Alex J Mitchell1, Sanjay Rao, Amol Vaze. 1. Department of Cancer Studies and Molecular Medicine, University of Leicester, UK. alex.mitchell@leicspart.nhs.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are international differences in the epidemiology of depression and the performance of primary care physicians but the factors underlying these national differences are uncertain. AIM: To examine the international variability in diagnostic performance of primary care physicians when diagnosing depression in primary care. DESIGN OF STUDY: A meta-analysis of unassisted clinical diagnoses against semi-structured interviews. METHOD: A systematic literature search, critical appraisal, and pooled analysis were conducted and 25 international studies were identified involving 8917 individuals. A minimum of three independent studies per country were required to aid extrapolation. RESULTS: Clinicians in the Netherlands performed best at case finding (the ability to rule in cases of depression with minimal false positives) (AUC+ 0.735) and this was statistically significantly better than the ability of clinicians in Australia (AUC+ 0.622) and the US (AUC+ 0.653), who were the worst performers. Clinicians from Italy had intermediate case-finding abilities. Regarding screening (the ability to rule out cases of no depression with minimal false negatives) there were no strong differences. Looking at overall accuracy, primary care physicians in Italy and the Netherlands were most successful in their diagnoses and physicians from the US and Australia least successful (83.5%, 81.9%, 74.3%, and 67.0%, respectively). GPs in the UK appeared to have the lowest ability to detect depression, as a proportion of all cases of depression (45.6%; 95% CI = 27.7% to 64.2%). Several factors influenced detection accuracy including: collecting data on clinical outcomes; routinely comparing the clinical performance of staff; working in small practices; and having long waits to see a specialist. CONCLUSION: Assuming these differences are representative, there appear to be international variations in the ability of primary care physicians to diagnose depression, but little differences in screening success. These might be explained by organisational factors.
BACKGROUND: There are international differences in the epidemiology of depression and the performance of primary care physicians but the factors underlying these national differences are uncertain. AIM: To examine the international variability in diagnostic performance of primary care physicians when diagnosing depression in primary care. DESIGN OF STUDY: A meta-analysis of unassisted clinical diagnoses against semi-structured interviews. METHOD: A systematic literature search, critical appraisal, and pooled analysis were conducted and 25 international studies were identified involving 8917 individuals. A minimum of three independent studies per country were required to aid extrapolation. RESULTS: Clinicians in the Netherlands performed best at case finding (the ability to rule in cases of depression with minimal false positives) (AUC+ 0.735) and this was statistically significantly better than the ability of clinicians in Australia (AUC+ 0.622) and the US (AUC+ 0.653), who were the worst performers. Clinicians from Italy had intermediate case-finding abilities. Regarding screening (the ability to rule out cases of no depression with minimal false negatives) there were no strong differences. Looking at overall accuracy, primary care physicians in Italy and the Netherlands were most successful in their diagnoses and physicians from the US and Australia least successful (83.5%, 81.9%, 74.3%, and 67.0%, respectively). GPs in the UK appeared to have the lowest ability to detect depression, as a proportion of all cases of depression (45.6%; 95% CI = 27.7% to 64.2%). Several factors influenced detection accuracy including: collecting data on clinical outcomes; routinely comparing the clinical performance of staff; working in small practices; and having long waits to see a specialist. CONCLUSION: Assuming these differences are representative, there appear to be international variations in the ability of primary care physicians to diagnose depression, but little differences in screening success. These might be explained by organisational factors.
Authors: Jordi Alonso; Miquel Codony; Viviane Kovess; Matthias C Angermeyer; Steven J Katz; Josep M Haro; Giovanni De Girolamo; Ron De Graaf; Koen Demyttenaere; Gemma Vilagut; Josué Almansa; Jean Pierre Lépine; Traolach S Brugha Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 9.319
Authors: Koen Demyttenaere; Ronny Bruffaerts; Jose Posada-Villa; Isabelle Gasquet; Viviane Kovess; Jean Pierre Lepine; Matthias C Angermeyer; Sebastian Bernert; Giovanni de Girolamo; Pierluigi Morosini; Gabriella Polidori; Takehiko Kikkawa; Norito Kawakami; Yutaka Ono; Tadashi Takeshima; Hidenori Uda; Elie G Karam; John A Fayyad; Aimee N Karam; Zeina N Mneimneh; Maria Elena Medina-Mora; Guilherme Borges; Carmen Lara; Ron de Graaf; Johan Ormel; Oye Gureje; Yucun Shen; Yueqin Huang; Mingyuan Zhang; Jordi Alonso; Josep Maria Haro; Gemma Vilagut; Evelyn J Bromet; Semyon Gluzman; Charles Webb; Ronald C Kessler; Kathleen R Merikangas; James C Anthony; Michael R Von Korff; Philip S Wang; Traolach S Brugha; Sergio Aguilar-Gaxiola; Sing Lee; Steven Heeringa; Beth-Ellen Pennell; Alan M Zaslavsky; T Bedirhan Ustun; Somnath Chatterji Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-06-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: S S Biswas; R Gupta; H A Vanjare; S Bose; J A Patel; S Selvarajan; J Aaron; E Nitya; D S Iyer; N S M Jacob; K R John; K S Jacob Journal: Int Psychogeriatr Date: 2009-01-13 Impact factor: 3.878
Authors: David G Beiser; Charlotte E Ward; Milkie Vu; Neda Laiteerapong; Robert D Gibbons Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2019-04-07 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Kirsti Nurmela; Aino Mattila; Virpi Heikkinen; Jukka Uitti; Aarne Ylinen; Pekka Virtanen Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: Clara Teusen; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Victoria von Schrottenberg; Feyza Gökce; Gabriele Pitschel-Walz; Peter Henningsen; Jochen Gensichen; Antonius Schneider Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-10-21 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Patrick H Alizai; Maren K Akkerman; Daniel Kaemmer; Florian Ulmer; Christian D Klink; Sabine Ernst; Klaus Mathiak; Ulf P Neumann; Volker Perlitz Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2015-06-10 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Mariko Carey; Kim Jones; Graham Meadows; Rob Sanson-Fisher; Catherine D'Este; Kerry Inder; Sze Lin Yoong; Grant Russell Journal: Aust N Z J Psychiatry Date: 2014-01-10 Impact factor: 5.744
Authors: Alain Mercier; Jacques Benichou; Isabelle Auger-Aubin; Jean-Pierre Lebeau; Estelle Houivet; Paul Van Royen; Lieve Peremans Journal: Ann Gen Psychiatry Date: 2015-01-22 Impact factor: 3.455