22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Why are there discrepancies between depressed patients’ Global Rating of Change and scores on the Patient Health Questionnaire depression module? A qualitative study of primary care in England

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          Our aims were to investigate discrepancies between depressed patients’ GlobalRating of Change (GRC) and scores on the Patient Health Questionnaire depression module (PHQ-9). Our objectives were to ascertain patients’ views on the source and meaning of mismatches and assess their clinical significance.

          Design

          Qualitative study nested within a cohort, in a programme investigating the indications for prescribing antidepressants that will lead to a clinical benefit.

          Setting

          Primary care practices in north-west England.

          Participants

          We invited 32 adults with a recent diagnosis of depression and evidence of mismatch between GRC and PHQ-9 Scores to participate. Of these, 29 completed our interviews; most were women, identified as white British, had high school education or higher, were employed or retired and had been depressed for a long time.

          Main measures

          We conducted semistructured interviews with a topic guide, focusing on experiences of depression; treatment experiences and expectations; effectiveness of the questionnaires; reasons for the mismatch; and social factors. Interviews were transcribed and subjected to interpretative phenomenological analysis.

          Results

          We identified four themes as explanations for mismatch between GRC and PHQ-9: perceptions that GRC provided a more accurate assessment of current mental state than PHQ-9; impact of recent negative or positive life events on either measure; personal understanding of depression as normally fluctuating, and tendency to underscore on PHQ-9 as a means of self-motivation; and lack of recall.

          Conclusions

          The combined used of the PHQ-9 and a more open question better captures the patient’s unique experiences of mental health. This approach ascertains the relevance of symptoms to the individual’s experience and influences treatment decisions.

          Study registration

          This study was an element of NIHR Programme Grant RP-PG 0610 10048.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Patient Health Questionnaire Somatic, Anxiety, and Depressive Symptom Scales: a systematic review.

          Depression, anxiety and somatization are the most common mental disorders in primary care as well as medical specialty populations; each is present in at least 5-10% of patients and frequently comorbid with one another. An efficient means for measuring and monitoring all three conditions would be desirable. Evidence regarding the psychometric and pragmatic characteristics of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-9 depression, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD)-7 anxiety and PHQ-15 somatic symptom scales are synthesized from two sources: (1) four multisite cross-sectional studies (three conducted in primary care and one in obstetric-gynecology practices) comprising 9740 patients, and (2) key studies from the literature that have studied these scales. The PHQ-9 and its abbreviated eight-item (PHQ-8) and two-item (PHQ-2) versions have good sensitivity and specificity for detecting depressive disorders. Likewise, the GAD-7 and its abbreviated two-item (GAD-2) version have good operating characteristics for detecting generalized anxiety, panic, social anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. The optimal cutpoint is > or = 10 on the parent scales (PHQ-9 and GAD-7) and > or = 3 on the ultra-brief versions (PHQ-2 and GAD-2). The PHQ-15 is equal or superior to other brief measures for assessing somatic symptoms and screening for somatoform disorders. Cutpoints of 5, 10 and 15 represent mild, moderate and severe symptom levels on all three scales. Sensitivity to change is well-established for the PHQ-9 and emerging albeit not yet definitive for the GAD-7 and PHQ-15. The PHQ-9, GAD-7 and PHQ-15 are brief well-validated measures for detecting and monitoring depression, anxiety and somatization. Copyright 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Global rating of change scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses and considerations for design.

            Most clinicians ask their patients to rate whether their health condition has improved or deteriorated over time and then use this information to guide management decisions. Many studies also use patient-rated change as an outcome measure to determine the efficacy of a particular treatment. Global rating of change (GRC) scales provide a method of obtaining this information in a manner that is quick, flexible, and efficient. As with any outcome measure, however, meaningful interpretation of results can only be undertaken with due consideration of the clinimetric properties, strengths, and weaknesses of the instrument. The purpose of this article is to summarize this information to assist appropriate interpretation of the GRC results and to provide evidence-informed advice to guide design and administration of GRC scales. These considerations are relevant and applicable to the use of GRC scales both in the clinic and in research.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Cognitive dysfunction in unipolar depression: implications for treatment.

              The primary objective of this review is to examine the literature assessing abnormalities in neural circuitry and cognition early in the course of major depressive disorder (MDD) and the impact of these features on treatment selection and long-term outcomes. English language and peer-reviewed publications were obtained by PubMed/Medline (www.pubmed.org) searches using combinations of major depressive disorder, major depression, or unipolar depression and "first episode", early, cognition, cognitive, executive function and memory. The terms bipolar and psychosis were excluded from the searches. These searches yielded 409 records. A total of 12 studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses were selected that evaluated learning, memory and executive function in individuals with major depressive disorder. Additional publications meeting these criteria were identified from the bibliographies of the 12 selected articles and from the "related citations" section of PubMed. Difficulty in concentrating and indecisiveness are reported as among the most troubling symptoms by patients with MDD and may limit functional recovery. Cognitive deficits in memory and decision-making are present early in the course of MDD and may be accompanied by structural abnormalities in the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex involved in cognitive functions. Although resolution of cognitive symptoms of depression lags behind recovery from mood symptoms in many patients, preliminary evidence suggests they may improve with antidepressant therapy, but can also persist residually. New strategies that target cognitive symptoms of depression in addition to mood symptoms are needed to improve long-term outcomes, particularly functional recovery. © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2017
                4 May 2017
                : 7
                : 4
                : e014519
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentDepartment of Sociology, Social Policy and Criminology , University of Liverpool , Liverpool, UK
                [2 ] departmentDepartment of Psychological Sciences , University of Liverpool , Liverpool, UK
                [3 ] departmentSchool of Social and Community Based Medicine , University of Bristol , Bristol, UK
                [4 ] departmentDepartment of Mental Health Sciences Unit , UCL Psychiatric Epidemiology , London, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Prof Christopher Dowrick; cfd@ 123456liv.ac.uk
                Article
                bmjopen-2016-014519
                10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014519
                5566896
                28473513
                0a89c548-9221-422d-ad2a-248c1fb3e805
                © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 29 September 2016
                : 22 February 2017
                : 28 February 2017
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007602, Programme Grants for Applied Research;
                Categories
                General practice / Family practice
                Research
                1506
                1696
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                primary care,depression,diagnosis,patient perspectives,mismatch,phq-9
                Medicine
                primary care, depression, diagnosis, patient perspectives, mismatch, phq-9

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content229

                Cited by15

                Most referenced authors300