What are the barriers faced by general practitioners in treating depression and anxiety in Hong Kong?

General practitioners' perspectives on barriers to depression care: development and validation of a questionnaire

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) regularly feel challenged by the care of depressed patients and may encounter several barriers in providing best management. GPs' perspectives on barriers to depression care are a subject of growing interest but there is a lack of validated assessment tools. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a questionnaire assessing barriers to depression care (BDC-Q) encountered by GPs in France and the French-speaking part of Switzerland.

METHODS

The BDC-Q was constructed in five steps: Item development, content validation, pretesting, testing phase and test-retest reliability. The questionnaire items were generated through a literature search. An expert panel of GPs (n = 16) and psychiatrists (n = 3) validated the content and 20 GPs pretested the questionnaire to provide response process validity evidence. We then tested the questionnaire among 116 GPs and used principal component analysis and internal consistency testing (Cronbach's alpha) to structure it into consistent dimensions. Test-retest reliability using Pearson correlation coefficient was assessed with 30 GPs who completed the questionnaire twice after an interval of at least 2 weeks.

RESULTS

The 25 items BDC-Q was structured in five dimensions: (i) provision of care by the general practitioner, (ii) considering patients' attitudes towards depression, (iii) guidance for care, (iv) collaboration with mental health specialists and (v) access to mental health care.

CONCLUSIONS

The BDC-Q displays evidence of validity and reliability to meaningfully assess GPs' perspectives on barriers to depression care. It can be used both at a practice level within a quality improvement strategy, and at a broader level, to inform health planners and tailor appropriate strategies to improve depression care in the community.

Development of a tool to assess the impact of a brief counseling curriculum: Validation of the Attitudes to Psychological Interventions and Counseling in Primary Care (APIC-PC) survey

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate an instrument to assess knowledge and attitudes regarding the use of psychological interventions in primary care.

METHODS

A 13-item questionnaire was developed based on literature review and expert panel discussion. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were carried out to test the construct validity of the subscales. Item-scale correlations were used to test the construct validity of the items. Internal reliability was tested by Cronbach's alpha. Responsiveness of the instrument was evaluated by using independent t-test of pre and post program scores.

RESULTS

Exploratory factor analysis extracted four factors: skills and knowledge, confidence to provide counseling, willingness to provide counseling, and curriculum needs. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated excellent goodness-of-fit. Item scale correlations confirmed convergent and discriminant validity. Good responsiveness was shown on independent t-test of the pre and post responses.

CONCLUSIONS

The Attitudes to Psychological Interventions and Counseling in Primary Care (APIC-PC) survey is a valid and responsive instrument for assessing knowledge and attitudes regarding psychological approaches in patient management (mental health care).

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Psycho-social counseling skills training is increasingly being recognised as a valuable component of undergraduate primary care medical education. The APIC-PC is a useful tool for evaluating the impact of such programs.