Reasons to be cheerful? Reflections on GPs' responses to depression

Understanding the body-mind in primary care

Patients' experience of symptoms does not follow the body-mind divide that characterizes the classification of disease in the health care system. Therefore, understanding patients in their entirety rather than in parts demands a different theoretical approach. Attempts have been made to formulate such approaches but many of these, such as the biopsychosocial model, are still basically dualistic or methodologically reductionist. In primary care, patients often present with diffuse symptoms, making primary care the ideal environment for understanding patients' undifferentiated symptoms and disease patterns which could readily fit both bodily and mental categories. In this article we discuss theoretical models that have attempted to overcome this challenge: The psychosomatic approach could be called holistic in the sense of taking an anti-dualistic stance. Primary care theorists have formulated integrative views but these have not gained a foothold in primary care medicine. McWhinney introduced a new metaphor, 'the body-mind', and Rudebeck advocated cultivating 'bodily empathy'. These views have much in common with both phenomenological thinking and mentalization, a psychological concept for understanding others. In the process of understanding patients there is a need for the physician to enter an intersubjectivity that aims at understanding the patient's experiences and sensations without initially jumping to diagnostic conclusions or into a division into mental and physical phenomena. Mentalization theory could form the basis of an approach to a more comprehensive understanding of patients. The success of such an approach is, however, dependent upon structural and organizational conditions that do not counteract it.

What is depression? Psychiatrists' and GPs' experiences of diagnosis and the diagnostic process

The diagnosis of depression is defined by psychiatrists, and guidelines for treatment of patients with depression are created in psychiatry. However, most patients with depression are treated exclusively in general practice. Psychiatrists point out that general practitioners' (GPs') treatment of depression is insufficient and a collaborative care (CC) model between general practice and psychiatry has been proposed to overcome this. However, for successful implementation, a CC model demands shared agreement about the concept of depression and the diagnostic process in the two sectors. We aimed to explore how depression is understood by GPs and clinical psychiatrists. We carried out qualitative in-depth interviews with 11 psychiatrists and 12 GPs. Analysis was made by Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. We found that the two groups of physicians differed considerably in their views on the usefulness of the concept of depression and in their language and narrative styles when telling stories about depressed patients. The differences were captured in three polarities which expressed the range of experiences in the two groups. Psychiatrists considered the diagnosis of depression as a pragmatic and agreed construct and they did not question its validity. GPs thought depression was a "gray area" and questioned the clinical utility in general practice. Nevertheless, GPs felt a demand from psychiatry to make their diagnosis based on instruments created in psychiatry, whereas psychiatrists based their diagnosis on clinical impression but used instruments to assess severity. GPs were wholly skeptical about instruments which they felt could be misleading. The different understandings could possibly lead to a clash of interests in any proposed CC model. The findings provide fertile ground for organizational research into the actual implementation of cooperation between sectors to explore how differences are dealt with.

General practitioners' and psychiatrists' responses to emotional disclosures in patients with depression

OBJECTIVE

To investigate general practitioners' (GPs') and psychiatrists' responses to emotional disclosures in consultations with patients with depression.

METHODS

Thirteen patient consultations with GPs and 17 with psychiatrists were video-recorded and then analyzed using conversation analysis (CA).

RESULTS

Psychiatrists responded to patients' emotional disclosures by attempting to clarify symptoms, by rational argumentation, or by offering an interpretation of the emotions from their own perspectives. GPs responded by claiming to understand the emotions or by formulating the patients' statements, but without further exploring the emotions.

CONCLUSION

GPs displayed a greater engagement with patients' emotions than psychiatrists. Their approach could be described as empathic, corresponding to a mentalizing stance. The different approaches taken by psychiatrists could represent conceptual differences and might affect fruitful interdisciplinary work. Psychiatric nurses' responses to patients' emotions must also be studied to complete our knowledge from psychiatry.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Experiences from training in mentalization could be used to develop physicians' empathic or mentalizing approach. As most patients with depression are treated in primary care, developing GPs' mentalizing capacity instead of offering didactic training could have a substantial effect in the population.

"I think this is maybe our Achilles heel..." exploring GPs' responses to young people presenting with emotional distress in general practice: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

An exploratory study to investigate general practitioners' (GPs') views and experiences of consulting with young people (aged 12-19 years) presenting with emotional distress in general practice.

DESIGN

A qualitative study using grounded theory and situational analysis. Empirical data were generated through in-depth interviews based on a topic guide developed from the literature, and augmented with a series of situational maps. Continuous field notes and theoretical memos were recorded during data collection and analysis. The data were analysed using the constant comparative method of grounded theory. There were three levels of analysis. The first level developed the open codes and is presented here.

SETTING

18 general practices located in the north east of England. The practices recruited included rural, urban and mixed populations of patients who were predominantly living in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities.

PARTICIPANTS

19 GPs (10 women) aged between 29 and 59 years participated. The modal age range was 40-49 years. Theoretical sampling was used to guide recruitment and continued until theoretical saturation was reached.

RESULTS

The overarching finding was that anxiety about practice dominated clinical consultations involving young people presenting with emotional distress. GPs responded differently to anxiety and to related uncertainties about professional practice, independent of GP age or gender. Anxiety occurred in the consultation, at an external level, across disciplinary boundaries, in relation to communication with young people and secondary to the complexity of presentations.

CONCLUSIONS

Adolescent emotional distress presents professional challenges to GPs who feel ill-equipped and inadequately prepared to address early need. Medical education needs to prepare doctors better. More research is needed to look at what factors facilitate or prohibit greater GP engagement with emotionally distressed young people.

Impact of the QOF and the NICE guideline in the diagnosis and management of depression: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The National Institute for Health and clinical Excellence (NICE) depression guideline (2004) and the updated Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) (2006) in general practice have introduced the concepts of screening severity assessment, for example using the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9), and 'stepped care' for depression.

AIM

To explore primary care practitioner perspectives on the clinical utility of the NICE guideline and the impact of the QOF on diagnosis and management of depression in routine practice.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative study using focus groups from four multidisciplinary practice teams with diverse populations in south Yorkshire.

METHOD

Four focus groups were conducted, using a topic guide and audiotaping. There were 38 participants: GPs, nurses, doctors in training, mental health workers, and a manager. Data analysis was iterative and thematic.

RESULTS

The NICE guideline, with its embedded principles of holism and evidence-based practice, was viewed positively but its impact was compromised by resource and practitioner barriers to implementation. The perceived imposition of the screening questions and severity assessments (PHQ-9) with no responsive training had required practitioners to work hard to minimise negative impacts on their work, for example: constantly adapting consultations to tick boxes; avoiding triggering open displays of distress without the time to offer appropriate care; positively managing how their patients were labelled. Further confusion was experienced around the evolving content of psychological interventions for depression.

CONCLUSION

Organisational barriers to the implementation of the NICE guideline and the limited scope of the QOF highlight the need for policy makers to work more effectively with the complex realities of general practice in order to systematically improve the quality and delivery of 'managed' care for depression.

Managing depression in primary care: A meta-synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research from the UK to identify barriers and facilitators

BACKGROUND

Current management in primary care of depression, with or without comorbid physical illness, has been found to be suboptimal. We therefore conducted a systematic review to identify clinician perceived barriers to and facilitators for good depression care.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search to identify qualitative and quantitative studies published in the UK since 2000 of GPs' and practice nurses' attitudes to the management of depression. We used principles from meta-ethnography to identify common and refuted themes across studies.

RESULTS

We identified 7 qualitative and 10 quantitative studies; none concerned depression and co-morbid physical illness of any kind. The studies of managing patients with a primary diagnosis of depression indicated that GPs and PNs are unsure of the exact nature of the relationship between mood and social problems and of their role in managing it. Among some clinicians, ambivalent attitudes to working with depressed people, a lack of confidence, the use of a limited number of management options and a belief that a diagnosis of depression is stigmatising complicate the management of depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Detection and management of depression is considered complex. In particular, primary care clinicians need guidance to address the social needs of depressed patients. It is not known whether the same issues are important when managing depressed people with co-morbid physical illness.

Identification of depression in diabetes: the efficacy of PHQ-9 and HADS-D

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines advise screening for depression in patients with diabetes. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D) are commonly used in primary care.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of HADS-D and PHQ-9 in identifying moderate to severe depression among primary care patients with type 2 diabetes.

DESIGN OF STUDY

Self-report postal survey, clinical records assessed by GPs.

SETTING

Seven metropolitan and rural general practices in Victoria, Australia.

METHOD

Postal questionnaires were sent to all patients with diabetes on the registers of seven practices in Victoria. A total of 561 completed postal questionnaires were returned, giving a response rate 47%. Surveys included demographic information, and history of diabetes and depression. Participants completed both the PHQ-9 and HADS-D. Clinical data from patient records included glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels and medications.

RESULTS

The proportion of the total sample completing HADS-D was 96.8% compared with 82.4% for PHQ-9. Level of education was unrelated to responses on the HADS-D but was related to completion of the PHQ-9. Using complete data (n = 456) from both measures, 40 responders showed HADS-D scores in the moderate to severe range, compared with 103 cases identified by PHQ-9. Only 35 cases were classified in the moderate to severe category by both the PHQ-9 and HADS-D. Items with the highest proportions of positive responses on the PHQ-9 were related to tiredness and sleeping problems and, on the HADS-D, feeling slowed down.

CONCLUSION

It may be that the items contributing to the higher prevalence of moderate to severe depression using the PHQ-9 are due to diabetes-related symptoms or sleep disorders.