Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Use of a self-rating scale to monitor depression severity in recurrent GP consultations in primary care - does it really make a difference?: A randomised controlled study
Univ Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska Acad, Inst Med, Dept Primary Hlth Care Publ Hlth & Community, Gothenburg, Sweden..
Karolinska Inst, Dept Neurobiol Care Sci & Soc, Div Family Med, Stockholm, Sweden..
Narhalsan Res & Dev Primary Hlth Care, Reg Vastra Gotaland, Gothenburg, Sweden.;Univ Gothenburg, Inst Neurosci & Physiol, Dept Hlth & Rehabil, Unit Physiotherapy, Gothenburg, Sweden..
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: BMC Family Practice, ISSN 1471-2296, E-ISSN 1471-2296, Vol. 18, article id 6Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Little information is available about whether the use of self-assessment instruments in primary care affects depression course and outcome. The purpose was to evaluate whether using a depression self-rating scale in recurrent person-centred GP consultations affected depression severity, quality of life, medication use, and sick leave frequency. Methods: Patients in the intervention group met their GP regularly at least 4 times during the 3 months intervention. In addition to treatment as usual (TAU), patients completed a self-assessment instrument (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale) on each occasion, and then GPs used the completed instrument as the basis for a person-centred discussion of changes in depression symptoms. The control group received TAU. Frequency of visits in the TAU arm was the result of the GPs' and patients' joint assessments of care need in each case. Depression severity was measured with Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), quality of life with EQ-5D, and psychological well-being with the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12). Data on sick leave, antidepressant and sedatives use, and care contacts were collected from electronic patient records. All variables were measured at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months. Mean intra-individual changes were compared between the intervention and TAU group. Results: There were no significant differences between the intervention and control group in depression severity reduction or remission rate, change in quality of life, psychological well-being, sedative prescriptions, or sick leave during the whole 12-month follow-up. However, significantly more patients in the intervention group continued antidepressants until the 6 month follow-up (86/125 vs 78/133, p < 0.05). Conclusions: When GPs used a depression self-rating scale in recurrent consultations, patients more often continued antidepressant medication according to guidelines, compared to TAU patients. However, reduction of depressive symptoms, remission rate, quality of life, psychological well-being, sedative use, sick leave, and health care use 4-12 months was not significantly different from the TAU group. These findings suggest that frequent use of depression rating scales in person-centred primary care consultations has no further additional effect on patients' depression or well-being, sick leave, or health care use.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BIOMED CENTRAL LTD , 2017. Vol. 18, article id 6
Keywords [en]
Depression, Primary care, Self-assessment instrument, Adherence, Sick-leave, Quality-of-life
National Category
General Practice
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-319658DOI: 10.1186/s12875-016-0578-9ISI: 000397340300001PubMedID: 28103816OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-319658DiVA, id: diva2:1087495
Available from: 2017-04-07 Created: 2017-04-07 Last updated: 2018-01-13Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(884 kB)82 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 884 kBChecksum SHA-512
377820d3740c1635ef36caf4463423483388c2444244c482737ac92edcf3e04556b5f66358c2cc93d40d2a9b6636c909501f0cb4b2a98b5ce023250bf6fd9c48
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
André, Malin
By organisation
Family Medicine and Preventive Medicine
In the same journal
BMC Family Practice
General Practice

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 82 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 528 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf