Alex J Mitchell1, Sanjay Rao, Amol Vaze. 1. Leicester General Hospital, Leicestershire Partnership Trust, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester, UK. ajm80@leicester.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is long-standing concern regarding poor recognition of depression in primary care, especially in older people. METHODS: Studies that examined the unassisted (clinical) ability of general practitioners (GPs; primary care physicians) to identify depression were divided into those of older adults, younger adults and mixed populations. Data were extracted by 3 reviewers independently and pooled using a Bayesian meta-analysis. RESULTS: We identified 31 valid studies that examined both sensitivity and specificity (or rule-in and rule-out accuracy), involving 52,513 individuals. Twelve studies recruited older individuals, 12 recruited younger adults and 7 recruited both younger and older adults (mixed populations). In the most robust studies the point prevalence of depression in late life was 13.2% (95% CI = 7.9-19.6). GPs were able to correctly identify 47.3% of the late-life depressions and 78.6% of the non-cases (71.0% overall accuracy). In younger adults GPs were able to identify 39.7% of the mid-life depressions and 85.1% of the non-depressed (77.8% overall accuracy). In mixed aged groups GPs we able to correctly identify 46.6% of the depressed individuals and 86.2% of the non-depressed (79.6% overall accuracy). The overall fraction correctly identified was significantly lower in older compared with younger adults. Correcting for differences in prevalence showed a statistically lower rule-in performance for older compared with younger adults. There was no difference in ability to identify non-depressed (healthy) individuals by age. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice GPs appear to be less successful in identifying depression in older people than in younger adults, however there have been few head-to-head studies stratified by age from one centre. Copyright 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel.
BACKGROUND: There is long-standing concern regarding poor recognition of depression in primary care, especially in older people. METHODS: Studies that examined the unassisted (clinical) ability of general practitioners (GPs; primary care physicians) to identify depression were divided into those of older adults, younger adults and mixed populations. Data were extracted by 3 reviewers independently and pooled using a Bayesian meta-analysis. RESULTS: We identified 31 valid studies that examined both sensitivity and specificity (or rule-in and rule-out accuracy), involving 52,513 individuals. Twelve studies recruited older individuals, 12 recruited younger adults and 7 recruited both younger and older adults (mixed populations). In the most robust studies the point prevalence of depression in late life was 13.2% (95% CI = 7.9-19.6). GPs were able to correctly identify 47.3% of the late-life depressions and 78.6% of the non-cases (71.0% overall accuracy). In younger adults GPs were able to identify 39.7% of the mid-life depressions and 85.1% of the non-depressed (77.8% overall accuracy). In mixed aged groups GPs we able to correctly identify 46.6% of the depressed individuals and 86.2% of the non-depressed (79.6% overall accuracy). The overall fraction correctly identified was significantly lower in older compared with younger adults. Correcting for differences in prevalence showed a statistically lower rule-in performance for older compared with younger adults. There was no difference in ability to identify non-depressed (healthy) individuals by age. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice GPs appear to be less successful in identifying depression in older people than in younger adults, however there have been few head-to-head studies stratified by age from one centre. Copyright 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel.
Authors: S Van der Auwera; G Schomerus; S E Baumeister; H Matschinger; M Angermeyer Journal: Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci Date: 2016-01-12 Impact factor: 6.892
Authors: Marie Dorow; Janine Stein; Alexander Pabst; Siegfried Weyerer; Jochen Werle; Wolfgang Maier; Lisa Miebach; Martin Scherer; Anne Stark; Birgitt Wiese; Lilia Moor; Jens-Oliver Bock; Hans-Helmut König; Steffi G Riedel-Heller Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2017-09-25 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Jo Anne Sirey; Alexandra Woods; Nili Solomonov; Lauren Evans; Samprit Banerjee; Paula Zanotti; George Alexopoulos; Helen C Kales Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2020-04-23 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Melissa D Zullo; Emily C Gathright; Mary A Dolansky; Richard A Josephson; Vinay K Cheruvu; Joel W Hughes Journal: J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 2.081
Authors: Natalie C Benda; George S Alexopoulos; Patricia Marino; Jo Anne Sirey; Dimitris Kiosses; Jessica S Ancker Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2021-01-25