Authors: Mitchell, Alex J¹; Rao, Sanjay²; Vaze, Amol²

Source: British Journal of General Practice, Volume 61, Number 583, February 2011 , pp. e72-e80(9)

Publisher: Royal College of General Practitioners

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.

References: 71 references open in new window

Articles that cite this article?

Keywords: depression; diagnostic accuracy; international; screening; sensitivity

Document Type: Research article

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgp11X556227

Affiliations: 1: Department of Cancer Studies and Molecular Medicine, University of Leicester 2: Leicestershire Partnership Trust, Leicester

Publication date: 2011-02-01

More about this publication?

• The British Journal of General Practice is an international journal publishing articles of interest to family practitioners and primary care researchers worldwide. The journal's 2010 Impact Factor is 2.07, making it the world's second most highly cited journal of general practice and primary health care.
  
  Recent issues: members of the Royal College of General Practitioners receive complementary access to the British Journal of General Practice. Access is via the members' login area using your RCGP membership details. All users can freely access articles published up to 1 year ago, and the BJGP archive is available via PubMed Central.
  
  Email alerts can be enabled by registering with ingentaconnect. For information, see Help for web users.
• Information for Authors
• Subscribe to this Title
• Membership Information
• BJGP Archive
• ingentaconnect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites

Related content

• In this: publication
• By this: publisher
• In this Subject: Public Health
• By this author: Mitchell, Alex J ;  Rao, Sanjay ;  Vaze, Amol

Website © Publishing Technology. Article copyright remains with the publisher, society or author(s) as specified within the article.

• Terms and conditions
• Privacy policy
• Information for advertisers