generally lower sensitivity of the PHQ-2 at cut-off ≥3 than the original validation study (0.83) suggests that ≥2 may be preferable if clinicians want to ensure that few cases of depression are missed. However, in situations in which the prevalence of depression is low, this may result in an unacceptably high false-positive rate because of the associated modest specificity. These results, however, need to be interpreted with caution given the possibility of selectively reported cut-offs.

Formative evaluation of practice changes for managing depression within a Shared Care model in primary care

Aim To investigate the implementation and initial impact of the Physician Integrated Network (PIN) mental health indicators, which are specific to screening and managing follow-up for depression, in three primary care practices with Shared Mental Health Care in Manitoba.

BACKGROUND

Manitoba Health undertook a primary care renewal initiative in 2006 called the PIN, which included the development of mental health indicators specific to screening and managing follow-up for depression. These indicators were implemented in three PIN group practice sites in Manitoba, which are also part of Shared Mental Health Care.

METHODS

The design was a non-experimental longitudinal design. A formative evaluation investigated the implementation and initial impact of the mental health indicators using mixed methods (document review, survey, and interview). Quantitative data was explored using descriptive and comparative statistics and a content and theme analysis of the qualitative interviews was conducted. Survey responses were received from 32 out of 36 physicians from the three sites. Interviews were conducted with 15 providers. Findings This evaluation illustrated providers' perceived attitudes, knowledge, skills, and behaviours related to recognizing and treating depression and expanded our understanding of primary care processes related to managing depression related to the implementation of a new initiative. Depression is viewed as an important problem in primary care practice that is time consuming to diagnose, manage and treat and requires further investigation. Implementation of the PIN mental health indicators was variable across sites and providers. There was an increase in use of the indicators across time and a general sentiment that benefits of screening outweigh the costs; however, the benefit of screening for depression remains unclear. Consistent with current guidelines, a question the findings of this evaluation suggests is whether there are more effective ways of having an impact on depression within primary care than screening.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) 2016 Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Adults with Major Depressive Disorder: Section 1. Disease Burden and Principles of Care

BACKGROUND

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) conducted a revision of the 2009 guidelines by updating the evidence and recommendations. The scope of the 2016 guidelines remains the management of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults, with a target audience of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals.

METHODS

Using the question-answer format, we conducted a systematic literature search focusing on systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Evidence was graded using CANMAT-defined criteria for level of evidence. Recommendations for lines of treatment were based on the quality of evidence and clinical expert consensus. This section is the first of six guidelines articles.

RESULTS

In Canada, the annual and lifetime prevalence of MDD was 4.7% and 11.3%, respectively. MDD represents the second leading cause of global disability, with high occupational and economic impact mainly attributable to indirect costs. DSM-5 criteria for depressive disorders remain relatively unchanged, but other clinical dimensions (sleep, cognition, physical symptoms) may have implications for depression management. e-Mental health is increasingly used to support clinical and self-management of MDD. In the 2-phase (acute and maintenance) treatment model, specific goals address symptom remission, functional recovery, improved quality of life, and prevention of recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

The burden attributed to MDD remains high, whether from individual distress, functional and relationship impairment, reduced quality of life, or societal economic cost. Applying core principles of care, including comprehensive assessment, therapeutic alliance, support of self-management, evidence-informed treatment, and measurement-based care, will optimize clinical, quality of life, and functional outcomes in MDD.

Routine primary care screening for intimate partner violence and other adverse psychosocial exposures: what's the evidence?

BACKGROUND

Family physicians and other primary care practitioners are encouraged or expected to screen for an expanding array of concerns and problems including intimate partner violence (IPV). While there is no debate about the deleterious impact of violence and other adverse psychosocial exposures on health status, the key question raised here is about the value of routine screening in primary care for such exposures.

DISCUSSION

Several characteristics of IPV have led to consideration for routine IPV screening in primary care and during other healthcare encounters (e.g., emergency room visits) including: its high prevalence, concern that it may not be raised spontaneously if not prompted, and the burden of suffering associated with this exposure. Despite these factors, there are now three randomized controlled trials showing that screening does not reduce IPV or improve health outcomes. Yet, recommendations to routinely screen for IPV persist. Similarly, adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) have several characteristics (e.g., high frequency, predictive power of such experiences for subsequent health problems, and concerns that they might not be identified without screening) suggesting they too should be considered for routine primary care screening. However, demonstration of strong associations with health outcomes, and even causality, do not necessarily translate into the benefits of routine screening for such experiences. To date, there have been no controlled trials examining the impact and outcomes - either beneficial or harmful - of routine ACEs screening. Even so, there is an expansion of calls for routine screening for ACEs. While we must prioritize how best to support and intervene with patients who have experienced IPV and other adverse psychosocial exposures, we should not be lulled into a false sense of security that our routine use of "screeners" results in better health outcomes or less violence without evidence for such. Decisions about implementation of routine screening for psychosocial concerns need similar rigorous debate and scrutiny of empirical evidence as that recommended for proposed physical health screening (e.g., for prostate and breast cancer).

Reporting completeness and transparency of meta-analyses of depression screening tool accuracy: A comparison of meta-analyses published before and after the PRISMA statement

OBJECTIVE

Meta-analyses that are conducted rigorously and reported completely and transparently can provide accurate evidence to inform the best possible healthcare decisions. Guideline makers have raised concerns about the utility of existing evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools. The objective of our study was to evaluate the transparency and completeness of reporting in meta-analyses of the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools using the PRISMA tool adapted for diagnostic test accuracy meta-analyses.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and PsycINFO from January 1, 2005 through March 13, 2016 for recent meta-analyses in any language on the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools. Two reviewers independently assessed the transparency in reporting using the PRISMA tool with appropriate adaptations made for studies of diagnostic test accuracy.

RESULTS

We identified 21 eligible meta-analyses. Twelve of 21 meta-analyses complied with at least 50% of adapted PRISMA items. Of 30 adapted PRISMA items, 11 were fulfilled by ≥80% of included meta-analyses, 3 by 50-79% of meta-analyses, 7 by 25-45% of meta-analyses, and 9 by <25%. On average, post-PRISMA meta-analyses complied with 17 of 30 items compared to 13 of 30 items pre-PRISMA.

CONCLUSIONS

Deficiencies in the transparency of reporting in meta-analyses of the diagnostic test accuracy of depression screening tools of meta-analyses were identified. Authors, reviewers, and editors should adhere to the PRISMA statement to improve the reporting of meta-analyses of the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools.

Sample sizes and precision of estimates of sensitivity and specificity from primary studies on the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools: a survey of recently published studies

Depression screening tools are useful to the extent that they accurately discriminate between depressed and non-depressed patients. Studies without enough patients to generate precise estimates make it difficult to evaluate accuracy. We conducted a survey of recently published studies on depression screening tool accuracy to evaluate the percentage with sample size calculations; the percentage that provided confidence intervals; and precision, based on the width and lower bounds of 95% confidence intervals for sensitivity and specificity. We calculated 95% confidence intervals, if possible, when not provided. Only three of 89 studies (3%) described a viable sample size calculation. Only 30 studies (34%) provided reasonably accurate confidence intervals. Of 86 studies where 95% confidence intervals were provided or could be calculated, only seven (8%) had interval widths for sensitivity of ≤ 10%, whereas 53 (62%) had widths of ≥ 21%. Lower bounds of confidence intervals were < 80% for 84% of studies for sensitivity and 66% of studies for specificity. Overall, few studies on the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools reported sample size calculations, and the number of patients in most studies was too small to generate reasonably precise accuracy estimates. The failure to provide confidence intervals in published reports may obscure these shortcomings. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Yield and Efficiency of Mental Health Screening: A Comparison of Screening Protocols at Intake to Prison

Background

The value of screening for mental illness has increasingly been questioned in low prevalence settings due to high false positive rates. However, since false positive rates are related to prevalence, screening may be more effective in higher prevalence settings, including correctional institutions. We compared the yield (i.e. newly detected cases) and efficiency (i.e. false positives) of five screening protocols to detect mental illness in prisons against the use of mental health history taking (the prior approach to detecting mental illness).

Methods and Findings

We estimated the accuracy of the six approaches to detect an Axis I disorder among a sample of 467 newly admitted male inmates (83.1% participation rate). Mental health history taking identified only 41.0% (95% CI 32.1, 50.6) of all inmates with mental illness. Screening protocols identified between 61.9 and 85.7% of all cases, but referred between 2 and 3 additional individuals who did not have a mental illness for every additional case detected compared to the mental health history taking approach. In low prevalence settings (i.e. 10% or less) the screening protocols would have had between 4.6 and 16.2 false positives per true positive.

Conclusions

While screening may not be practical in low prevalence settings, it may be beneficial in jails and prisons where the prevalence of mental illness is higher. Further consideration of the context in which screening is being implemented, and of the impacts of policies and clinical practices on the benefits and harms of screening is needed to determine the effectiveness of screening in these settings.

Methodological quality of meta-analyses of the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools

OBJECTIVE

Concerns have been raised that primary studies of diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools may exaggerate estimates of accuracy and that this could also influence the results of meta-analyses. No studies, however, have evaluated the quality of meta-analyses of depression screening tools. Our objective was to evaluate the quality of meta-analyses of the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and PsycINFO from January 1, 2005 through March 13, 2016 for recent meta-analyses in any language on the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools. Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality using the AMSTAR tool with appropriate adaptations made for studies of diagnostic test accuracy.

RESULTS

We identified 21 eligible meta-analyses. The majority provided a list of included studies (100%), included a comprehensive literature search (95%) and assessed risk of bias of included studies (71%). Meta-analyses less consistently included non-published evidence (38%), listed excluded studies (33%), incorporated risk of bias findings into conclusions (33%), and assessed selective cutoff reporting (29%). Meta-analyses rarely reported that duplicate study selection or data extraction occurred (14%), mentioned 'a priori' protocols (10%), or reported on conflicts of interest (0%) or funding sources (0%) of primary studies. Only 6 of 21 included meta-analyses complied with at least 7 of 14 adapted AMSTAR items.

CONCLUSIONS

The methodological quality of most meta-analyses of the diagnostic test accuracy of depression screening tools is suboptimal. Improving quality will reduce the risk of inaccurate estimates of accuracy and inappropriate inferences.

The relationship between sexual orientation and depression in a national population sample

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between sexual orientation and depression in a nationally representative population to determine if sexual minorities report higher levels of depression than the remainder of the population.

BACKGROUND

Depression is a highly prevalent and disabling chronic disorder worldwide. Prior research utilizing national population samples have reported that members of sexual minorities are at higher risk for depression when compared to heterosexual people. More recent studies have revealed differences in depression risk based on sexual orientation, sexual activity and sex. There have been significant shifts in societal attitudes towards sexual minorities in recent decades. Continuing research into predictors for reporting depression amongst sexual minorities is needed.

METHODS

National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey cycles 2005-2012 were used to identify sexual minority status based on declared sexual orientation and presence of same-sex sexual activity. Complex samples logistic and multivariate regression models were used to predict depression adjusted for sexual orientation, sexual activity, age, sex, marital status, education, income, race/ethnicity, employment and health status.

RESULTS

Sexual orientation was not a significant independent predictor of depressive symptoms overall. Gay men reported lower levels of depressive symptoms than heterosexual men. In the sex stratified analyses, men who reported having sex with men were five times more likely to report depressive symptomatology compared to men who reported opposite sex partners (2005-2008 adjusted odds ratios: 5·00; 95% confidence interval: 1·44-17·38; 2009-2012 adjusted odds ratios: 5·10; 95% confidence interval: 1·33-19·54) after controlling for sexual orientation.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of our analyses indicate that homosexually experienced heterosexual men appear to be at highest risk for depression. Furthermore, reported physical health status was a significant independent predictor of depression in all models, suggesting a strong link between physical and mental health.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Health care providers should inquire about sexual orientation and sexual behaviour as part of a routine health history and be familiar with the unique health needs of sexual minorities to tailor clinical practice and foster safe, inclusive, health care environments.

Diagnostic accuracy of the Depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D) for detecting major depression: protocol for a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analyses

INTRODUCTION

The Depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D) has been recommended for depression screening in medically ill patients. Many existing HADS-D studies have used exploratory methods to select optimal cut-offs. Often, these studies report results from a small range of cut-off thresholds; cut-offs with more favourable accuracy results are more likely to be reported than others with worse accuracy estimates. When published data are combined in meta-analyses, selective reporting may generate biased summary estimates. Individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses can address this problem by estimating accuracy with data from all studies for all relevant cut-off scores. In addition, a predictive algorithm can be generated to estimate the probability that a patient has depression based on a HADS-D score and clinical characteristics rather than dichotomous screening classification alone. The primary objectives of our IPD meta-analyses are to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the HADS-D to detect major depression among adults across all potentially relevant cut-off scores and to generate a predictive algorithm for individual patients. We are already aware of over 100 eligible studies, and more may be identified with our comprehensive search.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Data sources will include MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Eligible studies will have datasets where patients are assessed for major depression based on a validated structured or semistructured clinical interview and complete the HADS-D within 2 weeks (before or after). Risk of bias will be assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis will be conducted for the full range of plausible cut-off values, and a predictive algorithm for individual patients will be generated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The findings of this study will be of interest to stakeholders involved in research, clinical practice and policy.

Adult health checkup: Update on the Preventive Care Checklist Form©

OBJECTIVE

To describe updates to the Preventive Care Checklist Form© to help family physicians stay up to date with current preventive health care recommendations.

QUALITY OF EVIDENCE

The Ovid MEDLINE database was searched using specified key words and other terms relevant to the periodic health examination. Secondary sources, such as the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, the Public Health Agency of Canada, the Trip database, and the Canadian Medical Association Infobase, were also searched. Recommendations for preventive health care for average-risk adults were reviewed. Strong and weak recommendations are presented on the form in bold and italic text, respectively.

MAIN MESSAGE

Updates were made to the form based on the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care recommendations on screening for obesity (2015), cervical cancer (2013), depression (2013), osteoporosis (2013), hypertension (2012), diabetes (2012, 2013), and breast cancer (2011). Updates were made based on recommendations from other Canadian organizations on screening for HIV (2013), screening for sexually transmitted infections (2013), immunizations (2012 to 2014), screening for dyslipidemia (2012), fertility counseling for women (2011, 2012), and screening for colorectal cancer (2010). Some previous recommendations were removed and others lacking evidence were not included.

CONCLUSION

The Preventive Care Checklist Form has been updated with current recommendations to enable family physicians to provide comprehensive, evidence-based care to patients during periodic health examinations.

Points to consider for reporting, screening for and preventing selected comorbidities in chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases in daily practice: a EULAR initiative

In chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases, comorbidities such as cardiovascular diseases and infections are suboptimally prevented, screened for and managed. The objective of this European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) initiative was to propose points to consider to collect comorbidities in patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases. We also aimed to develop a pragmatic reporting form to foster the implementation of the points to consider. In accordance with the EULAR Standardised Operating Procedures, the process comprised (1) a systematic literature review of existing recommendations on reporting, screening for or preventing six selected comorbidities: ischaemic cardiovascular diseases, malignancies, infections, gastrointestinal diseases, osteoporosis and depression and (2) a consensus process involving 21 experts (ie, rheumatologists, patients, health professionals). Recommendations on how to treat the comorbidities were not included in the document as they vary across countries. The literature review retrieved 42 articles, most of which were recommendations for reporting or screening for comorbidities in the general population. The consensus process led to three overarching principles and 15 points to consider, related to the six comorbidities, with three sections: (1) reporting (ie, occurrence of the comorbidity and current treatments); (2) screening for disease (eg, mammography) or for risk factors (eg, smoking) and (3) prevention (eg, vaccination). A reporting form (93 questions) corresponding to a practical application of the points to consider was developed. Using an evidence-based approach followed by expert consensus, this EULAR initiative aims to improve the reporting and prevention of comorbidities in chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Next steps include dissemination and implementation.

Case finding and screening clinical utility of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9 and PHQ-2) for depression in primary care: a diagnostic meta-analysis of 40 studies

BACKGROUND

The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) is the most commonly used measure to screen for depression in primary care but there is still lack of clarity about its accuracy and optimal scoring method.

AIMS

To determine via meta-analysis the diagnostic accuracy of the PHQ-9-linear, PHQ-9-algorithm and PHQ-2 questions to detect major depressive disorder (MDD) among adults.

METHOD

We systematically searched major electronic databases from inception until June 2015. Articles were included that reported the accuracy of PHQ-9 or PHQ-2 questions for diagnosing MDD in primary care defined according to standard classification systems. We carried out a meta-analysis, meta-regression, moderator and sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 26 publications reporting on 40 individual studies were included representing 26 902 people (median 502, s.d.=693.7) including 14 760 unique adults of whom 14.3% had MDD. The methodological quality of the included articles was acceptable. The meta-analytic area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the PHQ-9-linear and the PHQ-2 was significantly higher than the PHQ-9-algorithm, a difference that was maintained in head-to-head meta-analysis of studies. Our best estimates of sensitivity and specificity were 81.3% (95% CI 71.6-89.3) and 85.3% (95% CI 81.0-89.1), 56.8% (95% CI 41.2-71.8) and 93.3% (95% CI 87.5-97.3) and 89.3% (95% CI 81.5-95.1) and 75.9% (95% CI 70.1-81.3) for the PHQ-9-linear, PHQ-9-algorithm and PHQ-2 respectively. For case finding (ruling in a diagnosis), none of the methods were suitable but for screening (ruling out non-cases), all methods were encouraging with good clinical utility, although the cut-off threshold must be carefully chosen.

CONCLUSIONS

The PHQ can be used as an initial first step assessment in primary care and the PHQ-2 is adequate for this purpose with good acceptability. However, neither the PHQ-2 nor the PHQ-9 can be used to confirm a clinical diagnosis (case finding).

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

None.

COPYRIGHT AND USAGE

© The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2016. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Non-Commercial, No Derivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) licence.

Risk of Bias from Inclusion of Currently Diagnosed or Treated Patients in Studies of Depression Screening Tool Accuracy: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Recently Published Primary Studies and Meta-Analyses

BACKGROUND

Depression screening can improve upon usual care only if screening tools accurately identify depressed patients who would not otherwise be recognized by healthcare providers. Inclusion of patients already being treated for depression in studies of screening tool accuracy would inflate estimates of screening accuracy and yield. The present study investigated (1) the proportion of primary studies of depression screening tool accuracy that were recently published in journals listed in MEDLINE, which appropriately excluded currently diagnosed or treated patients; and (2) whether recently published meta-analyses identified the inclusion of currently diagnosed or treated patients as a potential source of bias.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched from January 1, 2013 through March 27, 2015 for primary studies and meta-analyses on depression screening tool accuracy.

RESULTS

Only 5 of 89 (5.6%) primary studies excluded currently diagnosed or treated patients from any analyses and only 3 (3.4%) from main analyses. In 3 studies that reported the number of patients excluded due to current treatment, the number of excluded patients was more than twice the number of newly identified depression cases. None of 5 meta-analyses identified the inclusion of currently diagnosed and treated patients as a potential source of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The inclusion of currently diagnosed and treated patients in studies of depression screening tool accuracy is a problem that limits the applicability of research findings for actual clinical practice. Studies are needed that evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools among only untreated patients who would potentially be screened in practice.

Rethinking the Well Woman Visit: A Scoping Review to Identify Eight Priority Areas for Well Woman Care in the Era of the Affordable Care Act

PURPOSE

The annual pap smear for cervical cancer screening, once a mainstay of the well woman visit (WWV), is no longer recommended for most low-risk women. This change has led many women and their health care providers to wonder if they should abandon this annual preventive health visit altogether. Changing guidelines coinciding with expanded WWV coverage for millions of American women under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act have created confusion for health care consumers and care givers alike. Is there evidence to support continued routine preventive health visits for women and, if so, what would ideally constitute the WWV of today?

METHODS

A scoping review of the literature was undertaken to appraise the current state of evidence regarding a wide range of possible elements to identify priority areas for the WWV.

FINDINGS

A population health perspective taking into consideration the reproductive health needs of women as well as the preventable and modifiable leading causes of death and disability was used to identify eight domains for the WWV of today: 1) reproductive life planning and sexual health, 2) cardiovascular disease and stroke, 3) prevention, screening, and early detection of cancers, 4) unintended injury, 5) anxiety, depression, substance abuse, and suicidal intent, 6) intimate partner violence, assault, and homicide, 7) lower respiratory disease, and 8) arthritis and other musculoskeletal problems.

CONCLUSIONS

The WWV remains a very important opportunity for prevention, health education, screening, and early detection and should not be abandoned.

Pregnant Women's Perceptions of Harms and Benefits of Mental Health Screening

Background

A widely held concern of screening is that its psychological harms may outweigh the benefits of early detection and treatment. This study describes pregnant women's perceptions of possible harms and benefits of mental health screening and factors associated with identifying screening as harmful or beneficial.

Methods

This study analyzed a subgroup of women who had undergone formal or informal mental health screening from our larger multi-site, cross-sectional study. Pregnant women >16 years of age who spoke/read English were recruited (May-December 2013) from prenatal classes and maternity clinics in Alberta, Canada. Descriptive statistics were generated to summarize harms and benefits of screening and multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with reporting at least one harm or affirming screening as a positive experience (January-December 2014).

Results

Overall study participation rate was 92% (N = 460/500). Among women screened for mental health concerns (n = 238), 63% viewed screening as positive, 69% were glad to be asked, and 87% took it as evidence their provider cared about them. Only one woman identified screening as a negative experience. Of the 6 harms, none was endorsed by >7% of women, with embarrassment being most cited. Women who were very comfortable (vs somewhat/not comfortable) with screening were more likely to report it as a positive experience.

Limitations

Women were largely Caucasian, well-educated, partnered women; thus, findings may not be generalizable to women with socioeconomic risk.

Conclusions

Most women perceived prenatal mental health screening as having high benefit and low harm. These findings dispel popular concerns that mental health screening is psychologically harmful.

Diagnostic accuracy of the Whooley questions for the identification of depression: a diagnostic meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Whooley questions in the identification of depression; and, to examine the effect of an additional 'help' question.

DESIGN

Systematic review with random effects bivariate diagnostic meta-analysis. Search strategies included electronic databases, examination of reference lists, and forward citation searches.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies were included that provided sufficient data to calculate the diagnostic accuracy of the Whooley questions against a gold standard diagnosis of major depression.

DATA EXTRACTION

Descriptive information, methodological quality criteria, and 2 × 2 contingency tables were extracted.

RESULTS

Ten studies met inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity was 0.95 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.97) and pooled specificity was 0.65 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.74). Heterogeneity was low (I(2)=24.1%). Primary care subgroup analysis gave broadly similar results. Four of the ten studies provided information on the effect of an additional help question. The addition of this question did not consistently improve specificity while retaining high sensitivity as reported in the original validation study.

CONCLUSIONS

The two-item Whooley questions have high sensitivity and modest specificity in the detection of depression. The current evidence for the use of an additional help question is not consistent and there is, as yet, insufficient data to recommend its use for screening or case finding.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42014009695.

Diagnostic accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for detecting major depression in pregnant and postnatal women: protocol for a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analyses

INTRODUCTION

Studies of the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools often used data-driven methods to select optimal cut-offs. Typically, these studies report results from a small range of cut-off points around whatever cut-off score is identified as most accurate. When published data are combined in meta-analyses, estimates of accuracy for different cut-off points may be based on data from different studies, rather than data from all studies for each cut-off point. Thus, traditional meta-analyses may exaggerate accuracy estimates. Individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses synthesise data from all studies for each cut-off score to obtain accuracy estimates. The 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is commonly recommended for depression screening in the perinatal period. The primary objective of this IPD meta-analysis is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the EPDS to detect major depression among women during pregnancy and in the postpartum period across all potentially relevant cut-off scores, accounting for patient factors that may influence accuracy (age, pregnancy vs postpartum).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Data sources will include Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Studies that include a diagnosis of major depression based on a validated structured or semistructured clinical interview administered within 2 weeks of (before or after) the administration of the EPDS will be included. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis will be conducted for the full range of plausible cut-off values. Analyses will evaluate data from pregnancy and the postpartum period separately, as well as combining data from all women in a single model.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study does not require ethics approval. Dissemination will include journal articles and presentations to policymakers, healthcare providers and researchers.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2015:CRD42015024785.

International Committee on Mental Health in Cystic Fibrosis: Cystic Fibrosis Foundation and European Cystic Fibrosis Society consensus statements for screening and treating depression and anxiety

Studies measuring psychological distress in individuals with cystic fibrosis (CF) have found high rates of both depression and anxiety. Psychological symptoms in both individuals with CF and parent caregivers have been associated with decreased lung function, lower body mass index, worse adherence, worse health-related quality of life, more frequent hospitalisations and increased healthcare costs. To identify and treat depression and anxiety in CF, the CF Foundation and the European CF Society invited a panel of experts, including physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, nurses, social workers, a pharmacist, parents and an individual with CF, to develop consensus recommendations for clinical care. Over 18 months, this 22-member committee was divided into four workgroups: Screening; Psychological Interventions; Pharmacological Treatments and Implementation and Future Research, and used the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome methodology to develop questions for literature search and review. Searches were conducted in PubMed, PsychINFO, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, Psychiatry online and ABDATA by a methodologist at Dartmouth. The committee reviewed 344 articles, drafted statements and set an 80% acceptance for each recommendation statement as a consensus threshold prior to an anonymous voting process. Fifteen guideline recommendation statements for screening and treatment of depression and anxiety in individuals with CF and parent caregivers were finalised by vote. As these recommendations are implemented in CF centres internationally, the process of dissemination, implementation and resource provision should be closely monitored to assess barriers and concerns, validity and use.

Office-based screening of common psychiatric conditions

Depression and anxiety disorders are common conditions with significant morbidity. Many screening tools of varying length have been well validated for these conditions in the office-based setting. Novel instruments, including Internet-based and computerized adaptive testing, may be promising tools in the future. The best evidence for cost-effectiveness currently is for screening of major depression linked with the collaborative care model for treatment. Data are not conclusive regarding comparative cost-effectiveness of screening for multiple conditions at once or for other conditions. This article reviews screening tools for depression and anxiety disorders in the ambulatory setting.

A diagnostic meta-analysis of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) algorithm scoring method as a screen for depression

BACKGROUND

The depression module of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) is a widely used depression screening instrument in nonpsychiatric settings. The PHQ-9 can be scored using different methods, including an algorithm based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria and a cut-off based on summed-item scores. The algorithm was the originally proposed scoring method to screen for depression. We summarized the diagnostic test accuracy of the PHQ-9 using the algorithm scoring method across a range of validation studies and compared the diagnostic properties of the PHQ-9 using the algorithm and summed scoring method at the proposed cut-off point of 10.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of diagnostic accuracy studies of the PHQ-9 using the algorithm scoring method to detect major depressive disorder (MDD). We used meta-analytic methods to calculate summary sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and diagnostic odds ratios for diagnosing MDD of the PHQ-9 using algorithm scoring method. In studies that reported both scoring methods (algorithm and summed-item scoring at proposed cut-off point of ≥10), we compared the diagnostic properties of the PHQ-9 using these methods.

RESULTS

We found 27 validation studies that validated the algorithm scoring method of the PHQ-9 in various settings. There was substantial heterogeneity across studies, which makes the pooled results difficult to interpret. In general, sensitivity was low whereas specificity was good. Thirteen studies reported the diagnostic properties of the PHQ-9 for both scoring methods. Pooled sensitivity for algorithm scoring method was lower while specificities were good for both scoring methods. Heterogeneity was consistently high; therefore, caution should be used when interpreting these results.

INTERPRETATION

This review shows that, if the algorithm scoring method is used, the PHQ-9 has a low sensitivity for detecting MDD. This could be due to the rating scale categories of the measure, higher specificity or other factors that warrant further research. The summed-item score method at proposed cut-off point of ≥10 has better diagnostic performance for screening purposes or where a high sensitivity is needed.

Collaborative care versus screening and follow-up for patients with diabetes and depressive symptoms: results of a primary care-based comparative effectiveness trial

OBJECTIVE

Depressive symptoms are common and, when coexisting with diabetes, worsen outcomes and increase health care costs. We evaluated a nurse case-manager-based collaborative primary care team model to improve depressive symptoms in diabetic patients.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a controlled implementation trial in four nonmetropolitan primary care networks. Eligible patients had type 2 diabetes and screened positive for depressive symptoms, based on a Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) score of ≥10. Patients were allocated using an "on-off" monthly time series. Intervention consisted of case-managers working 1:1 with patients to deliver individualized care. The main outcome was improvement in PHQ scores at 12 months. A concurrent cohort of 71 comparable patients was used as nonscreened usual care control subjects.

RESULTS

Of 1,924 patients screened, 476 (25%) had a PHQ score >10. Of these, 95 were allocated to intervention and 62 to active control. There were no baseline differences between groups: mean age was 57.8 years, 55% were women, and the mean PHQ score was 14.5 (SD 3.7). Intervention patients had greater 12-month improvements in PHQ (7.3 [SD 5.6]) compared with active-control subjects (5.2 [SD 5.7], P = 0.015). Recovery of depressive symptoms (i.e., PHQ reduced by 50%) was greater among intervention patients (61% vs. 44%, P = 0.03). Compared with trial patients, nonscreened control subjects had significantly less improvement at 12 months in the PHQ score (3.2 [SD 4.9]) and lower rates of recovery (24%, P < 0.05 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 2 diabetes who screened positive for depressive symptoms, collaborative care improved depressive symptoms, but physician notification and follow-up was also a clinically effective initial strategy compared with usual care.

The provision of mental health treatment after screening: exploring the relationship between treatment setting and treatment intensity

OBJECTIVE

Primary care screening programs for mental health disorders are designed to detect patients who might benefit from treatment. As such, the utility of these programs is predicated on the actions that take place in response to a positive screen. Our objective was to characterize the cascade of care delivery steps following a positive screen for a mental health disorder.

METHOD

We examined the care received by primary care patients over the year following a new positive screen for depression, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or alcohol misuse. We characterized whether the care adhered to practice guidelines for related mental health disorders and whether involvement of mental health specialists led to higher use of guideline-adherent practices.

RESULTS

Many patients received appropriate treatment in the primary care setting and those whose scores were consistent with more severe illness were more likely to receive care in a mental health setting. Patients with positive screens for depression and PTSD who went on to be seen in mental health clinics received care that was consistent with treatment guidelines for the related disorder most of the time. In the case of patients with positive screens for alcohol misuse, few received guideline-recommended medications in any setting. However, a substantial portion of patients received some alcohol-related counseling from their primary care physicians during the visit in which their alcohol misuse was detected.

CONCLUSION

It appears that the treatment system for mental health problems, which extends from primary care settings to mental health subspecialty settings, can provide adequate care when patients' mental health problems are identified through screening. The care provided in all settings can be improved, and additional steps to enhance the quality of care are warranted. This should include additional efforts to align screening and treatment.

The diagnostic accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2), Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for detecting major depression: protocol for a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) may be present in 10%-20% of patients in medical settings. Routine depression screening is sometimes recommended to improve depression management. However, studies of the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools have typically used data-driven, exploratory methods to select optimal cutoffs. Often, these studies report results from a small range of cutoff points around whatever cutoff score is most accurate in that given study. When published data are combined in meta-analyses, estimates of accuracy for different cutoff points may be based on data from different studies, rather than data from all studies for each possible cutoff point. As a result, traditional meta-analyses may generate exaggerated estimates of accuracy. Individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses can address this problem by synthesizing data from all studies for each cutoff score to obtain diagnostic accuracy estimates. The nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the shorter PHQ-2 and PHQ-8 are commonly recommended for depression screening. Thus, the primary objectives of our IPD meta-analyses are to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the PHQ-9, PHQ-8, and PHQ-2 to detect MDD among adults across all potentially relevant cutoff scores. Secondary analyses involve assessing accuracy accounting for patient factors that may influence accuracy (age, sex, medical comorbidity).

METHODS/DESIGN

Data sources will include MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. We will include studies that included a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual or International Classification of Diseases diagnosis of MDD based on a validated structured or semi-structured clinical interview administered within 2 weeks of the administration of the PHQ. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, perform full article review, and extract study data. Disagreements will be resolved by consensus. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis will be conducted for the full range of plausible cutoff values.

DISCUSSION

The proposed IPD meta-analyses will allow us to obtain estimates of the diagnostic accuracy of the PHQ-9, PHQ-8, and PHQ-2.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42014010673.

Office-based screening of common psychiatric conditions

Depression and anxiety disorders are common conditions with significant morbidity. Many screening tools of varying length have been well validated for these conditions in the office-based setting. Novel instruments, including Internet-based and computerized adaptive testing, may be promising tools in the future. The best evidence for cost-effectiveness currently is for screening of major depression linked with the collaborative care model for treatment. Data are not conclusive regarding comparative cost-effectiveness of screening for multiple conditions at once or for other conditions. This article reviews screening tools for depression and anxiety disorders in the ambulatory setting.

Depression screening and patient outcomes in pregnancy or postpartum: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Clinical practice guidelines disagree on whether health care professionals should screen women for depression during pregnancy or postpartum. The objective of this systematic review was to determine whether depression screening improves depression outcomes among women during pregnancy or the postpartum period.

METHODS

Searches included the CINAHL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases through April 1, 2013; manual journal searches; reference list reviews; citation tracking of included articles; and trial registry reviews. RCTs in any language that compared depression outcomes between women during pregnancy or postpartum randomized to undergo depression screening versus women not screened were eligible.

RESULTS

There were 9,242 unique titles/abstracts and 15 full-text articles reviewed. Only 1 RCT of screening postpartum was included, but none during pregnancy. The eligible postpartum study evaluated screening in mothers in Hong Kong with 2-month-old babies (N=462) and reported a standardized mean difference for symptoms of depression at 6 months postpartum of 0.34 (95% confidence interval=0.15 to 0.52, P<0.001). Standardized mean difference per 44 additional women treated in the intervention trial arm compared to the non-screening arm was approximately 1.8. Risk of bias was high, however, because the status of outcome measures was changed post-hoc and because the reported effect size per woman treated was 6-7 times the effect sizes reported in comparable depression care interventions.

CONCLUSION

There is currently no evidence from any well-designed and conducted RCT that screening for depression would benefit women in pregnancy or postpartum. Existing guidelines that recommend depression screening during pregnancy or postpartum should be re-considered.

Patients understanding of depression associated with chronic physical illness: a qualitative study

Background

Detection of depression can be difficult in primary care, particularly when associated with chronic illness. Patient beliefs may affect detection and subsequent engagement with management. We explored patient beliefs about the nature of depression associated with physical illness.

Methods

A qualitative interview study of patients registered with general practices in Leeds, UK. We invited patients with coronary heart disease or diabetes from primary care to participate in semi-structured interviews exploring their beliefs and experiences. We analysed transcripts using a thematic approach, extended to consider narratives as important contextual elements.

Results

We interviewed 26 patients, including 17 with personal experience of depression. We developed six themes: recognising a problem, complex causality, the role of the primary care, responsibility, resilience, and the role of their life story. Participants did not consistently talk about depression as an illness-like disorder. They described a change in their sense of self against the background of their life stories. Participants were unsure about seeking help from general practitioners (GPs) and felt a personal responsibility to overcome depression themselves. Chronic illness, as opposed to other life pressures, was seen as a justifiable cause of depression.

Conclusions

People with chronic illness do not necessarily regard depression as an easily defined illness, especially outside of the context of their life stories. Efforts to engage patients with chronic illness in the detection and management of depression may need further tailoring to accommodate beliefs about how people view themselves, responsibility and negative views of treatment.

There are no randomized controlled trials that support the United States Preventive Services Task Force Guideline on screening for depression in primary care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends screening adults for depression in primary care settings when staff-assisted depression management programs are available. This recommendation, however, is based on evidence from depression management programs conducted with patients already identified as depressed, even though screening is intended to identify depressed patients not already recognized or treated. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate whether there is evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that depression screening benefits patients in primary care, using an explicit definition of screening.

METHODS

We re-evaluated RCTs included in the 2009 USPSTF evidence review on depression screening, including only trials that compared depression outcomes between screened and non-screened patients and met the following three criteria: determined patient eligibility and randomized prior to screening; excluded patients already diagnosed with a recent episode of depression or already being treated for depression; and provided the same level of depression treatment services to patients identified as depressed in the screening and non-screening trial arms. We also reviewed studies included in a recent Cochrane systematic review, but not the USPSTF review; conducted a focused search to update the USPSTF review; and reviewed trial registries.

RESULTS

Of the nine RCTs included in the USPSTF review, four fulfilled none of three criteria for a test of depression screening, four fulfilled one of three criteria, and one fulfilled two of three criteria. There were two additional RCTs included only in the Cochrane review, and each fulfilled one of three criteria. No eligible RCTs were found via the updated review.

CONCLUSIONS

The USPSTF recommendation to screen adults for depression in primary care settings when staff-assisted depression management programs are available is not supported by evidence from any RCTs that are directly relevant to the recommendation. The USPSTF should re-evaluate this recommendation. Please see related article: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/12/14 REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (#CRD42013004276).

Depression screening in primary care: why the Canadian task force on preventive health care did the right thing

OBJECTIVE

To review the recent recommendation against routinely screening adults for depression in primary care settings by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC).

METHODS

We reviewed the CTFPHC recommendation and discussed it in the context of relevant evidence.

RESULTS

Depression screening, which involves using depression symptom questionnaires to attempt to identify patients who have unrecognized depression, was previously recommended by the CTFPHC in primary care settings with staff-assisted depression care programs in place to ensure accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and follow-up, but not in the absence of such programs. The CTFPHC recently updated this guideline and recommended against routinely screening adults for depression in primary care because there have not been any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have shown depression screening to be beneficial and because of a concern about the potentially high number of false-positive screens that would occur. Without evidence from RCTs of better health outcomes from screening, there are numerous factors that suggest that depression screening, even with collaborative depression care, may not be beneficial for patients, including the high rate of patients already treated, uncertainty about the ability of depression screening tools to accurately identify previously unrecognized patients, and relatively small treatment effects among patients with less severe depression who would be most likely to be identified through screening. Routine screening would expose some patients to avoidable risks and would pose a significant cost burden.

CONCLUSION

The CTFPHC recommendation to not screen for depression in primary care is consistent with available evidence. Clinicians in primary care settings should be alert to signs of depression and attend to symptoms through assessment and, as appropriate, referral or management, as recommended by the CTFPHC.

Screening for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care has a guideline on screening for depression among adults 18 years of age or older at average or high risk for depression. To provide evidence for an update of this guideline, we evaluated the literature on the effectiveness of screening for depression in adults.

METHODS

For the period 1994 to May 23, 2012, we searched the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Randomized controlled trials, observational studies and systematic reviews with evidence for the benefits or harms of screening for depression were eligible for inclusion. We performed screening for relevance, extraction of data, analysis of risk of bias and quality assessments in duplicate. We used the generic inverse variance method to conduct a meta-analysis. To determine confidence in the effect, we analyzed the results according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

Five quasi-experimental studies (before-after design with a nonrandomized control group) met the inclusion criteria for this review. These studies reported on the effect of community-based screening for depression, with follow-up on the risk of suicide completion, for older residents in regions of rural Japan with high suicide rates. Meta-analysis showed that the screening program had a protective effect on the overall incidence of suicide completion (ratio of rate ratios [RRR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.78). When sex was considered, the RRR indicated a significantly lower rate of suicide among women (RRR 0.37, 95% CI 0.21-0.66) but not among men (RRR 0.67, 95% CI 0.35-1.27). The overall GRADE rating applied to this evidence indicated very low quality. No studies addressing the harms of screening for depression met the inclusion criteria for the review.

INTERPRETATION

There is very limited research evidence allowing conclusions about the effectiveness of screening for depression in either average-risk or high-risk populations.