Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
SynopsisD

Screening for depression in primary care: recommendation statement from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care

Harriet L. MacMillan, Christopher J.S. Patterson, C. Nadine Wathen and ; and The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care
CMAJ January 04, 2005 172 (1) 33-35; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.1030823
Harriet L. MacMillan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher J.S. Patterson
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
C. Nadine Wathen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading
  • © 2005 Canadian Medical Association or its licensors

In 1994 the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care addressed screening for depression in asymptomatic individuals during periodic health assessments.1 On the basis of a review of the literature published to May 1993, the task force concluded that there was fair evidence to exclude screening for depression in the primary care setting (grade D recommendation), because screening instruments did not improve the detection rate or management of depression, particularly among people at high risk, such as those with a family history of depression. The task force recently revisited the topic to determine whether studies published in the past 10 years provided new evidence to recommend that primary care practitioners routinely screen their patients for depression.

In 2002 a systematic review was conducted at the request of the US Preventive Services Task Force to determine whether routine screening improves the detection, treatment and outcome of depression.2,3 This rigorous overview provided the basis for our review to update the Canadian task force's recommendation (Table 1). (A summary of the methods and results of the Canadian task force's review of the US task force's work, the subsequent literature update and the process of arriving at the practice recommendations are available at www.ctfphc.org.)

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint

Table 1.

Depression is frequently encountered in patients in the primary care setting. The 1994/95 National Population Health Survey, a Canadian longitudinal study that included household residents in all provinces, gave a 1-year prevalence rate for major depressive disorder of about 6% among Canadians 18 years of age and older.8 Rates were higher among females than among males and declined in both sexes in the elderly population. Data from a province-wide Canadian community-based survey revealed a 6-month prevalence of depression of 5.9% among children 6–16 years of age.9 Certain subgroups of the Canadian population may be at increased risk for depression. The 2000/01 Canadian Community Health Survey showed that, after controlling for socioeconomic factors, Aboriginal people living off-reserve were 1.5 times more likely than non-Aboriginal people to have experienced an episode of depression in the previous year.10

The prevalence of major depression in Canadian primary care settings is unknown; however, in the United States point prevalence estimates of between 4.8% and 8.6% have been reported.2,11

When making its recommendations (Table 1), the Canadian task force not only considered the effectiveness of screening tools in identifying patients with depression in primary care settings, but it also evaluated the treatment options and outcomes arising from the initial screening process, weighing at each point the potential benefits of intervention against the potential harms (including false-positive results leading to further, unnecessary diagnostic investigation). The systematic review for the US task force2 found good evidence that screening for depression in the primary care setting improves detection rates. Furthermore, when screening is linked to appropriate follow-up and treatment, the overall result, based on a meta-analysis of findings from key studies, was a reduced risk of depression. However, when identification of depressed patients was not linked to follow-up and treatment, there was generally much less improvement in depressive symptoms. Evidence regarding screening adolescents and children is lacking. The available evidence led the US task force to recommend that adults be screened for depression “in clinical practices that have systems in place to assure accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and follow-up” (grade B recommendation).12 The Canadian task force, after reviewing this body of evidence in the Canadian context, and having ascertained that no new evidence was available, reached the same conclusion (Table 1).

In the studies reviewed, “effective follow-up and treatment” referred to screening programs that were integrated with both feedback to the clinician regarding depression status and a system for managing treatment (antidepressants and psychotherapeutic interventions). Trials that included access to case management or mental health care as part of the system of care were particularly effective in reducing depressive symptoms.

Clinical implications: What should primary health care providers do?

A number of screening tools exist for use in primary care settings. Asking 2 simple questions regarding mood and anhedonia — “Over the past 2 weeks, have you felt down, depressed, or hopeless?” and “Over the past 2 weeks, have you felt little interest or pleasure in doing things?” — may be as effective as longer instruments.12,13 The authors of the systematic review for the US task force calculated that 11 patients with depression would need to be identified through screening to produce 1 additional remission at 6 months. Assuming a 10% prevalence of treatment-responsive depression in primary care, 110 patients would need to be screened to produce this additional clinical remission.2 Although the optimal interval for screening is unknown, the US task force recently stated that “recurrent screening may be most productive in patients with past history of depression, unexplained somatic symptoms, comorbid psychological conditions (such as panic disorder or generalized anxiety), substance abuse, or chronic pain.” 12 A positive screen must be followed by accurate diagnosis, effective treatment and follow-up to ensure that the benefits of screening are realized.

“Integrated programs” as defined in the US and Canadian task force reviews went beyond feedback and included interventions such as education of patients or health care providers or both, access to case management or mental health care and telephone follow-up.12 In deciding whether an integrated program of care for screening and treating depression exists in a community, clinicians need to examine the step-by-step process by which patients go from screening to receiving effective treatment. Given the heterogeneity of the models used in the studies reviewed, it is not possible to recommend a specific primary care-based screening and treatment program for depression. However, the following questions, with examples, may assist clinicians in determining whether integrated care exists in their community:

• Is there a mechanism to ensure that the screening results are reported to the clinician, who can then provide appropriate treatment for depression? What is the process by which the patient proceeds from screening positive to having the diagnosis confirmed to receiving treatment for depression? In the study by Katzelnick and colleagues,5 results of telephone screening were provided to physicians, who saw the patients at an evaluation visit and then for prescheduled follow-up sessions. Providers in the study by Wells and colleagues7 were asked to schedule a visit with patients 2 weeks after the initial screening.

• Is there a clinician trained in the use of antidepressants who will follow up with patients who screen positive? Is there access to psychotherapists trained in approaches effective for the treatment of depression? Evidence-based training in the management and treatment of depression was implemented in the integrated programs reviewed. For example, the study by Wells and colleagues7 provided a 2-day training workshop to clinical leaders (local primary care experts and nurse specialists) as well as educational materials for clinicians and patients. Furthermore, the clinical leaders provided educational sessions, including lectures and ongoing feedback, to clinicians based on medical record audits. Those in the psychotherapy intervention group of this trial had access to therapists who received specific training in cognitive behavioural therapy. In the study by Rost and colleagues,6 both primary care physicians and nurses received brief training in the management of depression that was aimed at enhancing the proportion of patients who completed a course of psychopharmacotherapy or psychotherapy. In each of these studies, there was strong coordination in place and a systematic process that integrated screening with treatment of depression.

Authors of the US task force review suggested that, for increased rates of screening to be translated into improved outcomes, special focus on the course of therapy may be required, “perhaps in the form of a quality improvement effort or other programs systematically designed to provide appropriate care” (page 66).3

The Canadian task force recognizes that such services may not yet be available in all settings. However, on the basis of the evidence, and the burden of this disease, physicians are encouraged to advocate for the implementation of systems to provide linked screening for depression and treatment services in primary care settings.

Footnotes

  • An abridged version of this article appeared in the Jan. 4, 2005, issue of CMAJ and is available online at www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/172/1/33/DC1

    Contributors: Harriet MacMillan reviewed the evidence and drafted the recommendations and this commentary; Christopher Patterson and Nadine Wathen reviewed the evidence and draft recommendations, critically revised the current article and reviewed subsequent revisions. The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care critically reviewed the evidence and developed the recommendations according to its methodology and consensus development process.

    Acknowledgement: We thank Jana Fear, former Research Assistant to the task force, for her help in preparing the article.

    Harriet MacMillan was supported by the Wyeth Canada CIHR Clinical Research Chair in Women's Mental Health. The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care is funded by Health Canada.

    This statement is based on the technical report: “Screening for depression in primary care: updated recommendations from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care,” by Harriet L. MacMillan, Christopher J.S. Patterson and C. Nadine Wathen, with the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. The full technical report is available online (www.ctfphc.org) or from the task force office (ctfctfphc.org).

    Correspondence to: Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, 117–100 Collip Circle, London ON N6G 4X8 ; fax 519 858-5112; ctfctfphc.org

References

  1. 1.↵
    Feightner JW. Early detection of depression. In: Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. Canadian guide to clinical preventive health care. Ottawa: Health Canada; 1994. p. 450-4.
  2. 2.↵
    Pignone MP, Gaynes BN, Rushton JL, Burchell CM, Orleans CT, Mulrow CD, et al. Screening for depression in adults: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136:765-76.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    Pignone M, Gaynes BN, Rushton JL, Mulrow CD, Orleans CT, Whitener BL, et al. Screening for depression [systematic evidence review no 6]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2002.
  4. 4.
    Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. New grades for recommendations from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. CMAJ 2003;169(3):207-8.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    Katzelnick DJ, Simon GE, Pearson SD, Manning WG, Helstad CP, Henk HJ, et al. Randomized trial of a depression management program in high utilizers of medical care. Arch Fam Med 2000;9:345-51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    Rost K, Nutting P, Smith J, Werner J, Duan N. Improving depression outcomes in community primary care practice: a randomized trial of the QuEST intervention. Quality Enhancement by Strategic Teaming. J Gen Intern Med 2001;16:143-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    Wells KB, Sherbourne C, Schoenbaum M, Duan N, Meredith L, Unützer J, et al. Impact of disseminating quality improvement programs for depression in managed primary care: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000; 283:212-20.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    Beaudet MP. Depression. Health Rep 1996;7:11-24.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    Fleming JE, Offord DR. Epidemiology of childhood depressive disorders: a critical review. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 1990;29(4):571-80.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    Statistics Canada. Health of the off-reserve Aboriginal population, 2000/ 01. The Daily [Statistics Canada, Ottawa] 2002;Aug 27:2-3. Cat no 11-001E. Available: www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/020827/d020827.pdf
  11. 11.↵
    Depression Guideline Panel. Depression in primary care: Volume 1. Detection and diagnosis [clinical guideline no 5, AHCPR publ no 93-0550]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 1993. Available: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=hstat6.chapter.14485 (accessed 2004 Nov 17).
  12. 12.↵
    US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for depression: recommendations and rationale. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136:760-4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    Whooley MA, Avins AL, Miranda J, Browner WS. Case-finding instruments for depression. Two questions are as good as many. J Gen Intern Med 1997; 12:439-45.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 172 (1)
CMAJ
Vol. 172, Issue 1
4 Jan 2005
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Canadian Adverse Reaction Newsletter (127-138)

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Screening for depression in primary care: recommendation statement from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Screening for depression in primary care: recommendation statement from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care
Harriet L. MacMillan, Christopher J.S. Patterson, C. Nadine Wathen
CMAJ Jan 2005, 172 (1) 33-35; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.1030823

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Screening for depression in primary care: recommendation statement from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care
Harriet L. MacMillan, Christopher J.S. Patterson, C. Nadine Wathen
CMAJ Jan 2005, 172 (1) 33-35; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.1030823
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Clinical implications: What should primary health care providers do?
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Guidelines for Adolescent Depression in Primary Care (GLAD-PC): Part I. Practice Preparation, Identification, Assessment, and Initial Management
  • Dr. Roubille, et al reply
  • Case finding and screening clinical utility of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9 and PHQ-2) for depression in primary care: a diagnostic meta-analysis of 40 studies
  • Collaborative Care Versus Screening and Follow-up for Patients With Diabetes and Depressive Symptoms: Results of a Primary Care-Based Comparative Effectiveness Trial
  • Screening for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Why screening for depression in primary care is impractical
  • Recommendations on screening for depression in adults
  • Diagnostic accuracy of case-finding questions to identify perinatal depression
  • Rethinking recommendations for screening for depression in primary care
  • Evidence-based clinical guidelines for immigrants and refugees
  • Does a single-item measure of depression predict mortality?
  • Battling depression
  • Screening and case-finding instruments for depression: a meta-analysis
  • Complete health checkup for adults: Update on the Preventive Care Checklist Form(C)
  • Screening and long-term follow-up of depression in my practice
  • Nodding and napping in medical lectures: an instructive systematic review
  • Preventive care: so many recommendations, so little time
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • The changing ecology of avian flu
  • Applying the 2005 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations: 4. Managing uncomplicated hypertension
  • A newborn requiring selective bronchial intubation
Show more Synopsis

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Psychiatry & mental health: adult

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
  • Accessibiity
  • CMA Civility Standards
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: cmajgroup@cmaj.ca

Powered by HighWire