Accuracy of diagnosing depression in primary care: the impact of chronic somatic and psychiatric co-morbidity

BACKGROUND: Depression is highly co-morbid with both psychiatric and chronic somatic disease. These types of co-morbidity have been shown to exert opposite effects on underdiagnosis of depression by general practitioners (GPs). However, past research has not addressed their combined effect on underdiagnosis of depression. METHOD: Co-morbidity data on 191 depressed primary-care patients selected by a two-stage sampling procedure were analysed. Diagnoses of major depression and/or dysthymia in the last 12 months were assessed using a standardized psychiatric interview (CIDI) and compared with depression diagnoses registered by GPs in patient contacts during the same period. Presence of psychiatric and chronic somatic co-morbidity was determined using the CIDI and contact registration, respectively. RESULTS: Regression analysis showed a significant interaction effect between psychiatric and chronic somatic co-morbidity on GPs' diagnosis of depression, while taking into account the effects of sociodemographic variables, depression severity and number of GP contacts. Subsequent stratified analysis revealed that in patients without chronic somatic co-morbidity, a lower educational level, a less severe depression, and fewer GP contacts all significantly increased the likelihood of not being diagnosed as depressed. In contrast, in patients with chronic somatic co-morbidity, only having no psychiatric co-morbidity significantly decreased the likelihood of receiving a depression diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the effects of psychiatric co-morbidity and other factors on underdiagnosis of depression by GPs differ between depressed patients with and without chronic somatic co-morbidity. Efforts to improve depression diagnosis by GPs seem to require different strategies for depressed patients with and without chronic somatic co-morbidity.     

Sex and attitude: a randomized vignette study of the management of depression by general practitioners.

BACKGROUND: The management and detection of depression varies widely, and the causes of variation are incompletely understood. AIMS: To describe and explain general practitioners' (GPs') current practice in the recognition and management of depression in young adults, their attitudes towards depression, and to investigate associations of GP characteristics and patient sex with management. METHOD: All GP principals in the Greater Glasgow Health Board were randomized to receive questionnaires with vignettes describing increasingly severe symptoms of depression in either male or female patients, and asked to indicate which clinical options they would be likely to take. The Depression Attitude Questionnaire was used to elicit GP attitudes. RESULTS: As the severity of vignette symptoms increased, GPs responded by changing their prescribing and referral patterns. For the most severe vignette, the majority of GPs would prescribe drugs (76.4%) and refer the patient for further help (73.7%). Male and female patients were treated differently: GPs were less likely to ask female patients than male patients to attend a follow-up consultation (odds ratio [OR] = 0.55), and female GPs were less likely to refer female patients (OR = 0.33). GPs with a pessimistic view of depression, measured using the 'inevitable course of depression' attitude scale, were less willing to be actively involved in its treatment, being less likely to discuss a non-physical cause of symptoms (OR = 0.77) or to explore social factors in moderately severe cases (OR = 0.68). CONCLUSIONS: Accepting the limitations of the method, GPs appear to respond appropriately to increasingly severe symptoms of depression, although variation in management exists. Educational programmes should be developed with the aim of enhancing GP attitudes towards depression, and the effects on detection and management of depression should be rigorously evaluated.     

Qualitative study of patients'' perceptions of the quality of care for depression in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Research into quality of care in primary mental health care has largely focused on the role of the general practitioner (GP) in the detection and management of patients' problems. AIM: To explore depressed patients' perceptions of the quality of care received from GPs. DESIGN OF STUDY: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. SETTING: General practices in Greater Manchester. METHOD: Purposive sampling and semi-structured interviewing of 27 patients who had received care from 10 GPs for depression. RESULTS: Quality of care in depression depends on good communication between the doctor and the patient, but patients who are depressed often have difficulty in discussing their problems with doctors. They are also unlikely to be active in seeking care; for example, in making follow-up appointments, especially when they are uncertain that depression is a legitimate reason for seeing the doctor. Patients sometimes accept care that does not meet professional standards, either because of low expectations of what the National Health Service (NHS) can provide, or because of low self-worth associated with their problem. CONCLUSION: The depressed person may feel that they do not deserve to take up the doctor's time, or that it is not possible for doctors to listen to them and understand how they feel. Doctors need to be active in providing care that meets professional standards. We advocate a model of care in which patients with depression are followed up systematically.     

GP treatment decisions for patients with depression: an observational study

BACKGROUND: GPs are prescribing more antidepressants than previously, but not in accordance with guidelines. The reasons why they prescribe are not well understood. AIM: To explore associations between GP treatment and severity of depression, patients' life difficulties, previous history of illness and treatment, and patient attitudes. DESIGN: Observational study in two phases, 3 years apart. SETTING: Seven practices in Southampton, UK. METHOD: Adult attenders who consented were screened for depression in the waiting room. After the consultation, the 17 participating GPs completed questionnaires on the perceived presence and severity of depression, patients' life difficulties, previous problems and treatment, patient attitudes towards antidepressants, and their treatment decisions. Patients returned postal questionnaires on sociodemographics, life events, physical health, and attitudes towards antidepressants. RESULTS: Of 694 patients screened in the two phases, the GPs rated 101 (15%) as depressed, acknowledged depression in 44 cases (6%), and offered treatment in 27 (4%), including antidepressants in 14 (2%). Offers of antidepressants were more likely in both phases where the GPs rated the depression as moderate rather than mild, and where they perceived a positive patient attitude to antidepressants. However, GP ratings of severity did not agree well with the validated screening instrument, and their assessments of patients' attitudes to treatment were only moderately related to patients' self-reports. CONCLUSIONS: In line with current guidelines, GPs base prescribing decisions on the perceived severity of depression, taking patients' preferences into account, but they do not accurately identify which patients are likely to benefit from treatment. Better ways to assess depression severity and patient attitudes towards antidepressants are needed in order to target treatment more appropriately.     

Evaluation of general practitioners' training: how to manage patients with unexplained physical symptoms

Patients with unexplained physical symptoms ("somatoform disorders") tend to overuse the healthcare system. Therefore, the authors aimed to assess whether a training session for general practitioners (GPs) on managing patients with unexplained physical symptoms would be acceptable to GPs and lead to improvements in patient care. In a randomized clinical trial (GPs randomized), GPs got a 1-day training session and additional materials. Included were 26 GP offices in primary care and 295 patients with unexplained physical symptoms (minimum of two symptoms required). Outcome measures were healthcare utilization (number of doctor visits) 6 months before and 6 months after the index visit to the GP, somatization severity, depression, and hypochondriacal fears at the index visit to the GP's office and 6 months later. Training GPs to manage these patients led to significant reductions in healthcare utilization; patients of untrained GPs showed comparable attendance rates in the 6 months before and after the index visit. Differences in depression, somatization, and hypochondriacal fears, however, could not be attributed to the GP training. GPs rated the training as being highly relevant for their everyday practices, underlining the need for and acceptance of the training. Training GPs in managing patients with unexplained physical symptoms seems to be helpful for the reduction of excessive healthcare utilization. These 1-day workshops have high acceptability, so this approach could be a good model for empirically-validated continuing-education programs.     

A pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial of an educational intervention for GPs in the assessment and management of depression

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) can be provided with effective training in the skills to manage depression. However, it remains uncertain whether such training achieves health gain for their patients. METHOD: The study aimed to measure the health gain from training GPs in skills for the assessment and management of depression. The study design was a cluster randomized controlled trial. GP participants were assessed for recognition of psychological disorders, attitudes to depression, prescribing patterns and experience of psychiatry and communication skills training. They were then randomized to receive training at baseline or the end of the study. Patients selected by GPs were assessed at baseline, 3 and 12 months. The primary outcome was depression status, measured by HAM-D. Secondary outcomes were psychiatric symptoms (GHQ-12) quality of life (SF-36), satisfaction with consultations, and health service use and costs. RESULTS: Thirty-eight GPs were recruited and 36 (95%) completed the study. They selected 318 patients, of whom 189 (59%) were successfully recruited. At 3 months there were no significant differences between intervention and control patients on HAM-D, GHQ-12 or SF-36. At 12 months there was a positive training effect in two domains of the SF-36, but no differences in HAM-D, GHQ-12 or health care costs. Patients reported trained GPs as somewhat better at listening and understanding but not in the other aspects of satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Although training programmes may improve GPs' skills in managing depression, this does not appear to translate into health gain for depressed patients or the health service.     

Illness behaviour and antibiotic prescription in patients with respiratory tract symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Although the vast majority of respiratory tract symptoms are self-limiting, many patients visit their GP for these symptoms and antibiotics are over-prescribed. AIM: To explore determinants of patients visiting GPs for recent cough, sore throat, or earache; for being prescribed antibiotics; and for patients' satisfaction with visiting the GP. Design of the study: Second Dutch National Survey of General Practice (DNSGP-2) with a health interview and an additional questionnaire. SETTING: A total of 7057 adult patients of 163 GPs in the Netherlands. METHOD: Characteristics of patients and GPs as well as morbidity data were derived from the DNSGP-2 and a health interview. Characteristics of the symptoms, GPs' management and patients' satisfaction were measured by an additional written questionnaire. Data were analysed by means of multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: About 40% of the responders (n = 1083) reported cough, sore throat, or earache in the 2 weeks preceding the interview and, of them, 250 visited their GP. Of this latter group, 97 patients were prescribed antibiotics. Apart from non-medical reasons, relevant medical factors played an important role in deciding to visit the GP. Smokers and patients with cardiac disease or diabetes mellitus were not especially inclined to see their GP. Smoking behaviour, fever, and views on respiratory tract symptoms and antibiotics of patients and GPs were associated with being prescribed antibiotics. Patients' perception of having been carefully examined was associated with their satisfaction, while receiving antibiotics was not. CONCLUSION: GPs should inform patients with clear elevated risk when to visit their GP in cases of cough, sore throat, or earache. There is still a need for GPs and patients to be better informed about the limited significance of single inflammation signs (for example, fever and green phlegm) as an indication for antibiotics. Careful examination of the patient contributes to patient satisfaction.     

Effects on depression pharmacotherapy of a Dutch general practitioner training program

BACKGROUND: General practitioners' (GPs) ability to recognize, diagnose and treat depression improved significantly after a comprehensive, 20-h training programme. This study aims to evaluate in more detail the effects of the training on GPs' pharmacotherapy of depression and related issues. METHODS: A pretest-posttest design was used. Both in the pre- and post-training phase, a sample was drawn from consecutive patients of the 17 participating GPs. In the pre-training phase we identified a sample of 31 cases with an ICD-10 depression who received an antidepressant from their GP. The sample was followed for 1 year. Outcome measures were: type of antidepressant, dosage, duration and number of target instructions given by the GP. Then we trained the GPs. In the post-training phase, we identified a new sample (n = 47) from their practices and measured the same outcomes. RESULTS: Improvements were seen in choice for modern antidepressant, adequate dosage, adequate duration, and number of target instructions given. LIMITATIONS: Observed changes can be due to a period effect, inherent in a pre-post design. CONCLUSIONS: A post-academic hands-on training of GPs can improve depression pharmacotherapy according to clinical guidelines with respect to choice of a modern antidepressant, adequate dosage, adequate duration and psychoeducation.     

A pilot study exploring the effect of discharging cancer survivors from hospital follow-up on the workload of general practitioners.

BACKGROUND: The tradition of routine, long-term follow-up of cancer patients in the outpatient clinic has led to busy clinics and long waiting times. Many cancer patients are anxious and have become dependent on the specialist clinic for reassurance. General practitioners (GPs) have been shown to be willing to assume greater responsibility for the routine follow-up of breast cancer patients, but patients have demonstrated a preference for hospital follow-up. If patients are discharged unwillingly, their rehabilitation may be at the cost of an increased demand on GP practices. AIM: To determine the consequences for GPs of discharging long-term cancer patients from a hospital outpatient follow-up clinic. METHOD: A consecutive sample of 65 patients under annual review in a hospital oncology clinic were offered a planned discharge in which their return to the clinic, if necessary, was guaranteed. The 41 patients who accepted discharge were monitored. Anxiety and depression rates were assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) at the time of discharge and four months later at a home interview. The GPs of all patients who were discharged were sent questionnaires four and twelve months after discharge to evaluate consultation rates and change in psychological morbidity. RESULTS: The results showed no significant increase in the consultation rates during the 12 months after discharge compared with the previous 12 months. There was no significant change in the level of patients' anxiety or depression at four months after discharge. The great majority of GPs (71%) reported no change in their perception of patients' levels of anxiety or depression. GPs thought there was a need for more specialist Macmillan nurses working in the community and highlighted the importance of fast-track specialist referral. CONCLUSION: Discharging this group of long-term cancer survivors did not increase the workload of GPs. However, GPs' concern over the lack of availability of Macmillan nurses in the community suggests that primary care services may find it difficult to cope adequately with the special requirements involved in cancer patient care. Finally, there is a need to address the further training requirements of GPs in the routine follow-up of cancer patients.     

Evaluation of Advanced Access in the National Primary Care Collaborative

BACKGROUND: An aim of the National Primary Care Collaborative is to improve quality and access for patients in primary care using principles of Advanced Access. AIMS: To determine whether Advanced Access led to improved availability of appointments with general practitioners (GPs) and to examine GPs' views of the process. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Four hundred and sixty-two general practices in England participating in four waves of the collaborative during 2000 and 2001. METHOD: Regression analysis of the collaborative's monthly data on the availability of GP appointments for the 352 practices in waves 1-3, and a postal survey of lead GPs in all four waves. The main outcome measures were the change in mean time to the third available appointment with GPs, and the proportion of GPs thinking it worthwhile participating in the collaborative. RESULTS: The time to the third available appointment improved from a mean of 3.6 to 1.9 days, difference = 1.7 days, 95% confidence interval (CI)= 1.4 to 2.0 days. It improved in two-thirds of practices (66% [219/331]), remained the same in 16% (53/331), and worsened in 18% (59/331). The majority of GPs in all four waves, 83% (308/371, 95% CI = 79 to 87), felt that it was worthwhile participating in the collaborative, although one in 12 practices would not recommend it. One-fifth of GPs cited a lack of resources as a constraint, and some expressed concerns about the trade-off between immediate access and continuity of care. CONCLUSION: Advanced Access helped practices to improve availability of GP appointments, and was well received by the majority of practices.     

An exploration of the value of the personal doctor-patient relationship in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Within the context of general practice, continuity of care creates an opportunity for a personal doctor-patient relationship to develop which has been associated with significant benefits for patients and general practitioners (GPs). Continuity of care is, however, threatened by trends in the organisational development of primary health care in the United Kingdom and its intrinsic role within general practice is currently the subject of debate. AIMS: To determine how many patients report having a personal doctor and when this is most valued, to compare the value of a personal doctor-patient relationship with that of convenience, and to relate these findings to a range of patient, GP, and practice variables. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cross sectional postal questionnaire study. SETTING: Nine hundred and ninety-six randomly selected adult patients from a stratified random sample of 18 practices and 284 GP principals in Oxfordshire. METHOD: Qualitative interviews with patients and GPs were conducted and used to derive a parallel patient and GP questionnaire. Each patient (100 from each practice) was invited to complete a questionnaire to evaluate their experience and views concerning personal care. All GP principals currently practising in Oxfordshire were sent a similar questionnaire, which also included demographic variables. RESULTS: Overall, 75% of patients reported having at least one personal GP. The number of patients reporting a personal GP in each practice varied from 53% to 92%. Having a personal doctor-patient relationship was highly valued by patients and GPs, in particular for more serious, psychological and family issues when 77-88% of patients and 80-98% of GPs valued a personal relationship more than a convenient appointment. For minor illness it had much less value. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and GPs particularly value a personal doctor-patient relationship for more serious or for psychological problems. Whether a patient has a personal GP is associated with their perception of its importance and with factors which create an opportunity for a relationship to evolve.     

The impact of training in problem-based interviewing on the detection and management of psychological problems presenting in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The vast majority of mental health problems present to primary care teams. However, rates of under-diagnosis remain worryingly high. This study explores a GP-centred approach to these issues. AIM: To examine the impact of training in problem-based interviewing (BPI) on the detection and management of psychological problems in primary care. METHOD: The detection and management of psychological problems by 10 general practitioners (GPs) who had received PBI training 12 months earlier was compared with that of 10 control GPs matched for age, sex, clinical experience, and practice setting; and had originally applied for, but had not been able to attend, BPI training. Consecutive attendees at one randomly selected surgery undertaken by each GP were invited to participate in the study. Two hundred and eighty patients living in Newcastle upon Tyne met inclusion criteria and gave informed consent. The presence or absence of psychological problems was assessed using patient self-ratings on the 28-item version of the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) and blind independent observer ratings of the brief Present State Examination (PSE). Patient satisfaction with interviews was rated using the Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale (MISS). After each consultation, the GPs (blind to subjective and observer ratings) recorded their assessment and management of the patients' problems on a Practice Activity Card (PAC). RESULTS: In comparison with control GPs, index GPs demonstrated significantly greater sensitivity in the detection of psychological problems in the GHQ-PAC ratings. The absolute decrease in misdiagnosis of GHQ cases was 9% and of PSE cases was 15%. Patients meeting GHQ criteria for caseness were more likely to be prescribed psychotropic medication by an index GP than compared with a control GP. Length of interview did not differ between the groups and mean scores on the MISS suggested that patients attending PBI-trained GPs, compared with control GPs, were as satisfied or slightly more satisfied with their consultation. CONCLUSION: In comparison with control GPs, PBI-trained GPs were better at recognizing and managing psychological disorders. The potential benefits of BPI training are discussed in light of other attempts to improve mental health skills in primary care.     

General practitioners miss disability and anxiety as well as depression in their patients with osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) integrate physical, psychological, and social factors when assessing patients, particularly those with chronic diseases. Recently, the emphasis has been on assessment of depression but not of other factors. AIM: To determine functional disability, psychological morbidity, social situation, and use of health and social services in patients with osteoarthritis and examine GP knowledge of these factors. METHOD: Two hundred patients completed a validated postal questionnaire about functional disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ]), mood (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HAD]), employment status, who they lived with, welfare benefits received, and use of health and social services. A similar questionnaire was completed by the patient's GP, including a HAQ. However, a three-point scale was used to assess depression and anxiety. RESULTS: Forty-seven per cent of patients were moderately or severely disabled (HAQ > 1). GPs underestimated functional disability: mean patient HAQ = 1.04 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.92-1.16), mean GP HAQ = 0.74 (95% CI = 0.65-0.83), and there was low correlation between patient and GP scores (kappa = 0.24). There was moderate prevalence of depression and high prevalence of anxiety, which the GP often did not recognise: patient depression = 8.3% (95% CI = 4.1%-12.8%), GP depression = 6.0% (95% CI = 2.4%-9.6%), kappa = 0.11; patient anxiety = 24.4% (95% CI = 17.8%-31.0%), GP anxiety = 11.9% (95% CI = 6.9%-16.9%), kappa = 0.19. Only 46% of severely disabled patients (HAQ > 2) were receiving disability welfare benefits. GPs were often unaware of welfare benefits received or the involvement of other professionals. CONCLUSION: GPs frequently lack knowledge about functional disability, social factors, and anxiety as well as depression in their patients with osteoarthritis.     

Diagnostic work-up of rectal bleeding in general practice

BACKGROUND: GPs have many patients with gastrointestinal discomfort. Among bowel-related complaints, the sign of rectal bleeding is of particular importance in patients aged 50 years and above, as it can be an early sign for serious bowel diseases such as colon carcinoma. Despite many guidelines offered to GPs for screening and early detection of colorectal carcinomas, there is very little information about the actual diagnostic approach to the sign of rectal bleeding. AIM: The aim of the study was to collect data concerning treatment strategies used by GPs who treat patients presenting with rectal bleeding. DESIGN OF STUDY: Prospective data collection. SETTING: General practices in Germany. METHOD: Over the course of a year, GPs recorded their treatment strategies in patients presenting with rectal bleeding and associated symptoms. Using a digital practice patient file, physicians participating in the study were able to continuously transmit data electronically to the researchers of the study about diagnostics, referrals, hospital admissions, and final diagnoses. RESULTS: During the course of 1 year, 94 participating physicians collected data on 1584 patients. Information about treating rectal bleeding was recorded for 422 patients; 60% of the patients were referred to specialists in internal medicine or gastroenterologists for further diagnostics. A colonoscopy was the most frequently performed diagnostic procedure (46.2%). Twenty-two per cent (n = 93) of the patients--54 of them aged 50 years and above--were exclusively treated by their GP without conducting a colonoscopy or cooperating with specialists. For these patients, GPs diagnosed less severe diseases like haemorrhoids or other proctologic diseases. CONCLUSION: By using a study that allows GPs to transmit electronically their findings and data, it is possible to draw a picture of treatment strategies of GPs in patients presenting with rectal bleeding. The high percentage of patients who received medical treatment in consultation with specialists underscores the significance of the sign of rectal bleeding in general practice. The need for further diagnostic measures in patients who have been treated exclusively by GPs has to be discussed.     

General practitioners' use of guidelines in the consultation and their attitudes to them.

BACKGROUND: There is concern about the apparent lack of uptake of management and referral guideline information by general practitioners (GPs) in their day-to-day consultations with patients. Little is understood about the barriers to the uptake of guidelines as perceived by GPs. AIMS: To explore how GPs gain access to and use guidelines, including computer-based guidelines, in day-to-day consultations with their patients; and to identify the perceived problems and barriers to the use of guidelines in such situations. METHOD: Postal questionnaires enquiring about the practices and attitudes towards the use of guidelines in general practice were completed by 391 of 600 randomly selected GPs in the South and West NHS region. RESULTS: GPs found guidelines a useful method of accessing expert information. Key factors in their uptake were brevity, an authoritative and unbiased source of evidence, and resonance with the GP's usual practices; they also needed to be flexible enough to incorporate individual viewpoints. Guidelines were perceived as being valuable to enable safe delegation of care to other health professionals and for sharing decision-making with patients. Dissemination of guidelines through the medium of computers was acceptable to the majority of GPs. Virtually all (93%) responders reported adapting guidelines to the needs of individual patients. Older GPs from non-fundholding practices were least likely to show a positive attitude towards guidelines. CONCLUSION: In principle, there is a very positive attitude towards the use of guidelines in general practice. However, those developing guidelines for use by GPs in the consulting room need to be aware of the factors that facilitate their use in practice. Educational strategies aimed at increasing the use of guidelines need to take into account the significant proportion who show negative attitudes towards guidelines, whose characteristics have been identified in this study.