Literature DB >> 7804491

Clinician specialty and treatment style for depressed outpatients with and without medical comorbidities.

L S Meredith1, K B Wells, P Camp.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The advent of clinical practice guidelines for the management of depression increases the importance of understanding variation across clinician specialty groups in treatment styles for depression and the role of medical comorbidities.
METHODS: Data are reported by clinicians (N = 470) and patients (N = 2545). Multiple regression was used to compare the treatment styles (counseling and prescribing antidepressants) of family physicians with those of psychiatrists, medical subspecialists, internists, psychologists, and other therapists for depressed patients with different medical comorbidities.
RESULTS: Relative to other primary care specialists, family physicians had the strongest preferences for both counseling and prescribing antidepressants for depressed patients. Family physicians reported preferences for treating with antidepressants that were similar to those of psychiatrists. However, in actual practice, medication use was higher among the patients of psychiatrists than those of family physicians. Mental health care specialists reported the strongest counseling preferences and provided the most counseling in actual practice, compared with general medicine physicians. Internists and subspecialists had similar preferences for prescribing antidepressants, but, compared with internists, subspecialists had lower preferences for counseling. Clinician preferences for counseling were similar for depressed patients with or without medical comorbidities, but preferences for prescribing antidepressants were lowest for patients with depression and myocardial infarction, compared with other patient groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Measures of clinician treatment style for depression are good proxies for counseling but not for prescribing practices. Among general medical physicians, family physicians have the strongest reported preferences in treating depression but, especially in terms of medication therapy, do not always follow those preferences. Preferred treatments of patients with and without medical comorbidities were similar. Findings have implications for improving the quality of treatment of depressed patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7804491     DOI: 10.1001/archfami.3.12.1065

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Fam Med        ISSN: 1063-3987


  5 in total

Review 1.  Knowledge, patterns of care, and outcomes of care for generalists and specialists.

Authors:  L R Harrold; T S Field; J H Gurwitz
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Primary care clinicians evaluate integrated and referral models of behavioral health care for older adults: results from a multisite effectiveness trial (PRISM-e).

Authors:  Joseph J Gallo; Cynthia Zubritsky; James Maxwell; Michael Nazar; Hillary R Bogner; Louise M Quijano; Heidi J Syropoulos; Karen L Cheal; Hongtu Chen; Herman Sanchez; John Dodson; Sue E Levkoff
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.166

3.  Treating depression in staff-model versus network-model managed care organizations.

Authors:  L S Meredith; L V Rubenstein; K Rost; D E Ford; N Gordon; P Nutting; P Camp; K B Wells
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Symptoms of major depression and tricyclic side effects in primary care patients.

Authors:  B L Rollman; M R Block; H C Schulberg
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  System factors affect the recognition and management of posttraumatic stress disorder by primary care clinicians.

Authors:  Lisa S Meredith; David P Eisenman; Bonnie L Green; Ricardo Basurto-Dávila; Andrea Cassells; Jonathan Tobin
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.983

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.