Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
  • 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
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
  • 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
  • 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
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Commentary

Battling depression

Donna E. Stewart
CMAJ April 08, 2008 178 (8) 1023-1024; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.080126
Donna E. Stewart MD
  • 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
  • © 2008 Canadian Medical Association

Depression is a major public health problem, which is predicted to be second only to cardiovascular disease as the leading cause of disease-related disability worldwide by 2020.1 It is already the leading cause of disease-related disability among women, and in most countries, the prevalence of depression among women from puberty to menopause is twice that among men of the same age.1 In Canada, the 12-month prevalence of depression among people aged 18–65 is 4.8% (5.9% of women, 3.7% of men), with the sex-based disparity being even greater during the child-bearing years.2 Certain subgroups of Canadians are at even higher risk. For example, Aboriginal people who live off-reserve are 1.5 times more likely than other Canadians to be depressed over a 12-month period. Depression rates are slightly higher in the United States and slightly lower in Europe but follow the same sex-based pattern. In addition to personal suffering, depression has a detrimental effect on general health, family well-being, work productivity and health care costs. It may also lead to self-injury and suicide.2

Unfortunately, depression is underrecognized and poorly treated by both primary care physicians and specialists. Numerous studies in developed countries report that only half of patients with depression in primary care or general hospital settings are identified and even fewer are adequately treated.3 Most patients with depression in Canada and elsewhere are treated exclusively by primary care physicians. Various reasons have been proposed for the low rate of identification, including time pressure, competing comorbidities, stigma, physician preference for dealing with physical conditions, uncertainty about treatment efficacy and patient denial. Screening has been proposed as a method of increasing identification of depression in primary care and in perinatal, cardiovascular and diabetes mellitus clinics. But does screening alone help the detection, treatment and outcomes of depression?

In this issue of CMAJ, Gilbody and colleagues addressed this question in a rigorous Cochrane systematic review and meta-analyses of 16 randomized controlled trials in nonmental health settings.4 The authors found that screening and case-finding instruments were associated with a modest increase in the recognition of depression by clinicians (relative risk [RR] 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02 to 1.59). When questionnaires were administered to all patients and the results given to the clinicians irrespective of the patient's baseline score, there was no impact on recognition of depression (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.24). However, the authors reported that there was a borderline significant effect on the overall management of depression (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.76) and that there was no evidence of an influence on the prescription of antidepressant medication (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.66). Seven studies provided data on the impact of screening on depression outcomes, but there was no evidence of an effect (standardized mean difference –0.02, 95% CI –0.25 to 0.20). They concluded that recommendations to adopt depression screening strategies in isolation are not justified and successful care likely requires organizational enhancements.

So given that depression is a serious health problem, what might improve its identification, treatment and outcomes? Although the findings by Gilbody and colleagues may surprise some, their findings are consistent with the reports of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care and their American counterparts, which point out that depression screening needs to be accompanied by accurate diagnosis, effective treatment and follow-up.5 This suggests that systemic changes are needed to improve depression outcomes, but exactly what would this entail? As a start, we should look at what has worked in research settings and other jurisdictions.

A systemic review of the effectiveness of educational and organizational strategies to improve the management of depression in primary care found that effectiveness was usually associated with complex interventions that incorporated clinician education, case management by nurses and greater integration between primary and specialist mental health care.6 Telephone medication counselling by practice nurses or trained counselors was also found to be effective. However, simple guideline implementation or educational strategies were generally ineffective.6

A randomized controlled trial in primary care settings in the United Kingdom recently tested these findings by allocating patients to usual care or to collaborative care with a case manager, coordinated medication support, brief psychological treatment and enhanced specialist and general practitioner communication.7 The researchers concluded that “collaborative care is a potentially powerful organizational intervention for improving depression treatment in United Kingdom primary care, the effect of which is probably partly mediated through the organizational aspects of the intervention”.7

An early US study showed that collaborative care models in primary care involving psychologists (to provide short-term psychotherapy to increase adaptive coping) and psychiatrists (to consult on medication) improved treatment adherence, satisfaction with care and clinical outcomes for patients with major, but not minor, depression.8

A small US randomized controlled trial that compared usual care and telephone-managed care found that those in the telephone-care group improved significantly more than those in the usual care group.9 This study also reported that the improvements in depression among those in the telephone-care group was related to improved clinician adherence to treatment algorithms but that it was not related to improved patient adherence to clinician recommendations.9

Arguably the most successful trial to date was the large, intensive trial of quality improvements for depression care called “Partners in Care.” This trial compared primary care clinics to usual care (mailing of practice guidelines) or to a quality-improvement program. The quality-improvement program was based on obtaining institutional commitment, training local experts to provide clinician and patient education and providing either nurses for patient follow-up about medication or access to trained psychotherapists to provide individual and group cognitive behavioural therapy as outlined in a manual. This program also screened all primary care patients, included educational materials and talks for clinicians and patients, and provided ongoing feedback to clinicians based on record audits. At 6 and 12 months, more patients in the quality-improvement program than in the usual care program had received counselling, used antidepressants at an appropriate dose, had a medical visit for a mental health problem and had seen a mental health specialist. However, the number of overall medical visits did not increase. More importantly, compared with patients in the usual-care group, patients in the quality-improvement group had better outcomes for depression improvement after 6 and 12 months of follow-up and, at 12 months, they were more likely to be working.10

We can safely conclude that screening for depression alone in primary care and hospital settings will not improve outcomes. Complex interventions are needed that incorporate systemic interventions that may include depression screening as one component. We need to involve mental health nurses, psychologists, social workers and case managers as well as family physicians and psychiatrists in “shared care” for treatment of depression. Antidepressant drugs are effective treatments for about half of all patients with depression, and cognitive behavioural treatment is also an effective treatment for cases of mild to moderate depression and for reducing its recurrence. Patients with depression may respond differently to specific drugs or psychotherapy, so we need tailored approaches. As depression is a chronic recurring disorder, we also need longer-term strategies to manage it and to prevent recurrences. There is clearly no quick fix, but the sooner we develop interventions that are coordinated, systemic, collaborative, multidisciplinary and evidence-based, instead of our current predominantly sole practitioner model of pill prescription, the sooner we will see improved outcomes with better quality of life and productivity for patients with this prevalent disorder.

@ See related research article page 997

Key points

• Screening alone does not improve recognition, treatment or outcomes of depression in primary care or general hospital settings.

• Evidence-based treatments for depression include both antidepressants and cognitive behavioural psychotherapy. Patients may respond differently to specific antidepressants or psychotherapy.

• Systemic, collaborative, multidisciplinary and coordinated programs are needed to improve depression outcomes.

Footnotes

  • Une version française de cet article est disponible à l'adresse www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/178/8/1023/DC1

    Competing interests: Donna E. Stewart is on the advisory boards of Eli Lilly and Wyeth.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Murray CJ, Lopez AD, eds. The global burden of disease: A comprehensive assessment of morbidity and disability from disease, injuries and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1996.
  2. 2.↵
    Stewart DE, Gucciardi E, Grace SL. Depression. BioMed Central Women's Health 2004;25: Suppl 1-19.
  3. 3.↵
    Katon W, Ciechanowski P. Impact of major depression on chronic medical illness. J Psychosom Res 2002;53:859-63.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    Gilbody S, Sheldon T, House A. Screening and case-finding instruments for depression: a meta-analysis. CMAJ 2008;178:997-1003.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    MacMillan HL, Patterson CJS, Wathen CN; Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Screening for depression in primary care: recommendation statement from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. CMAJ 2005;172:33-5.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    Gilbody S, Whitty P, Grimshaw J, et al. Educational and organizational interventions to improve the management of depression in primary care: a systemic review. JAMA 2003;289:3145-51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    Richards DA, Lovell K, Gilbody S, et al. Collaborative care for depression in UK primary care: a randomized controlled trial. Psychol Med 2008;38:279-87.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    Katon W, Robinson P, VonKorff M, et al. A multifaceted intervention to improve treatment of depression in primary care. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1996;53:924-32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    Datto CJ, Thompson R, Horowitz D, et al. The pilot study of telephone disease management program for depression. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2003;25:169-77.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    Wells KB, Sherbourne C, Schoenbaum M, et al. Impact of disseminating quality improvement programs for depression in managed primary care: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000;283:212-20.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 178 (8)
CMAJ
Vol. 178, Issue 8
8 Apr 2008
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Canadian Adverse Reaction Newsletter

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.
Battling depression
(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
Battling depression
Donna E. Stewart
CMAJ Apr 2008, 178 (8) 1023-1024; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.080126

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Battling depression
Donna E. Stewart
CMAJ Apr 2008, 178 (8) 1023-1024; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.080126
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Highlights of this issue
  • Dans ce numéro
  • Screening and case-finding instruments for depression: a meta-analysis
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Review: screening or case-finding questionnaires used alone are not effective for management of depression
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Antiracism as a foundational competency: reimagining CanMEDS through an antiracist lens
  • Keeping the front door open: ensuring access to primary care for all in Canada
  • Improving post-tuberculosis care in Canada
Show more Commentary

Similar Articles

 

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