High-quality antidepressant prescribing: please consider whether "perfection is the enemy of progress"

Clinical Practice Guideline for the Assessment and Treatment of Children and Adolescents With Major and Persistent Depressive Disorders

OBJECTIVE

To enhance the quality of care and clinical outcomes for children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD) and persistent depressive disorder (PDD). The aims are as follows: (1) to summarize empirically based guidance about the psychosocial and psychopharmacologic treatment of MDD and PDD in children and adolescents; and (2) to summarize expert-based guidance about the assessment of these disorders as an integral part of treatment, and the implementation of empirically based treatments for these disorders in clinical practice.

METHOD

Statements about the treatment of MDD and PDD are based upon empirical evidence derived from a critical systematic review of the scientific literature conducted by the Research Triangle Institute International-University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (RTI-UNC) Evidence-based Practice Center under contract with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Evidence from meta-analyses published since the AHRQ/RTI-UNC review is also presented to support or refute the AHRQ findings. Guidance about the assessment and clinical implementation of treatments for MDD and PDD is informed by expert opinion and consensus as presented in previously published clinical practice guidelines, chapters in leading textbooks of child and adolescent psychiatry, the DSM-5-TR, and government-affiliated prescription drug information websites.

RESULTS

Psychotherapy (specifically, cognitive-behavioral and interpersonal therapies) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) medication have some rigorous (randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses) empirical support as treatment options. Because effective treatment outcomes are predicated in part upon accuracy of the diagnosis, depth of the clinical formulation, and breadth of the treatment plan, comprehensive, evidence-based assessment may enhance evidence-based treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Disproportionate to the magnitude of the problem, there are significant limitations in the quality and quantity of rigorous empirical support for the etiology, assessment, and treatment of depression in children and adolescents. In the context of a protracted severe shortage of child and adolescent-trained behavioral health specialists, the demonstration of convenient, efficient, cost-effective, and user-friendly delivery mechanisms for safe and effective treatment of MDD and PDD is a key research need. Other research priorities include the sequencing and comparative effectiveness of depression treatments, delineation of treatment mediators and moderators, effective approaches to treatment nonresponders and disorder relapse/recurrence, long-term effects and degree of suicide risk with SSRI use, and the discovery of novel pharmacologic or interventional treatments.

Community paediatricians' experience of joint working with child and adolescent mental health services: findings from a British national survey

OBJECTIVES

Children and young people (CYP) presenting to paediatric or child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) often have needs spanning medical and psychiatric diagnoses. However, joint working between paediatrics and CAMHS remains limited. We surveyed community paediatricians in the UK to inform better strategies to improve joint working with CAMHS.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey of community paediatricians through the British Association for Community Child Health (BACCH) on how much joint working they experienced with CAMHS, any hindrances to more collaborative working, and the impact on service users and service provision. This paper is based on thematic analysis of 327 free-text comments by paediatricians.

RESULTS

A total of 245 community paediatricians responded to the survey (22% of BACCH members). However, some responses were made on behalf of teams rather than for individual paediatricians. The following were the key themes identified: a strong support for joint working between community paediatrics and CAMHS; an acknowledgement that current levels of joint working were limited; the main barriers to joint working were splintered commissioning and service structures (eg, where integrated care systems fund different providers to meet overlapping children's health needs); and the most commonly reported negative impact of non-joint working was severely limited access to CAMHS for CYP judged by paediatricians to require mental health support, particularly those with autism spectrum disorder.

CONCLUSION

There is very limited joint working between community paediatrics and CAMHS in the UK, which is associated with many adverse impacts on service users and providers. A prointegration strategy that includes joint commissioning of adequately funded paediatric and CAMHS services that are colocated and within the same health management organisations is crucial to improving joint working between paediatrics and CAMHS.