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.
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.