Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2014 Jun;48(6):571-8. doi: 10.1177/0004867413520047. Epub 2014 Jan 10.

Accuracy of general practitioner unassisted detection of depression.

Author information

1
Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, Australia mariko.carey@newcastle.edu.au.
2
Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, Australia.
3
Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, School of Psychology and Psychiatry, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
4
Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, Australia Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
5
Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, Australia Centre for Brain and Mental Health Research, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
6
Southern Academic Primary Care Research Unit, School of Primary Health Care, Monash University, Notting Hill, Australia.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

Primary care is an important setting for the treatment of depression. The aim of the study was to describe the accuracy of unassisted general practitioner judgements of patients' depression compared to a standardised depression-screening tool delivered via touch-screen computer.

METHOD:

English-speaking patients, aged 18 or older, completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) when presenting for care to one of 51 general practitioners in Australia. General practitioners were asked whether they thought the patients were clinically depressed. General practitioner judgements of depression status were compared to PHQ-9 results.

RESULTS:

A total of 1558 patients participated. Twenty per cent of patients were identified by the PHQ-9 as being depressed. General practitioners estimated a similar prevalence; however, when compared to the PHQ-9, GP judgement had a sensitivity of 51% (95% CI [32%, 66%]) and a specificity of 87% (95% CI [78%, 93%]).

CONCLUSIONS:

General practitioner unassisted judgements of depression in their patients lacked sensitivity when compared to a standardised psychiatric measure used in general practice.

KEYWORDS:

Case finding; depression; primary care; screening; sensitivity; specificity

PMID:
24413807
PMCID:
PMC4230951
DOI:
10.1177/0004867413520047
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Atypon Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Support Center