Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Dr Peter Cornwall
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
Background. Many policy and research documents on the treatment of depression in primary care suggest that general practitioners (GPs) should make use of clinical guidelines. Aim. To describe the content of peer-reviewed guidelines for the detection and treatment of depression in primary care and help GPs identify the one most useful to their own needs. Method. Guidelines were evaluated by an explicit method using the Institute of Medicine assessment instrument and according to six key clinical management questions identified as important by GPs and psychiatrists. Results. Only five (30%) of the published guidelines identified met all the pre-defined inclusion criteria. Total scores for development process and content ranged from 54% to 82%. Validity scores ranged from 52% to 88%. No guideline answered all the key questions identified by clinicians. Conclusions. Only two guidelines conform to the quality standard of a clinical practice guideline. One covers all aspects of detection and management of depression in primary care but gives no advice on first-line choice of antidepressant, while the other focuses only on medication and fails to explore problems of case detection or to consider non-pharmacological treatments. However, taken together they do cover most of the key clinical issues in a reliable and valid manner. The identified guidelines vary considerably in both utility and clinical applicability.
Author(s): Cornwall PL; Scott J
Publication type: Review
Publication status: Published
Journal: British Journal of General Practice
Year: 2000
Volume: 50
Issue: 460
Pages: 908-911
ISSN (print): 0960-1643
ISSN (electronic): 1478-5242
URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1313856/
PubMed id: PMC1313856
