Primary Care Physicians' Evaluation and Treatment of Depression (original) (raw)
Related papers
BMC Family Practice, 2008
Background: To examine the agreement between depression symptoms using an assessment tool (PHQ-9), and physician documentation of the same symptoms during a clinic visit, and then to examine how the presence of these symptoms affects depression diagnosis in primary care settings. Methods: Interviewer administered surveys and medical record reviews. A total of 304 participants were recruited from 2321 participants screened for depression at two large urban primary care community settings. Results: Of the 2321 participants screened for depression 304 were positive for depression and of these 75.3% (n = 229) were significantly depressed (PHQ-9 score ≥ 10). Of these, 31.0% were diagnosed by a physician with a depressive disorder. A total of 57.6% (n = 175) of study participants had both significant depression symptoms and functional impairment. Of these 37.7% were diagnosed by physicians as depressed. Cohen's Kappa analysis, used to determine the agreement between depression symptoms elicited using the PHQ-9 and physician documentation of these symptoms showed only slight agreement (0.001-0.101) for all depression symptoms using standard agreement rating scales. Further analysis showed that only suicidal ideation and hypersomnia or insomnia were associated with an increased likelihood of physician depression diagnosis (OR 5.41 P sig < .01 and (OR 2.02 P sig < .05 respectively). Other depression symptoms and chronic medical conditions had no affect on physician depression diagnosis. Conclusion: Two-thirds of individuals with depression are undiagnosed in primary care settings. While functional impairment increases the rate of physician diagnosis of depression, the agreement between a structured assessment and physician elicited and or documented symptoms during a clinical encounter is very low. Suicidality, hypersomnia and insomnia are associated with an increase in the rate of depression diagnosis even when physician and self report of the symptom differ. Interventions that emphasize the use of routine structured screening of primary care patients might also improve the rate of diagnosis of depression in these settings. Further studies are needed to explore depression symptom assessment during physician patient encounter in primary care settings.
Patient presentation, interview content, and the detection of depression by primary care physicians
Psychosomatic Medicine, 1994
This study was undertaken in order to better understand the detection of depression by primary care physicians. Specifically, we investigated the relationship between information gathered during the course of the medical interview and the subsequent diagnosis of depression. Forty-seven community-based primary care physicians, unaware of the mental health focus of this research, were videotaped in the office setting, as they interviewed two "typical" standardized patients who met DSM-III-R criteria for major depression. One patient presented with headaches and the other presented with palpitations and chest pain. After each interview, physicians were provided with physical findings and results of any diagnostic procedures they ordered, then asked to construct and explicate their differential diagnoses. The-two patients were correctly diagnosed as depressed by 53 and 45% of the physicians. Although detection was related to greater amounts of information gathered, inquiry about the DSM-III-R criteria symptoms was generally low, and in no case was sufficient information acquired to make a formal DSM-III-R diagnosis of depression. However, a subset of the DSM-III-R symptoms (those related to disturbances of appetite, sleep, and other neurovegetative functions) were among the reasons cited for inclusion of depression in the differential, as were psychosocial stressors and the patient's appearance. These findings suggest that detection of depression is low by primary care physicians.
Depression Treatment in Primary Care
Background: Depression costs the United States $40 billion annually. Primary care physicians play a key role in the identification and treatment of depression. This study focused on the treatment options recommended by physicians and whether physicians were following the recommended treatment guidelines.
Nondetection of depression by primary care physicians reconsidered
General Hospital Psychiatry, 1995
This article examines the rates of detection for major depression and other depressive disorders by family physicians as well as the differences between detected and undetected cases in terms of a variety of demographic and clinical variables. A total of 1,580 family practice patients completed a screening form and were rated by their physician. Patients with elevated Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) scores were oversampled for possible interviews using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID). In the resulting weighted sample, family physicians detected 34.9% of cases of major depression and 27.9% of cases of any depressive disorder. Detection was associated with pharmacological and psychological intervention. However, the undetected cases tended to be mildly depressed and higher functioning. Presence of a current anxiety disorder facilitated detection. Overall, the mildness of undetected depression and associated impairment have implications for estimates of the consequences of primary care physicians' low rates of nondetection and for the development of interventional strategies to improve their performance.
Do Patient Requests for Antidepressants Enhance or Hinder Physicians’ Evaluation of Depression?
Medical Care, 2006
Objective: We sought to ascertain whether patients' requests for antidepressants affect visit duration or history taking by primary care physicians (PCPs) for patients with depressive symptoms and a coexisting musculoskeletal disorder and to determine whether more thorough history taking is associated with diagnostic accuracy or with provision of minimally acceptable initial care for major depression. Design: This was a randomized trial using standardized patients (SPs). Six roles involved 2 conditions (major depression and adjustment disorder, both with coexisting musculoskeletal conditions) and 3 patient request types (brand-specific, general, or none). We conducted the study in 152 PCP offices in Northern California and Rochester, New York. Physicians were assigned randomly to see 2 SPs with depression/wrist pain or adjustment disorder/back pain. Main Outcome Measures: Physician history-taking for depression and the musculoskeletal condition; depression diagnosis in the medical record; antidepressant prescriptions/samples; referral/follow-up recommendations; visit duration; and provision of minimally acceptable initial depression care. Results: General antidepressant requests were associated with more depression history-taking (Adjusted Parameter Estimate ϭ 0.80 more questions of 10 (95% confidence interval ϭ 0.31-1.29, P Ͻ 0.001); brand-specific requests were marginally associated with more depression history-taking (Adjusted Parameter Estimate ϭ 0.45, 95% confidence interval ϭ Ϫ0.04-0.93, P ϭ 0.07). Antide-pressant medication requests were not related to musculo-skeletal question asking (P Ͼ 0.3) or visit length (P Ͼ 0.8). Depression history taking was directly associated with the likelihood of a chart diagnosis of depression and the provision of minimally acceptable initial depression care. Conclusion: General antidepressant requests increase depression history taking, including screening for suicide. Patients' requests for medication do not appear to short-circuit history taking for depression or distract the physician's attention from coexisting musculoskeletal conditions.
Identification of depression by medical and surgical general hospital physicians
General Hospital Psychiatry, 2002
Little information is available about identification of mental distress by general hospital physicians (GHPs). We compared, among patients admitted in a General Hospital, depressed patients with patients identified as depressed by the GHPs. A random sample of 1,039 patients were screened with the 12-item General Health Questionnaire. Afterwards, all high scorers and a probability sample of low scorers were interviewed with a variety of measures, including the Composite International Diagnostic Interview-Primary Care version (CIDI-PHC). GHPs recorded the presence of depression on a Physician Encounter Form. Patients were more likely to have depression detected on medical than surgical wards. Of the 195 patients who had a depression, the GHPs assessed 32.5% as depressed. A number of factors associated with CIDI diagnoses were not significantly associated with being identified by the GHPs - female gender, two or more life events in the previous year, and a previous history of depression. The identification by the GHPs was associated with a higher probability of contacts with medical professionals and of antidepressant drug prescriptions during the year which followed the first interview.
Academic Psychiatry, 2011
Objective: Standardized patients (SPs) have been developed to measure practitioner performance in actual practice settings, but results have not been fully validated for psychiatric disorders. This study describes the process of creating reliable and valid SPs for unannounced assessment of general-practitioners' management of depression disorders in Iran. Method: Ten psychology and nursing students (potential SPs) took part in a five-session course involving training in dialogue and body language. Five scenarios, along with corresponding checklists representing common presentations of mood disorders in primary-care settings, were developed by an expert group. The SPs' role-play performance of their respective scenario was videotaped and scored independently by three psychiatrists according to an observational rating scale to assess validity. The role-play was repeated after 1 week with the same scenario and the same doctor, to assess test-retest reliability. The reliability of each checklist to be used by the SPs was assessed by testing interrater reliability between groups of SPs. Results: The cutoff score for the SPs' portrayal validity was 90% or above for all SPs. Mean interrater reliability for the checklists was acceptable for the SPs watching the same videos and filling in the checklists, while the mean kappa for assessing concurrent validity in filling in the checklists was lower. The test-retest performance for assessing reliability resulted in a mean kappa of 0.72. All SPs except one, who was not recruited, performed acceptably well. Conclusion: The authors have demonstrated a thorough validation of the technique of using standardized patients in the portrayal of depressive disorders in primary-care settings in Iran, which creates confidence in employing this technique to evaluate doctors' performance, for example, after an educational intervention. Similar methods of validation can be used for SPs' portrayal of other psychiatric disorders.
Conditions That Influence a Primary Care Clinician's Decision to Refer Patients for Depression Care
Rehabilitation Nursing, 2010
The objective of this study was to identify conditions that influence primary care clinicians' referral decisions related to depression care. Forty primary care clinicians (15 general internists, 10 nurse practitioners, and 15 family practice physicians) were included in this study. The clinicians participated in semistructured interviews and completed two quantitative instruments (with 33 items on depression treatment decision making and 32 items on provider attitudes toward psychosocial care). Data analysis revealed that several conditions influence a clinician's decision to refer a depressed patient to a mental health specialist: the patient's resources, the clinician's comfort in prescribing antidepressants and counseling patients with depression, and familiarity with a mental health specialist and practice environment. The decision to refer a patient with depression to a mental health specialist is a complex process involving the clinician, patient, and practice-related issues. Understanding these relationships may provide strategies to improve depression care management and lead to the design of depression care quality-improvement interventions that accommodate primary care practice context. The findings from this study suggest a need to increase mental health training opportunities for primary care clinicians to strengthen their skills and comfort level in managing depressed patients and encourage the development of relationships between primary care clinicians and mental health specialists to facilitate timely and accessible mental health care for patients.
Predictors of Primary Care Physicians’ Self-reported Intention to Conduct Suicide Risk Assessments
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 2012
Primary care physicians play a significant role in depression care, suicide assessment, and suicide prevention. However, little is known about what factors relate to and predict quality of depression care (assessment, diagnosis, and treatment), including suicide assessment. The authors explored the extent to which select patient and physician factors increase the probability of one element of quality of care: namely, intention to conduct suicide assessment. Data were collected from 404 randomly selected primary care physicians after their interaction with CD-ROM vignettes of actors portraying major depression with moderate levels of severity. The authors examined which patient factors and physician factors increase the likelihood of physicians' intention to conduct a suicide assessment. Data from the study revealed that physician-participants inquired about suicide 36% of the time. A random effects logistic model indicated that several factors were predictive of physicians' intention to conduct a suicide assessment: patient's comorbidity status (odds ratio (OR) = 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.37-1.00), physicians' age (OR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.49-0.92), physicians' race (OR = 1.84; 95% CI = 1.08-3.13), and how depressed the physician perceived the virtual patient to be (OR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.39-0.87). A substantial number of primary care physicians in this study indicated they would not assess for suicide, even though most physicians perceived the virtual patient to be depressed or very depressed. Further