Depression in primary care--more like asthma than appendicitis: the Michigan Depression Project

The primary care assessment and research of a telephone intervention for neuropsychiatric conditions with education and resources study: Design, rationale, and sample of the PARTNERs randomized controlled trial

While most patients with depression, anxiety, or at-risk drinking receive care exclusively in primary care settings, primary care providers experience challenges in diagnosing and treating these common problems. Over the past two decades, the collaborative care model has addressed these challenges. However, this model has been adopted very slowly due to the high costs of care managers; inability to sustain their role in small practices; and the perceived lack of relevance of interventions focused on a specific psychiatric diagnosis. Thus, we designed an innovative randomized clinical trial (RCT), the Primary Care Assessment and Research of a Telephone Intervention for Neuropsychiatric Conditions with Education and Resources study (PARTNERs). This RCT compared the outcomes of enhanced usual care and a novel model of collaborative care in primary care patients with depressive disorders, generalized anxiety, social phobia, panic disorder, at-risk drinking, or alcohol use disorders. These conditions were selected because they are present in almost a third of patients seen in primary care settings. Innovations included assigning the care manager role to trained lay providers supported by computer-based tools; providing all care management centrally by phone - i.e., the intervention was delivered without any face-to-face contact between the patient and the care team; and basing patient eligibility and treatment selection on a transdiagnostic approach using the same eligibility criteria and the same treatment algorithms regardless of the participants' specific psychiatric diagnosis. This paper describes the design of this RCT and discusses the rationale for its main design features.

The care provided by general practitioners for persistent depression

Purpose.

To examine the care provided by general practitioners (GPs) for persistent depressive illness and its relationship to patient, illness and consultation characteristics.

Subjects and method.

Using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview-Primary Health Care Version (CIDI-PHC) a sample of 264 patients with ICD-10 depression was identified among consecutive primary care patients in the Netherlands. At 1-year follow-up 78 of these patients (30%) still fulfilled the criteria of an ICD-10 depression and were considered persistent cases. At baseline and follow-up the GPs specified their diagnosis and treatment. The extent of recognition as a mental health problem, accuracy of diagnosis as a depression and treatment in accordance with clinical guidelines for depression was examined. In addition it was examined whether these steps in adequate GP care for persistent depression were related to patient, illness and consultation characteristics.

Results.

Twenty percent of the persistent depression cases were not recognized at baseline or during follow-up, 28% was recognized but not accurately diagnosed, 17% was accurately diagnosed, but did not receive adequate treatment and 35% was treated adequately. Recognition was associated with psychological reason for encounter; accurate diagnosis with absence of activity limitation days; and adequate treatment with severity of depression and higher educational level.

Conclusion.

Non-recognition, misdiagnosis and inadequate treatment are not limited to patients with a relatively mild and brief depression but are also prominent in patients with a persistent depression, who consulted their GP 8.2 times on average during the year their depression persisted.

Target-D: a stratified individually randomized controlled trial of the diamond clinical prediction tool to triage and target treatment for depressive symptoms in general practice: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Depression is a highly prevalent and costly disorder. Effective treatments are available but are not always delivered to the right person at the right time, with both under- and over-treatment a problem. Up to half the patients presenting to general practice report symptoms of depression, but general practitioners have no systematic way of efficiently identifying level of need and allocating treatment accordingly. Therefore, our team developed a new clinical prediction tool (CPT) to assist with this task. The CPT predicts depressive symptom severity in three months' time and based on these scores classifies individuals into three groups (minimal/mild, moderate, severe), then provides a matched treatment recommendation. This study aims to test whether using the CPT reduces depressive symptoms at three months compared with usual care.

METHODS

The Target-D study is an individually randomized controlled trial. Participants will be 1320 general practice patients with depressive symptoms who will be approached in the practice waiting room by a research assistant and invited to complete eligibility screening on an iPad. Eligible patients will provide informed consent and complete the CPT on a purpose-built website. A computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by practice and depressive symptom severity group, will randomly assign participants to intervention (treatment recommendation matched to predicted depressive symptom severity group) or comparison (usual care plus Target-D attention control) arms. Follow-up assessments will be completed online at three and 12 months. The primary outcome is depressive symptom severity at three months. Secondary outcomes include anxiety, mental health self-efficacy, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Intention-to-treat analyses will test for differences in outcome means between study arms overall and by depressive symptom severity group.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, this is the first depressive symptom stratification tool designed for primary care which takes a prognosis-based approach to provide a tailored treatment recommendation. If shown to be effective, this tool could be used to assist general practitioners to implement stepped mental-healthcare models and contribute to a more efficient and effective mental health system.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR 12616000537459 ). Retrospectively registered on 27 April 2016. See Additional file 1 for trial registration data.

Role of patient treatment beliefs and provider characteristics in establishing patient-provider relationships

BACKGROUND

Positive patient-provider relationships have been associated with improved depression treatment outcomes. Little is known about how patient treatment beliefs influence patient-provider relationships, specifically treatment alliance and shared decision making in primary care (PC).

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the relationship between patient treatment beliefs and patient-provider relationships by gender, race and current depression.

METHODS

We used a deductive parallel convergent mixed method design with cross-sectional data. Participants were 227 Black and White patients presenting with depression symptoms in PC settings. Individuals were randomized into either a quantitative survey (n = 198) or qualitative interview (n = 29) group. We used multiple ordinary least squares regression to evaluate the association between patient beliefs, as measured by the Treatment Beliefs Scale and the Medication Beliefs Scale, and treatment alliance or shared decision making. We concurrently conducted thematic analyses of qualitative semistructured interview data to explicate the nature of patient-provider relationships.

RESULTS

We found that patients who believed their provider would respectfully facilitate depression treatment reported greater bond, openness and shared decision making with their provider. We also identified qualitative themes of physicians listening to, caring about and respecting patients. Empathy and emotive expression increased patient trust in PC providers as facilitators of depression treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This work systematically demonstrated what many providers anecdotally believe: PC environments in which individuals feel safe sharing psychological distress are essential to early identification and treatment of depression. Interprofessional skills-based training in attentiveness and active listening may influence the effectiveness of depression intervention.

Bringing back the social history

The social environment of a child is a key determinant of the child's current and future health. Factors in a child's family environment, both protective and harmful, have a profound impact on a child's long-term health, brain development, and mortality. The social history may be the best all-around tool available for promoting a child's future health and well-being. It is a key first step in identifying social needs of a child and family so that they may benefit from intervention. This article focuses on key social history elements known to increase a child's risk of maltreatment and provides case examples.

"It's Like Being a Well-Loved Child": Reflections From a Collaborative Care Team

OBJECTIVE

The present case study examines how a collaborative care model for the treatment of depression works with a low-income, uninsured adult population in a primary care setting.

METHOD

The qualitative interviews were conducted in 2010 at a primary care clinic as part of an evaluation of the Integrated Behavioral Health program, a collaborative care model of identifying and treating mild-to-moderate mental disorders in adults in a primary care setting. A single-case study design of an interdisciplinary team was used: the care manager, the primary care physician, the consulting psychiatrist, and the director of social services. Other units of analysis included clinical outcomes and reports that describe the patient demographics, services offered, staff, and other operational descriptions.

RESULTS

Multiple themes were identified that shed light on how one primary care practice successfully operationalized a collaborative care model, including the tools they used in novel ways, the role of team members, and perceived barriers to sustainability.

CONCLUSIONS

The insights captured by this case study allow physicians, mental health practitioners, and administrators a view into key elements of the model as they consider implementation of a collaborative care model in their own settings. It is important to understand how the model operates on a day-to-day basis, with careful consideration of the more subtle aspects of the program such as team functioning and adapting tools to new processes of care to meet the needs of patients in unique contexts. Attention to barriers that still exist, especially regarding workforce and workload, will continue to be critical to organizations attempting integration.

A randomized-controlled trial of an intervention to improve antidepressant adherence among Latinos with depression

BACKGROUND

Studies have consistently shown that Latinos with depression have lower adherence to antidepressant medication. Given that low adherence is associated with poorer response to treatment, this is a likely source of unequal care. The current study examined the efficacy of a motivational interviewing intervention for improving antidepressant adherence among Latinos with a depressive disorder.

METHODS

Participants were 50 Latinos with a DSM-IV diagnosis of major depression or dysthymia who were receiving treatment at a community mental health center. Participants were recruited from July 2007 to December 2009 and were randomized to receive usual care (UC) or Motivational Enhancement Therapy for Antidepressants (META). META participants received three sessions of motivational interviewing as an enhancement to their usual care. Participants were assessed as baseline (time 1), 5 weeks (time 2), and 5 months (time 3). Antidepressant adherence was measured with the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS®) and changes in depression were measured with the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II).

RESULTS

After adjusting for covariates, META participants showed significantly higher antidepressant adherence than UC participants at time 2 (72% versus 42%, respectively, p < .01) and time 3 (60% versus 34%, p < .01). The groups did not differ on mean BDI-II score across time. However, after adjusting for covariates, META participants were significantly more likely to show symptom remission on the BDI-II, compared to UC participants (OR = 7.0, p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

This initial trial of META demonstrated feasibility and promising effects for improving antidepressant adherence. Some effects on depression were also observed.

Psychiatric Factors in Asthma

Emotional factors are an obstacle in the diagnosis and management of asthma. This review discusses three problem patterns: negative emotions in relatively normal patients with asthma; patients presenting possible functional symptoms and; patients presenting asthma in conjunction with psychiatric deviations. Negative emotions influence the symptoms and management of asthma, even in relatively normal patients. Psychogenic symptoms appear normal, but culminate in functional symptoms in a minority of patients. Diagnosing and treating asthma in patients with comorbid asthma and psychiatric symptoms is very difficult. On the one hand, treating asthma may often be just treating the emotions. On the other hand, negative emotions make the treatment of asthma guesswork. Physicians should estimate emotional influences in their patients' symptoms for an optimal evaluation of medication efficacy. Assessment and analysis of emotional factors surrounding exacerbations seems essential, e.g. emotional precipitants of asthma and asthma-evoked negative emotions. Moreover, patients should be informed about stress-induced breathlessness and the consequences of overuse of bronchodilators. When patients present with atypical symptoms, or do not properly respond to asthma medication, functional symptoms should be suspected. Psychiatric analysis may often lead to the conclusion that symptoms have a functional basis. In patients with comorbid asthma and anxiety disorders, asthma should be the focus for treatment since difficult-to-control asthma often causes anxiety problems in the first place. Moreover, panic-like symptoms in asthma are often related to sudden onset asthma exacerbations. However, in patients with comorbid asthma and depression, depression should become the focus of treatment. The reason is that optimal treatment of depressive asthmatics is probably impossible. Special issues include specific problems with children, compliance problems, and physicians' dilemmas regarding the simultaneous treatment of asthma and psychiatric symptoms.

Dynamic patterns in mood among newly diagnosed patients with major depressive episode or panic disorder and normal controls

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this pilot study was to compare the dynamic patterns of hourly mood variation among newly diagnosed primary care patients with major depressive disorder or panic disorder with patterns in patients with neither disorder.

METHOD

Five adult patients with major depressive episode, 5 with panic disorder, and 5 with neither disorder were asked to complete hourly self-assessments of anxiety and depression (using 100-mm visual analog scales) for each hour they were awake during a 30-day period. Time series were analyzed using ARIMA (autoregression, integration, moving average) modeling (to assess periodicity), Lyapunov exponents (to assess sensitivity to initial conditions indicative of chaotic patterns), and correlation dimension saturation (to assess whether an attractor is limiting change). The study was conducted from March to June 2003.

RESULTS

Controls displayed circadian rhythms with underlying chaotic variability. Depressed patients did not display circadian rhythm, but did show chaotic dynamics. Panic disorder patients showed circadian rhythms, but 2 of the 4 patients completing the self-assessments displayed nonchaotic underlying patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with major depressive disorder or panic disorder may differ from controls and from each other in their patterns of mood variability. There is a need for more research on the dynamics of mood among patients with mental disorders.

Diagnosing somatisation disorder (P75) in routine general practice using the International Classification of Primary Care

OBJECTIVE

(i) To analyze general practitioners' diagnosis of somatisation disorder (P75) using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC)-2-E in routine general practice. (ii) To validate the distinctiveness of the ICD-10 to ICPC-2 conversion rule which maps ICD-10 dissociative/conversion disorder (F44) as well as half of the somatoform categories (F45.0-2) to P75 and codes the other half of these disorders (F45.3-9), including autonomic organ dysfunctions and pain syndromes, as symptom diagnoses plus a psychosocial code in a multiaxial manner.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis of routine data from a German research database comprising the electronic patient records of 32 general practitioners from 22 practices. For each P75 patient, control subjects matched for age, gender, and practice were selected from the 2007 yearly contact group (YCG) without a P75 diagnosis using a propensity-score algorithm that resulted in eight controls per P75 patient.

RESULTS

Of the 49,423 patients in the YCG, P75 was diagnosed in 0.6% (302) and F45.3-9 in 1.8% (883) of cases; overall, somatisation syndromes were diagnosed in 2.4% of patients. The P75 coding pattern coincided with typical characteristics of severe, persistent medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). F45.3-9 was found to indicate moderate MUS that otherwise showed little clinical difference from P75. Pain syndromes exhibited an unspecific coding pattern. Mild and moderate MUS were predominantly recorded as symptom diagnoses. Psychosocial codes were rarely documented.

CONCLUSIONS

ICPC-2 P75 was mainly diagnosed in cases of severe MUS. Multiaxial coding appears to be too complicated for routine primary care. Instead of splitting P75 and F45.3-9 diagnoses, it is proposed that the whole MUS spectrum should be conceptualized as a continuum model comprising categorizations of uncomplicated (mild) and complicated (moderate and severe) courses. Psychosocial factors require more attention.

Meta-analyses of agreement between diagnoses made from clinical evaluations and standardized diagnostic interviews

Standardized diagnostic interviews (SDIs) have become de facto gold standards for clinical research. However, because clinical practitioners seldom use SDIs, it is essential to determine how well SDIs agree with clinical diagnoses. In meta-analyses of 38 articles published from 1995 to 2006 (N = 15,967 probands), mean kappas (z-transformed) between diagnoses from clinical evaluations versus SDIs were 0.27 for a broad category of all disorders, 0.29 for externalizing disorders, and 0.28 for internalizing disorders. Kappas for specific disorders ranged from 0.19 for generalized anxiety disorder to 0.86 for anorexia nervosa (median = 0.48). For diagnostic clusters (e.g. psychotic disorders), kappas ranged from 0.14 for affective disorders (including bipolar) to 0.70 for eating disorders (median = 0.43). Kappas were significantly higher for outpatients than inpatients and for children than adults. However, these effects were not significant in meta-regressions.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic agreement between SDIs and clinical evaluations varied widely by disorder and was low to moderate for most disorders. Thus, findings from SDIs may not fully apply to diagnoses based on clinical evaluations of the sort used in the published studies. Rather than implying that SDIs or clinical evaluations are inferior, characteristics of both may limit agreement and generalizability from SDI findings to clinical practice.

Population-based care of depression: team care approaches to improving outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To describe evidence-based quality improvement interventions in the primary care system that have been shown in randomized trials to the improve quality of care and outcomes of patients with depression.

METHODS

Medical literature review, focused on the concept of population-based care and research-proven ways to decrease the prevalence of depression in primary care, including several meta-analyses that described the effect of collaborative care interventions in improving the quality and outcomes of primary care patients with depression.

RESULTS

A total of 37 randomized trials of collaborative care interventions have shown that collaborative care, compared with usual primary care, is associated with 2-fold increases in antidepressant adherence, improvements in depressive outcomes that last up to 2 to 5 years, increased patient satisfaction with depression care, and improved primary care satisfaction with treating depression. From a health plan perspective, cost-effectiveness analyses suggest that for most depressed primary care patients, collaborative care is associated with a modest increase in medical costs, but markedly improved depression and functional outcomes. The few studies that have used a societal perspective that included examination of both direct and indirect costs found that collaborative care was associated with overall cost savings. For patients with depression and diabetes and depression and panic disorder, there is evidence that the increase in mental health care costs associated with collaborative care is offset by greater savings in medical costs.

CONCLUSION

Collaborative care is a high value intervention associated with improved quality of care, depression outcomes, and improved patient and primary care physician satisfaction.

Efficiency of a two-item pre-screen to reduce the burden of depression screening in pregnancy and postpartum: an IMPLICIT network study

OBJECTIVE

Systems for efficient case finding of women with major depression during pregnancy and postpartum are needed. Here we assess the diagnostic accuracy of a modified 2-item patient health questionnaire (PHQ-2) as a pre-screen in assessing depression.

METHODS

Cross-sectional assessments at 15 weeks' gestation (n = 414), 30 weeks' gestation (n = 334), and 6 to 16 weeks postpartum (n = 193) among women from a diverse set of races/ethnicities, participating in the IMPLICIT maternal care quality improvement network. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale score (>or=13) was used as the criterion measure for the PHQ-2.

RESULTS

A positive 2-item screen had sensitivity of 93%, 82%, and 80% and specificity of 75%, 80%, and 86% for Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale score of >or=13 for assessment at 15 and 30 weeks gestational age and postpartum, respectively. The positive/negative predictive values for the PHQ-2 were 44/98, 24/91, and 30/98 for each time point, respectively. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis suggested that 2-item assessments at each time point had approximately equal diagnostic validity.

CONCLUSIONS

Two questions were efficient to rule out depression and reduced the need for further screening of approximately 60% to 80% of women, depending on the point in pregnancy or postpartum. A diagnostic interview follow-up of women screening positive is still required.

Population-based care of depression: team care approaches to improving outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To describe evidence-based quality improvement interventions in the primary care system that have been shown in randomized trials to the improve quality of care and outcomes of patients with depression.

METHODS

Medical literature review, focused on the concept of population-based care and research-proven ways to decrease the prevalence of depression in primary care, including several meta-analyses that described the effect of collaborative care interventions in improving the quality and outcomes of primary care patients with depression.

RESULTS

A total of 37 randomized trials of collaborative care interventions have shown that collaborative care, compared with usual primary care, is associated with 2-fold increases in antidepressant adherence, improvements in depressive outcomes that last up to 2 to 5 years, increased patient satisfaction with depression care, and improved primary care satisfaction with treating depression. From a health plan perspective, cost-effectiveness analyses suggest that for most depressed primary care patients, collaborative care is associated with a modest increase in medical costs, but markedly improved depression and functional outcomes. The few studies that have used a societal perspective that included examination of both direct and indirect costs found that collaborative care was associated with overall cost savings. For patients with depression and diabetes and depression and panic disorder, there is evidence that the increase in mental health care costs associated with collaborative care is offset by greater savings in medical costs.

CONCLUSION

Collaborative care is a high value intervention associated with improved quality of care, depression outcomes, and improved patient and primary care physician satisfaction.

Clinical factors associated with relapse in primary care patients with chronic or recurrent depression

BACKGROUND

Because in most patients depression is a relapsing/remitting disorder, finding clinical factors associated with risk of relapse is important. The majority of patients with depression are treated in primary care settings, but few previous studies have examined predictors of relapse in primary care patients with recurrent or chronic depression.

METHODS

Data from a cohort of 386 primary care patients in a clinical trial were analyzed for clinical and demographic predictors of relapse over a one-year post-study observational period. Patients were selected for a high risk of relapse, based on a history of either 3 previous depressive episodes or dysthymia, and enrolled in a randomized trial of relapse prevention.

RESULTS

Factors found to be associated with significantly higher risk of relapse included poorer medication adherence in the 30 days prior to the trial, lower self-efficacy to manage depression, and higher scores on the Child Trauma Questionnaire.

LIMITATIONS

Use of a sample of limited diversity taken from a clinical trial, and use of retrospective information from patients with potential for recall bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this report suggest specific risk factors to be targeted in depression relapse prevention interventions. It is encouraging that two of the factors associated with increased risk of relapse, self-efficacy and medication adherence have been seen to improve with the intervention utilized in the primary care trial from which the studied cohort was drawn.

Observational studies of depression in primary care: what do we know?

BACKGROUND

We undertook a systematic review of observational studies of depression in primary care to determine 1) the nature and scope of the published studies 2) the methodological quality of the studies; 3) the identified recovery and risk factors for persistent depression and 3) the treatment and health service use patterns among patients.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO using combinations of topic and keywords, and Medical Subject Headings in MEDLINE, Headings in CINAHL and descriptors in PsycINFO. Searches were limited to adult populations and articles published in English during 1985-2006.

RESULTS

40 articles from 17 observational cohort studies were identified, most were undertaken in the US or Europe. Studies varied widely in aims and methods making it difficult to meaningfully compare the results. Methodological limitations were common including: selection bias of patients and physicians; small sample sizes (range 35-108 patients at baseline and 20-59 patients at follow-up); and short follow-up times limiting the extent to which these studies can be used to inform our understanding of recovery and relapse among primary care patients with depression. Risk factors for the persistence of depression identified in this review were: severity and chronicity of the depressive episode, the presence of suicidal thoughts, antidepressant use, poorer self-reported quality of life, lower self-reported social support, experiencing key life events, lower education level and unemployment.

CONCLUSION

Despite the growing interest in depression being managed as a chronic illness, this review identified only 17 observational studies of depression in primary care, most of which have included small sample sizes and been relatively short-term. Future research should be large enough to investigate risk factors for chronicity and relapse, and should be conducted over a longer time frame.

Classification and diagnosis of patients with medically unexplained symptoms

Patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) have little or no demonstrable disease explanation for the symptoms, and comorbid psychiatric disorders are frequent. Although common, costly, distressed, and often receiving ill-advised testing and treatments, most MUS patients go unrecognized, which precludes effective treatment. To enhance recognition, we present an emerging perspective that envisions a unitary classification for the entire spectrum of MUS where this diagnosis comprises severity, duration, and comorbidity. We then present a specific approach for making the diagnosis at each level of severity. Although our disease-based diagnosis system dictates excluding organic disease to diagnose MUS, much exclusion can occur clinically without recourse to laboratory or consultative evaluation because the majority of patients are mild. Only the less common, "difficult" patients with moderate and severe MUS require investigation to exclude organic diseases. By explicitly diagnosing and labeling all severity levels of MUS, we propose that this diagnostic approach cannot only facilitate effective treatment but also reduce the cost and morbidity from unnecessary interventions.

Depression case finding in primary care: a method for the mandates

The current mandates for depression screening in primary care create a dilemma for clinicians. How should screening be implemented in the face of limited evidence for sustainable strategies for effective depression monitoring and management in primary care. In this article we review the issues surrounding primary care depression screening, and develop the argument for a case-finding strategy that includes careful choice of a single instrument, focused identification of high-risk patients, and systematic monitoring of outcomes. We believe this is a sustainable method that primary care clinicians can implement to address the spirit of current depression screening mandates.

Venlafaxine extended-release in patients older than 80 years with depressive syndrome

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this evaluation was to assess the efficacy and safety of venlafaxine extended-release (ER) in very old primary care out-patients with depressive syndrome and associated anxiety symptoms.

METHODS

This was an observational, naturalistic, multicenter, prospective, open-label study in an outpatient population with a diagnosis of depressive syndrome with anxiety symptoms. Minimum scores of 17 and 10 on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D(17)) and Anxiety (HAM-A), respectively, were required. Daily doses of 75 mg to 225 mg of venlafaxine extended release (ER) were administered for 24 weeks. Effectiveness for depressive-anxious symptomatology was assessed using the HAM-D(17) and HAM-A scales.

PATIENTS

The 97 patients discussed in this report are a subgroup comprising all elderly patients, aged >or= 80 years, who were part of the larger observational, naturalistic, multicenter, prospective, open-label study and who had received venlafaxine ER for a maximum duration of 24 weeks.

RESULTS

At endpoint, remission rates were 57.1% (HAM-D(17) <or=7), 66.2% (HAM-A <or= 7), and 52% (HAM-D(17) <or=7 and HAM-A <or= 7). Twenty patients (20.6%) dropped out or were withdrawn. Adverse events were reported by seven (7.2%) patients, none were reported as serious.

CONCLUSIONS

Venlafaxine ER was shown to be an effective and safe drug for the treatment of very elderly primary care patients with depressive syndrome and associated anxiety symptoms.

Depressive symptom deterioration in a large primary care-based elderly cohort

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to examine the incidence and clinical predictors of symptom deterioration in depressed elderly patients who have responded to treatment in primary care.

METHOD

A cohort study of 901 older adults from 18 primary care clinics in five states who met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria for major depression and/or dysthymia at baseline interview, had participated in a trial of collaborative care for depression compared to usual care, and had improved to the point of no longer meeting criteria for major depression at 12 months were observed for one year (18 and 24 months) after enrolling in the original study.

RESULTS

A total of 40% of patients met criteria for significant depressive symptom deterioration over the 12- to 24-month observational period. Among usual-care patients, higher initial severity of depression and a higher number of residual DSM-IV depressive symptoms at 12 months were significant predictors of symptom deterioration. No variables predicted symptom deterioration in intervention patients.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a high rate of symptom deterioration among elderly patients in primary care who are treated for depression. Efforts to improve long-term outcomes of older patients with major depression and/or dysthymia should focus on providing more intensive treatment and follow up for patients with residual depressive symptoms.

The treatment of common mental health problems in general practice

BACKGROUND

Previous studies report GPs under-treat mental health disorders, particularly depression, and treatments are non-specific and lack an evidence base. They conclude further training and education of GP's is required.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the treatment of common mental health disorders in relation to the level and severity of psychological problems as defined by the GP and external assessment.

METHODS

Cross sectional survey of General Practice attenders in New Zealand. Fifty consecutive adult patients were recruited from each practice of 70 randomly selected GP's. The psychological status of 773 respondents selected via the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) was assessed, and details of management provided. Management options were compared with the level of psychological problem identified by the GP.

RESULTS

Treatment varied depending on the level of problem identification, and frequency of consultation, from 93% given treatment when an explicit diagnosis was made to 22.3% in patients with subclinical symptoms. The most commonly given treatment with an explicit diagnosis was psychotropic medication [73% (95% CI 63.6-82.9)] while for those patients with subclinical symptoms the most common form of treatment was discussion and counselling [15.7% (7.1-24.2)]. Only 1.7% (0.3-3.0) of patients with subclinical symptoms received psychotropics.

CONCLUSION

There is a clear association between the level of psychological problem identified and treatment. In contrast to previous views that treatment often appears to be given regardless of diagnosis, these results provide a picture of general practice management of common mental disorders more in line with evidence-based practice than previously described.

Differing mental health practice among general practitioners, private psychiatrists and public psychiatrists

BACKGROUND

Providing care for mental health problems concerns General Practitioners (GPs), Private Psychiatrists (PrPs) and Public Psychiatrists (PuPs). As patient distribution and patterns of practice among these professionals are not well known, a survey was planned prior to a re-organisation of mental health services in an area close to Paris

METHODS

All GPs (n = 492), PrPs (n = 82) and PuPs (n = 78) in the South-Yvelines area in France were informed of the implementation of a local mental health program. Practitioners interested in taking part were invited to include prospectively all patients with mental health problem they saw over an 8-day period and to complete a 6-month retrospective questionnaire on their mental health practice. 180 GPs (36.6%), 45 PrPs (54.9%) and 63 PuPs (84.0%) responded.

RESULTS

GPs and PrPs were very similar but very different from PuPs for the proportion of patients with anxious or depressive disorders (70% v. 65% v. 38%, p < .001), psychotic disorders (5% v. 7% v. 30%, p < .001), previous psychiatric hospitalization (22% v. 26 v. 61%, p < .001) and receiving disability allowance (16% v. 18% v. 52%, p < .001). GPs had fewer patients with long-standing psychiatric disorders than PrPs and PuPs (52%, 64% v. 63%, p < .001). Time-lapse between consultations was longest for GPs, intermediate for PuPs and shortest for PrPs (36 days v. 26 v. 18, p < .001). Access to care had been delayed longer for Psychiatrists (PrPs, PuPs) than for GPs (61% v. 53% v. 25%, p < .001). GPs and PuPs frequently felt a need for collaboration for their patients, PrPs rarely (42% v. 61%. v. 10%, p < .001). Satisfaction with mental health practice was low for all categories of physicians (42.6% encountered difficulties hospitalizing patients and 61.4% had patients they would prefer not to cater for). GPs more often reported unsatisfactory relationships with mental health professionals than did PrPs and PuPs (54% v. 15% v. 8%, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

GP patients with mental health problems are very similar to patients of private psychiatrists; there is a lack of the collaboration felt to be necessary, because of psychiatrists' workload, and because GPs have specific needs in this respect. The "Yvelines-Sud Mental Health Network" has been created to enhance collaboration.

General Practitioners' opinions on their practice in mental health and their collaboration with mental health professionals

BACKGROUND

Common mental health problems are mainly treated in primary care settings and collaboration with mental health services is needed. Prior to re-organisation of the mental health care offer in a geographical area, a study was organized: 1) to evaluate GPs' opinions on their day-to-day practice with Patients with Mental Health Problems (PMHP) and on relationships with Mental Health Professionals (MHPro); 2) to identify factors associated with perceived need for collaboration with MHPro and with actual collaboration.

METHODS

All GPs in the South Yvelines area in France (n = 492) were informed of the implementation of a local mental health program. GPs interested in taking part (n = 180) were invited to complete a satisfaction questionnaire on their practice in the field of Mental Health and to include prospectively all PMHP consultants over an 8-day period (n = 1519). For each PMHP, data was collected on demographic and clinical profile, and on needs (met v. unmet) for collaboration with MHPro.

RESULTS

A majority of GPs rated PMHP as requiring more care (83.4%), more time (92.3%), more frequent consultations (64.0%) and as being more difficult to refer (87.7%) than other patients. A minority of GPs had a satisfactory relationship with private psychiatrists (49.5%), public psychiatrists (35%) and social workers (27.8%). 53.9% had a less satisfactory relationship with MHPro than with other physicians. Needs for collaboration with a MHPro were more often felt in caring for PMHP who were young, not in employment, with mental health problems lasting for more than one year, with a history of psychiatric hospitalization, and showing reluctance to talk of psychological problems and to consult a MHPro. Needs for collaboration were more often met among PMHP with past psychiatric consultation or hospitalization and when the patient was not reluctant to consult a MHPro. Where needs were not met, GP would opt for the classic procedure of mental health referral for only 31.3% of their PMHP.

CONCLUSION

GPs need targeted collaboration with MHPro to support their management of PMHP, whom they are willing to care for without systematic referral to specialists as the major therapeutic option.

Medication management of depression: the impact of comorbid chronic medical conditions

OBJECTIVE

This paper addresses the following question: Does quality of care for depression differ between depressed persons with and without chronic medical conditions (CMCs)?

METHODS

We used a population-based mental health survey to identify respondents aged 18 to 64 with the diagnosis of major depression in the past year (N = 278). In our model, the dependent variable was guideline-level medication management of depression. Determinants for guideline-level care were modeled using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Depressed persons with CMCs were significantly more likely to receive guideline-level care for depression than were the depressed persons without CMCs (OR = 1.46; 95% C.I. = 1.12-1.90). This increased likelihood did not persist when the sample excluded persons seeing physicians at more than eight visits per year (OR = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.35-1.90). Previous psychiatric hospitalization was the only other significant determinant of guideline-level care.

CONCLUSION

Depressed persons with comorbid CMCs are more likely to receive guideline-level care for depression than are depressed persons without comorbid CMCs. However, the association did not persist once we excluded respondents who were high utilizers. This finding implies that further understanding of the interaction between depression care and comorbid CMCs will require a longitudinal focus on repeated physician-patient interactions.

Depression in primary care: effectiveness of venlafaxine extended-release in elderly patients; Observational study

Depression in the elderly is frequent but is often not recognized or treated as such. Few studies have assessed the effectiveness and tolerability of venlafaxine extended-release in patients over 60 years in primary care. This study aims to demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of venlafaxine extended-release in depressive disorders in this kind of population. Observational, multicenter and prospective study in an outpatient population over 60 years with depressive symptoms that needs pharmacological treatment and with a minimum score of 14 on the 17-items Hamilton rating scale for depression (HAM-D17). Effectiveness was assessed by HAM-D17. Physician's assessment of the patient's global status was also used and all the possible adverse effects were recorded. Venlafaxine extended-release was administered for 6 months at 75 mg per day dose, with the possibility of going up to 150 mg per day according to clinical criterion. Data of 1214 patients were obtained, with remission rates (HAM-D17 </= 7) in 70.2% of the patients and response rates (50% decrease in HAM-D17) of 83.2%. Global assessment of the patient's status significantly improved in each visit. After 6 months of treatment, 87.6% of the patients continued taking 75 mg per day of venlafaxine extended release. A total of 4.6% of the patients reported adverse events during the study. Venlafaxine extended-release is effective and safe for the treatment of depression in elderly patients managed by primary care physicians.

Physicians' constructions of depression: inside/outside the boundaries of medicalization

A qualitative study explored primary care physicians' experiences of diagnosing and treating depression. Twenty physicians participated in semi-structured interviews. Interview questions asked physicians to consider a range of topics such as the etiology of depression, the diagnostic process and treatment of depression. Transcripts were analyzed discursively with a view to exploring the ways in which physicians construct depression. In this article, physicians' constructions of depression are examined through exploration of their descriptions of this condition, as well as their recognition of the social context of depression. Based on this analysis, it was concluded that physicians' medicalized understandings of depression conflict with recognition of the social context of depression. The result of this conflict is dissonant descriptions of depression. One implication of this research is that physicians' training would benefit from the integration of multidisciplinary perspectives on depression, which would better reflect physicians' experiences in routine practice situations.

Knowledge About Recommended Treatment and Management of Major Depressive Disorder, Panic Disorder, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder Among Family Physicians

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been raised about whether primary care physicians appropriately manage mental disorders. We assessed family physicians' knowledge of appropriate management of major depressive disorder (MDD), panic disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). METHOD: Active members of the Texas Academy of Family Physicians (N = 3553) were mailed a questionnaire in 2002 asking them to indicate which treatments they felt were effective for MDD, panic disorder, and GAD and also to indicate how they had treated their last patient with each disorder. Their treatment strategies were then compared with current guidelines. RESULTS: 574 physicians (16%) responded. The percentage of respondents scoring at or above 80% for knowledge of effective treatments was 88.3% for MDD, 16.8% for panic disorder, and 12.5% for GAD (p <.001 for MDD vs. panic disorder or GAD). Only 0.3% of MDD patients, 1.4% of panic disorder patients, and 4.0% of GAD patients were not prescribed at least 1 of the effective treatments. Referral rates to mental health providers were high for all 3 conditions. CONCLUSIONS: There were significant gaps in physician knowledge of current guidelines on treating panic disorder and GAD, but not MDD. However, most patients with one of the disorders were either referred to a mental health provider or treated with an effective modality.

A method for rating charts to identify and classify patients with medically unexplained symptoms

BACKGROUND

As part of conducting a randomized control trial (RCT) to treat chronically high utilizing patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS), we developed the chart rating method reported here to identify and classify MUS subjects.

METHOD

Intended at this point only as a research tool, the method is comprehensive, uses explicit guidelines, and requires clinician raters. It distinguishes primary organic disease patients from those with primary MUS, quantifies medical comorbidities in primary MUS patients, and also distinguishes subgroups among MUS patients that we call somatization (resembles DSM-IV somatoform disorders) and minor acute illness (MAI) which differs from DSM-IV somatoform definitions. Scoring rules are used to generate the diagnoses above. The rules may be set according to the investigator's needs, from highly sensitive to highly specific.

RESULTS

We found high levels of agreement with the gold standard for MUS vs. organic disease (97.6%) and among raters for the key individual chart elements rated (92-96%). The method identified 206 MUS subjects and the extent of their medical comorbidities for entry into a RCT. It also identified somatization and MAI; the latter supports the validity of this newly reported MAI syndrome.

CONCLUSION

We concluded that this method offered research potential for identifying MUS patients, for quantifying their medical comorbidities, and for classifying MUS subgroups.

Do family physicians and internists differ in knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported approaches for depression?

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this investigation was to assess the relationship of primary care specialty training with self-assessed skill, knowledge, attitudes, and behavior toward depression recognition and management.

METHOD

A baseline self-report questionnaire was administered to 184 internists and 138 family physicians participating in a multisite depression intervention study.

RESULTS

There were no marked differences in knowledge of internists and family physicians regarding depression, in attitudes about the effectiveness of specific therapies, or in barriers to providing optimum treatment for depression. However, compared to internists, family physicians rated themselves as more skilled in the management of depression. When considering management of patients with moderate to severe depression, family physicians were more likely to report that they prescribed a selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor (relative odds (RO) = 3.51, 95 percent Confidence interval (CI) [2.19, 5.60] and to personally counsel patients (RO = 1.97, 95 percent CI [1.16, 3.38]) more than half the patients, but were less likely to refer to a specialist in mental health (RO = 0.52, 95 percent CI [0.33, 0.82]) than were internists. Additional potentially influential characteristics did not wholly account for the reported differences in practice according to specialty. Physicians of both specialties expressed considerable uncertainty in their knowledge of psychotherapy and in their evaluation of the effectiveness of other strategies for the prevention of recurrence of depression.

CONCLUSION

Strategies to improve mental health care should account for the orientation of primary care physicians to mental health issues.

Primary care pediatricians' roles and perceived responsibilities in the identification and management of maternal depression

OBJECTIVE

To describe the attitudes and approaches of primary care pediatricians in the identification and management of postpartum and other maternal depression.

METHODS

A national survey of randomly selected primary care pediatricians reported their management of the last recalled case of postpartum or other maternal depression, barriers to care, their attitudes about recognition and management, confidence in skills, and their willingness to implement new strategies to improve care.

RESULTS

Of 888 eligible primary care pediatricians, 508 (57%) completed surveys. Of these pediatricians, 57% felt responsible for recognizing maternal depression. In their last recalled case, respondents used an unstructured approach for identification based primarily on maternal appearance or complaints. When maternal depression was suspected, additional assessment of any kind was done by 48% of pediatricians. Although 7% perceived themselves to be responsible for treating maternal depression, pediatricians indicated they had an active role in 66% of cases in which they provided 1 or more brief interventions. The major barriers that were believed to limit their diagnosis or management were insufficient time for adequate history (70%) or education/counseling (73%) and insufficient training/knowledge to diagnose/counsel (64%) or treat (48%). Responses with cases involving maternal depression and the specific situation of postpartum depression were very similar. Forty-five percent were confident in their ability to diagnose maternal depression, whereas 32% were confident in their ability to diagnose postpartum depression. Nearly one fourth of pediatricians were willing to change their approach to identification. Pediatricians who felt responsible for recognizing maternal depression were more likely to assess more completely and intervene in cases as well as consider implementing change in their practice.

CONCLUSION

Pediatricians' current attitudes and skills that are relevant to maternal depression limit their ability to play an effective role in recognition and management. Future interventions need to address each of these issues. Educational efforts and new clinical approaches may be more effective with those who feel responsible and willing to change their approach to maternal depression.

Depression treatment in rural California: preliminary survey of nonpsychiatric physicians

Depressive disorders have been recognized as disabling conditions of public health proportions. However, in areas underserved by mental health professionals, the treatment of depressed patients becomes challenging. Furthermore, patients living in rural areas and communities underserved by health professionals are at risk for high levels of depressive symptoms and low access to care. Physicians (N = 58) of multiple nonpsychiatric specialties in Imperial County, a rural underserved area in California, were surveyed to ascertain their preferred strategies in the management of depressed patients. More than half (57%) of the respondents preferred to either refer patients to a mental health specialist (p < .01) as the only strategy, or in combination with counseling, prescribing medication, or both. The most commonly reported form of counseling was of a supportive nature. The most commonly prescribed drugs were selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (in order of frequency:fluoxetine, sertraline, and paroxetine). Tricyclic antidepressants and benzodiazepines were identified as first-line drugs by some pediatricians and surgeons. The results of this study support the need for enhanced postgraduate training in the treatment of depression for nonpsychiatric physicians, and greater exposure of psychiatric residents to rural psychiatry.

A three-component model for reengineering systems for the treatment of depression in primary care

Depression in primary care is a chronic disease. As with most chronic diseases, long-term adherence to treatment plans is problematic. Evidence-based systems of care address this problem, but persistence and dissemination of systems after testing is a new problem. The three-component model for the care of patients with depression is a system of widely applicable, easily transported strategies and materials to address dissemination. The three-component model provides a series of routines (processes for structured diagnostic and follow-up-care with a time line) and division of responsibility, including a role for a telephone care manager. In the three-component model, clinician and office education create a prepared practice that is predisposed to providing evidence-based depression management. Enabling elements include the telephone care managers, who are trained to promote adherence to a management plan, and a supervising psychiatrist. The key reinforcing element is care manager reports about patient response to treatment. The three-component model is bound together by a common depression diagnostic and severity measure that facilitates communication and treatment decisions.

Diagnosis of late life depression: the view from primary care

In the typical primary care practice, in which patients with a wide range of diseases and symptoms present with numerous needs, concerns, and requests, a chronic disease that lacks quantitative, biologically based diagnostic testing, such as depression, can present a daunting diagnostic challenge to even the best and most dedicated primary care physician. Depression does not compete well for patient and physician time and energy with other medical problems and medical co-morbidity in patients who seek care from their primary care physician. Primary care patients may be more comfortable with and accepting of depression being framed as a "normal" chronic disease rather than a psychiatric "brain" disease subject to cultural and generational stigmas, nihilism, and prejudice. Insurance parity in mental health care would make depression and other mental illness more legitimate in the eyes of patients, family members, employers, and physicians. Of particular value would be new and creative approaches to collaborative care, including telephone monitoring, nurse clinician outreach, and improved availability of psychiatric consultation in primary care, because elderly depressed patients often see the care of their depression as part of the integrated care of multiple chronic medical diseases, rather than a separate psychiatric problem to be referred for specialty care.

Depression in primary care: linking clinical and systems strategies

Depression is a serious, often chronic disease that can be managed effectively with a chronic care model in primary care settings. Depressed persons are likely to be seen by a primary care physician, but their condition often goes unrecognized and untreated. There are effective treatment models that consist of efficacious psychotherapeutic and pharmacological interventions, use of evidence-based guidelines for primary care treatment of depression, development of explicit plans and protocols, reorganization of practice, longitudinal follow-up, patient self-management, decision-making support, access to community resources and leadership commitment. Moving these models into everyday practice requires overcoming both clinical and system barriers. Barriers consist of issues surrounding patients, providers, practices, plans, and purchasers. An understanding of these barriers at each level helps to provide a framework for the changes required to overcome them. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation National Program on Depression in Primary Care will seek to apply simultaneously both clinical and system strategies in a new five-year initiative to overcome these barriers.

Treatments for late life depression in primary care--a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Depression is common among older people. It is associated with increased mortality and use of health services. We could identify no prior systematic review of treatment for depression in either primary care attenders or population samples of older people.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to carry out a systematic review of trials of treatments for depression of patients over 60 years of age in primary care or population samples.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Cinahl, the Cochrane Library, Psyclit, BIDS--Social Science and BIDS--Science Citation Indices for trials of drug treatment, interpersonal psychotherapy, cognitive behavioural psychotherapy, counselling and social interventions for late life depression in English, French or German published between 1980 and June 1999.

RESULTS

Of the studies identified, only two were of patients over 60 years of age and met all inclusion criteria for content and quality. Three further studies that were not restricted to but included patients over the age of 60 years also fulfilled our criteria. We found no studies of psychological therapies for depression in older people. With few exceptions, studies were limited to older people who reached a diagnostic threshold and excluded those with 'subcase level depression'.

CONCLUSION

There is little evidence of effectiveness for a variety of treatment approaches for depression in older people in primary care, particularly in those with less severe depression. As older people take more medication, making contra-indications to the use of antidepressant drugs more likely, there is a pressing need for studies of the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions in primary care settings.

Predictors, prodromes and incidence of postpartum depression

The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of clinically significant depression occurring between 1 and 4 months postpartum and to investigate whether somatic complaints, subsyndromal depressive symptoms, or birth-related concerns among non-depressed women at 1 month were predictive of postpartum depression. This is a prospective cohort study of 465 women from the Wisconsin Maternity Leave and Health Project (WMLHP). Women who were not depressed at 1 month postpartum were reassessed 3 months later for depression occurring at any time in the interval between 1 and 4 months postpartum. Depression was defined as either meeting the criteria for major depression on the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Diagnostic interview Schedule (DIS) or scoring above 15 on the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Physical symptoms were assessed by an adapted Health Responses Scale. Other measures were developed specifically for the WMLHP. Of 465 women, 27 (5.8%) became clinically depressed between 1 and 4 months postpartum. In a logistic regression analysis, four variables (maternal age, depression during pregnancy, thoughts of death and dying at 1 month postpartum, and difficulty falling asleep at 1 month postpartum) were predictive of depression at 4 months postpartum. Breast-feeding, mode of delivery, family income, parity and mother's education did not predict depression. The existence of subsyndromal depressive symptoms, particularly thoughts of death and dying, may represent a prodromal phase of depression and should alert clinicians to the possibility of future postpartum depression. Women with a history of depression during pregnancy should be monitored for signs of postpartum depression for a minimum of 4 months. Obstetricians are in a unique position during the postpartum check-up to screen women for these predictors of future postpartum depression and possibly to avert the development of a clinically significant depressive episode.

Treatment of depression related to recurrence: 10-year follow-up in general practice

OBJECTIVES

To study outcomes related to long-term treatment of depression and differences in treatments for first episodes of depression in patients with and without recurrences.

METHODS

A historic cohort design study with 222 general practice patients who had been followed up for 10 years after being diagnosed of depression. Prescriptions for antidepressants, psychotropics and referrals over the period of 10 years following the first diagnosis of depression were studied.

RESULTS

Over the 10-year period, the length of treatment with antidepressants and the doses prescribed were low compared to what is known to be efficacious in depression. This was also true for treatment during the first episode. Patients with a recurrent type of illness were more often treated with antidepressants and other psychotropics during their first episode than patients with only one episode of depression, but they were not referred any more often.

CONCLUSION

Even though treatment was not as recommended for depression, the majority of the patients did not have recurrences. Future prospective research is needed to study causal relationships between treatment of depression and long-term outcome.

Outcomes of recognized and unrecognized depression in an international primary care study

Longitudinal data from the World Health Organization Psychological Problems in General Health Care study were used to examine the relationship between recognition and outcomes among depressed primary care patients. A representative sample of primary care patients at 15 sites completed a baseline assessment including the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), the 28-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), and the Brief Disability Questionnaire (BDQ). The GHQ and BDQ were readministered after 3 months, and the GHQ, BDQ, and CIDI were readministered after 12 months. Of 948 patients with major depression at the baseline assessment, 42% were recognized by the primary care physician and given an appropriate diagnosis. Recognized patients were more severely ill (mean GHQ score 16.2 vs. 12.9, t = 5.44, p < 0.001) and more disabled (mean BDQ score 9.8 vs 8.2, t = 3.22, p < 0.001) at baseline. Recognized patients showed a significantly greater decrease in GHQ score at the 3-month assessment (6.1 vs 4.1, F = 5.33, df = 1, p = 0.02). At 12 months, recognized and unrecognized groups did not differ in either change in GHQ score or change in diagnostic status from baseline. Results were consistent across study sites. Our data suggest that recognition and appropriate diagnosis of depression in primary care is associated with significantly greater short-term improvement. The absence of a relationship between recognition and long-term outcomes may reflect limitations of this observational study. When considered along with other recent studies, these findings suggest that increasing recognition of depression in primary care is only a first step toward more appropriate treatment.

Diagnosis of depression by primary care physicians versus a structured diagnostic interview. Understanding discordance

In this paper, false-negative and false-positive cases of depressive illness are examined, differentiating levels of disagreement between a primary care physician's diagnosis and a standardized research diagnosis. Two stratified random samples of primary care patients in Seattle, USA (N = 373) and Groningen, The Netherlands (N = 340) were examined with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview-Primary Health Care Version (CIDI-PHC). Physician's severity ratings and diagnosis of psychological disorder were obtained. Three levels of disagreement between physician and CIDI diagnosis were distinguished: 1) complete disagreement about the presence of psychiatric symptoms (true false-negative and true false-positive patients); 2) disagreement over severity of recognized psychological illness (underestimated or overestimated); and 3) disagreement over the specific psychiatric diagnosis among those given a diagnosis (misdiagnosed or given another CIDI diagnosis). All three levels of disagreement were common. Only 27% of the false-negative cases were due to complete disagreement (true false-negatives), and 55% of the false-positives were due to complete disagreement (true false-positives). The true false-negative patients were younger, more often employed, rated their own health more favorably, visited their doctor for a somatic complaint and made fewer visits than the underestimated, misdiagnosed, and concordant positive patients. Complete disagreement in depressive diagnoses between the primary care physician and research interview is not as frequent as indicated by an undifferentiated false-negative/ false-positive analysis. Differentiating levels of disagreement does more justice to diagnostic practice in primary care and provides guidance on how to improve the diagnostic accuracy of primary care physicians.