Article

A qualitative study exploring how GPs decide to prescribe antidepressants.

Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London.
British Journal of General Practice (Impact Factor: 2.36). 11/2005; 55(519):755-62.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To influence GPs' prescribing policies and practices it is necessary to have an understanding of how they make decisions. The limited evidence available suggests that not only do GPs find making decisions about diagnosing and prescribing for depression problematic, but that decisions are severely constrained by lack of resources. As a result, it might be thought that GPs, in line with current guidelines, will inevitably prescribe antidepressants for patients presenting with symptoms of anxiety and depression. This study examines the accuracy of this view.
To explore how GPs decide to prescribe antidepressants.
Focus groups with self-selected GPs.
Bristol and the surrounding district.
Qualitative study of five focus groups with 27 GPs.
GPs' decisions about whether an antidepressant would be an appropriate form of management are shaped by a set of rules based on 'clinical' and 'social' criteria. The preferred strategy is to 'wait and see', but antidepressants are prescribed earlier when symptoms are perceived to be persistent, unresolving, severe and 'classic'. Decisions to prescribe are also shaped by organisational constraints of time, lack of accessible alternative management options, cost of prescribing and perceived patient attitude.
The evidence from this study provides little support for the view that GPs take the easy option of prescribing antidepressants in the face of uncertainty. Evidence suggests that the GPs' prescribing was cautious, which indicates that GPs would support the initiative of recent draft guidelines regarding watchful waiting. This guidance, however, needs to be clear about what constitutes mild depression and address the question of prescribing to patients who are experiencing social adversity. Furthermore, alternatives to antidepressants such as counselling would need to be readily and equitably accessible. In addition, GPs need to be convinced that alternatives to antidepressants are at least as effective for patients with so-called 'mild depression'.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
60 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Time pressure is common in acute healthcare and significantly influences clinical judgement and decision making. Despite nurses' judgements being studied since the 1960s, the empirical picture of how time pressure impacts on nurses' judgement strategies and outcomes remain undeveloped. This paper aims to assess alterations in nurses' judgement strategies and outcomes under time pressure in a simulated acute care setting.
    BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 11/2014; 14(1):96. · 1.50 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: To determine whether social inequalities in new antidepressant treatment exist at the individual and/or neighborhood level; and their relation to access to prescribers and/or processes of care (treatment initiation and duration). METHODS: We followed 316,412 inhabitants of Marseilles (aged 18-64 years) covered by the National Health Insurance Fund for 2.5 years. We analyzed new treatments (≥1 purchase of antidepressants and none in the 6 months before the first one), and new long treatments (≥4 within 6 months after the first purchase). We tested their associations with high individual disadvantage and census block deprivation in a multivariate, multilevel logistic model adjusted for consultations with general practitioners and psychiatrists to control for access to care. RESULTS: High individual disadvantage was not associated with the probability of new treatments, but it was with lower odds of receiving new long treatments. Residing in deprived census blocks was associated with lower odds of receiving treatment for both dependent variables. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that social inequalities at the individual and neighborhood levels in new antidepressant treatment occur in access to specialty care and in treatment initiation and affect its duration. Further research is warranted to improve our understanding of their mechanisms.
    Annals of epidemiology 01/2013; · 2.95 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In developed countries, primary care physicians manage most patients with depression. Relatively few studies allow a comprehensive assessment of the decisions these doctors make in these cases and the factors associated with these decisions. We studied how general practitioners (GPs) manage the acute phase of a new episode of non-comorbid major depression (MD) and the factors associated with their decisions. In this cross-sectional telephone survey, professional investigators interviewed an existing panel of randomly selected GPs (1249/1431, response rate: 87.3%). We used case-vignettes about new MD episodes in 8 versions differing by patient gender and socioeconomic status (blue/white collar) and disease intensity (mild/severe). GPs were randomized to receive one of these 8 versions. Overall, 82.6% chose pharmacotherapy; among them GPs chose either an antidepressant (79.8%) or an anxiolytic/hypnotic alone (18.5%). They rarely recommended referral for psychotherapy alone, regardless of severity, but 38.2% chose it in combination with pharmacotherapy. Antidepressant prescription was associated with severity of depression (OR = 1.74; 95%CI = 1.33-2.27), patient gender (female, OR = 0.75; 95%CI = 0.58-0.98), GP personal characteristics (e.g. history of antidepressant treatment: OR = 2.31; 95%CI = 1.41-3.81) and GP belief that antidepressants are overprescribed in France (OR = 0.63; 95%CI = 0.48-0.82). The combination of antidepressants and psychotherapy was associated with severity of depression (OR = 1.82; 95%CI = 1.31-2.52), patient's white-collar status (OR = 1.58; 95%CI = 1.14-2.18), and GPs' dissatisfaction with cooperation with mental health specialists (OR = 0.63; 95%CI = 0.45-0.89). These choices were not associated with either GPs' professional characteristics or psychiatrist density in the GP's practice areas. GPs' choices for treating severe MD complied with clinical guidelines better than those for mild MD; GPs rarely recommended psychotherapy alone but rather as a complement to pharmacotherapy. Their decisions were mainly influenced by personal life experience and attitudes regarding treatment more than by professional characteristics. These results call into question the methods and content of continuing medical education in France about MD management.
    PLoS ONE 12/2012; 7(12):e52429. · 3.53 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
21 Downloads
Available from
May 28, 2014