Tony Kendrick1, Beth Stuart2, Colin Newell2, Adam W A Geraghty2, Michael Moore2. 1. Primary Care and Population Sciences, University of Southampton, UK. Electronic address: A.R.Kendrick@Southampton.ac.uk. 2. Primary Care and Population Sciences, University of Southampton, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Both the 2004 NICE depression guidelines and 2006 general practice Quality Outcomes Framework (QOF) encouraged improved targeting of antidepressant treatment for depression. METHODS: Possible effects of the NICE guideline from January 2005, and QOF from April 2006, on rates of GP antidepressant prescribing were examined using time trend analyses of anonymised data from 142 English practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), 2003-2013. RESULTS: Sustained reductions were found in the proportion of first-ever depression episodes treated within 12 months, of 4.2% (95% C.I. 1.0-7.3%) following introduction of the NICE guideline, and 4.4% (2.3-6.5%) following introduction of the QOF. Treatment rates for first-ever episodes fell from 72.5% (70.8-74.1%) in Quarter 2 (Q2) 2003 to 61.0% (59.3-62.7%) in Q1 2012, but treatment rates for recurrent episodes increased from 74.3% (72.8-75.8%) to 77.8% (76.5-79.1%), so overall rates remained around 70%. Mean prescriptions per patient per year doubled from 2.06 (2.05-2.07) to 3.98 (3.97-3.99). LIMITATIONS: Participating practices were larger than average and not representative across regions. Inferences of cause and effect from time trend analyses are subject to the possibility of unidentified confounders. No data were available on depression severity or appropriateness of prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of GP antidepressant treatment for patients with incident depression fell following introduction of NICE depression guidelines and the QOF, but treatment rates for recurrent depression increased. Prescription numbers increased due to longer treatment courses. To impact on antidepressant prescribing rates, guidelines and performance indicators must address recurrent and long-term prescribing, rather than initial treatment decisions.
BACKGROUND: Both the 2004 NICE depression guidelines and 2006 general practice Quality Outcomes Framework (QOF) encouraged improved targeting of antidepressant treatment for depression. METHODS: Possible effects of the NICE guideline from January 2005, and QOF from April 2006, on rates of GP antidepressant prescribing were examined using time trend analyses of anonymised data from 142 English practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), 2003-2013. RESULTS: Sustained reductions were found in the proportion of first-ever depression episodes treated within 12 months, of 4.2% (95% C.I. 1.0-7.3%) following introduction of the NICE guideline, and 4.4% (2.3-6.5%) following introduction of the QOF. Treatment rates for first-ever episodes fell from 72.5% (70.8-74.1%) in Quarter 2 (Q2) 2003 to 61.0% (59.3-62.7%) in Q1 2012, but treatment rates for recurrent episodes increased from 74.3% (72.8-75.8%) to 77.8% (76.5-79.1%), so overall rates remained around 70%. Mean prescriptions per patient per year doubled from 2.06 (2.05-2.07) to 3.98 (3.97-3.99). LIMITATIONS: Participating practices were larger than average and not representative across regions. Inferences of cause and effect from time trend analyses are subject to the possibility of unidentified confounders. No data were available on depression severity or appropriateness of prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of GP antidepressant treatment for patients with incident depression fell following introduction of NICE depression guidelines and the QOF, but treatment rates for recurrent depression increased. Prescription numbers increased due to longer treatment courses. To impact on antidepressant prescribing rates, guidelines and performance indicators must address recurrent and long-term prescribing, rather than initial treatment decisions.
Authors: George Hripcsak; Patrick B Ryan; Jon D Duke; Nigam H Shah; Rae Woong Park; Vojtech Huser; Marc A Suchard; Martijn J Schuemie; Frank J DeFalco; Adler Perotte; Juan M Banda; Christian G Reich; Lisa M Schilling; Michael E Matheny; Daniella Meeker; Nicole Pratt; David Madigan Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2016-06-06 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Emma Maund; Beth Stuart; Michael Moore; Christopher Dowrick; Adam W A Geraghty; Sarah Dawson; Tony Kendrick Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Adam Wa Geraghty; Miriam Santer; Samantha Williams; Jennifer Mc Sharry; Paul Little; Ricardo F Muñoz; Tony Kendrick; Michael Moore Journal: Health (London) Date: 2016-10-01
Authors: Becky Mars; Jon Heron; David Kessler; Neil M Davies; Richard M Martin; Kyla H Thomas; David Gunnell Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2016-11-24 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: George Salaminios; Larisa Duffy; Anthony Ades; Ricardo Araya; Katherine S Button; Rachel Churchill; Tim Croudace; Catherine Derrick; Padraig Dixon; Christopher Dowrick; Simon Gilbody; William Hollingworth; Vivien Jones; Tony Kendrick; David Kessler; Daphne Kounali; Paul Lanham; Alice Malpass; Tim J Peters; Derek Riozzie; Jude Robinson; Debbie Sharp; Laura Thomas; Nicky J Welton; Nicola Wiles; Glyn Lewis Journal: Trials Date: 2017-10-24 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Clément François; Adrian Tanasescu; François-Xavier Lamy; Nicolas Despiegel; Bruno Falissard; Ylana Chalem; Christophe Lançon; Pierre-Michel Llorca; Delphine Saragoussi; Patrice Verpillat; Alan G Wade; Djamel A Zighed Journal: J Mark Access Health Policy Date: 2017-09-13
Authors: Niklas Bobrovitz; Carl Heneghan; Igho Onakpoya; Benjamin Fletcher; Dylan Collins; Alice Tompson; Joseph Lee; David Nunan; Rebecca Fisher; Brittney Scott; Jack O'Sullivan; Oliver Van Hecke; Brian D Nicholson; Sarah Stevens; Nia Roberts; Kamal R Mahtani Journal: BMC Med Date: 2018-07-26 Impact factor: 8.775