Elsevier

General Hospital Psychiatry

Volume 24, Issue 1, January–February 2002, Pages 35-42
General Hospital Psychiatry

Commentary and perspective
Implementing practice guidelines for depression: Applying a new framework to an old problem

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0163-8343(01)00169-4Get rights and content

Abstract

We discuss the challenges of implementing clinical practice guidelines for depression in the primary care setting. Multiple potential barriers can limit physician guideline adherence and translation of research into improved patient outcomes. Six primary barriers relate to providers (lack of awareness, lack of familiarity, lack of agreement, lack of self efficacy, lack of outcome expectancy, and inertia of previous practice). In addition, factors related to patient, guideline, and practice environment factors encompass external barriers to adherence. By delineating the underlying barriers to adherence, different interventions that are tailored to improve physician adherence to guidelines can be utilized. We review examples of these barriers, as well as interventions to improve guideline adherence. We also review characteristics of successful interventions to improve physician adherence to guidelines for depression. Since different physicians and practice settings may encounter a variety of barriers, multifaceted interventions that are not focused exclusively on the physician tend to be most effective.

Introduction

Depressive disorders are common, yet often challenging to identify, evaluate and manage. Advances in screening instruments, pharmacotherapy and counseling approaches have provided promise for improved outcomes. However, multiple barriers in the health care system, stigmatization and other factors have limited attempts to reduce the significant morbidity and mortality of depression. Thus, despite the frequent presentation of depression in primary care settings and the availability of effective treatments, the diagnosis and treatment of depression by many primary care practitioners is poor [1].

For example, despite the availability of screening instruments, most primary care physicians do not recognize or properly identify depressed patients. Even when depression is properly diagnosed, primary care physicians often do not provide adequate treatment [2], [3], [4], [5]. Primary care physicians face many pressures and demands; thus, multiple approaches have been recommended to improve the delivery of care for depressed patients.

One method to improve the quality of medical care is to implement clinical practice guidelines, “systematically developed statements to assist practitioner and patient decisions about appropriate health care for specific clinical circumstances” [6].

Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of depression were one of the first guidelines addressed by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) now known as the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). This article focuses on the AHRQ guidelines to illustrate the barriers to physician guideline adherence. However, the same general principles likely apply to other guidelines that have been developed for depression [7], [8].

Well-implemented clinical practice guidelines, in general, can improve patient outcomes [9]. In primary care settings, Katon et al. found that implementation of the AHRQ guidelines for depression increased the quality of care and improved clinical outcomes [10].

However, there is evidence that the AHRQ guidelines have not been effective in changing physician practice in certain settings. For example, although the guidelines are addressed to primary care providers, several studies have documented poor awareness of the guideline [11], [12]. Using AHRQ guideline criteria, Goldberg et al., noted that primary care practitioners had low rates of diagnosing unrecognized cases of depression and continued to prescribe first generation tricyclics, versus newer, safer medications as recommended by the AHRQ guidelines [13]. In addition, Wells et al. surveyed 1,204 patients with depression from 46 primary care clinics in seven different managed care organizations and found that “only 35 to 42% of patients used antidepressant medication in appropriate dosages” using AHRQ criteria [14]. Finally, Young et al. found that only 19% of patients received appropriate care for depression also using AHRQ criteria [15].

As a result, the NIMH National Advisory Mental Health Council has encouraged the improvement of methods for both evaluating clinician implementation and adherence to treatment guidelines [16]. We have previously described a general framework to understand reasons why physicians might not follow practice guidelines [17]. The purpose of this paper is to apply these general concepts to the specific challenges of implementing clinical practice guidelines for depression in the primary care setting. By delineating the underlying barriers to adherence, different interventions which are tailored to improve physician adherence to guidelines can be utilized. We will also examine characteristics of successful attempts to improve guideline adherence and primary care of depression.

Section snippets

Barriers to guideline adherence

Multiple barriers can limit guideline adherence and translation of research into improved patient outcomes. Six primary barriers relate to individual providers, while factors associated with patients, guidelines and the practice environment constitute external barriers. These are described in detail in the following text.

Primary care physicians may not adhere to a guideline simply due to lack of awareness of a guideline’s existence. Although practice guidelines are meant to help physicians keep

Combining interventions based on the barriers

By understanding the underlying barriers, more effective interventions can be combined to address barriers that prevent physician guideline adherence (Table 1). For example, while traditional continuing medical education (CME) might be useful for improving awareness or familiarity to guidelines, more intensive interventions, such as the use of opinion leaders, may be needed for other barriers like lack of agreement. In situations were multiple barriers exist, a broader approach that combines

The need for multi-faceted interventions

Since physicians have different training, experiences and skills, multiple barriers will most likely exist and affect different steps of behavior change. As a result, multiple interventions to improve physician guideline adherence are necessary to address these multiple barriers. Studies that have demonstrated the greatest lasting effect involve intensive interventions at several levels.

Rubenstein et al. developed a multifaceted intervention to improve depression care involving 46 practices in

Characteristics of interventions that are effective

An assessment of studies that have attempted to improve guideline adherence in the primary care setting points to several characteristics of strategies that are effective. Effective strategies are multifaceted and are not exclusively physician-centered. As expected, due to the many barriers to adherence that physicians face, multi-faceted interventions are more effective than single interventions [78]. Physician-oriented educational sessions have only limited effect [79], [80], [81]. Kick et

Management of depression and the primary care system

The barriers described in this review are not unique to the management of depression and occur with other chronic illness such as hypertension and asthma. For example, multiple studies have shown that physician treatment of hypertension does not always match national guidelines for hypertension. [66], [67], [68], [69], [70]. These guidelines also encourage physicians to counsel patients about diet modification for the primary prevention of hypertension [66]. Just as in the treatment of

Recommendations

Effective implementation of the AHRQ depression guidelines can help decrease inappropriate variation in care and is one method for improving quality of care. Lack of adherence to guidelines can be due to a variety of barriers that we describe in the above framework. Just as in patient care, diagnostic strategies are needed “to determine the reasons for suboptimal performance and to identify barriers to change and to select carefully the interventions most likely to be effective in light of the

References (83)

  • G.E. Simon et al.

    Recognition, management, and outcomes of depression in primary care

    Arch Fam Med.

    (1995)
  • T.L. Schwenk et al.

    Depression in the family physician’s office: what the psychiatrist needs to knowthe Michigan Depression Project

    J Clin Psychiatry

    (1998)
  • R.M. Hirschfeld et al.

    The National Depressive and Manic-Depressive Association consensus statement on the undertreatment of depression

    JAMA

    (1997)
  • E.J. Costello

    Primary care pediatrics and child psychopathologya review of diagnostic, treatment and referral practices

    Pediatrics

    (1986)
  • Practice guideline for major depressive disorder in adults

    Am J Psychiatry

    (1993)
  • M.L. Crismon et al.

    The Texas Medication Algorithm Project. Report of the Texas Consensus Conference Panel on medication treatment of major depressive disorder

    J Clin Psychiatry

    (1999)
  • W. Katon et al.

    Collaborative management to achieve treatment guidelinesimpact on depression in primary care

    JAMA

    (1995)
  • E.L. Feldman et al.

    Clinical practice guidelines on depressionawareness, attitudes, and content knowledge among family physicians in New York

    Arch Fam Med

    (1998)
  • J. Betz-Brown et al.

    The paradox of guideline implementationhow AHCPR’s depression guideline was adapted at Kaiser Permanente Northwest Region

    J Qual Improv

    (1995)
  • K.B. Wells et al.

    Quality of care for primary care patients with depression in managed care

    Arch Fam Med

    (1999)
  • A.S. Young et al.

    The quality of care for depressive and anxiety disorders in the United States

    Arch Gen Psychiatry

    (2001)
  • Bridging Science, and Service. NIH

    NIMH

    (1999)
  • M.D. Cabana et al.

    Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidleines? A framework for improvement

    JAMA

    (1999)
  • M.D. Cabana et al.

    Barriers that pediatricians face when using asthma practice guidelines

    Arch Ped Adol Med

    (2000)
  • T.T. Stone et al.

    Evaluation of physician preference for guideline implementation

    Am J Med Qual

    (1999)
  • S.R. Tunis et al.

    Internists’ attitudes about clinical practice guidelines

    Ann Intern Med

    (1994)
  • F.R. Munoz et al.

    On the AHCPR Depression in Primary Care guidelines

    Am Psych

    (1994)
  • C. Blacker et al.

    Depressive disorder in primary care

    Br J Psychiatry

    (1987)
  • H.C. Schulberg et al.

    Treating major depression in primary care practicean update of the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Practice Guidelines

    Arch Gen Psych

    (1998)
  • A.J. Rush

    Clinical practice guidelinesgood news, bad news, or no news?

    Arch Gen Psych

    (1993)
  • D. Antonuccio

    Psychotherapy for depressionno stronger medicine

    Am Psych

    (1995)
  • J.B. Persons et al.

    The role of psychotherapy in the treatment of depressionreview of two practice guidelines

    Arch Gen Psych

    (1996)
  • Guide to Clinical Preventive Services

    (1996)
  • K. Glanz et al.

    Linking Theory, Research, and Practice

  • American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information

  • G.E. Simon et al.

    An international study of the relation between somatic symptoms and depression

    N Engl J Med

    (1999)
  • H.C. Schulberg et al.

    Applicability of clinical pharmacotherapy guidelines for major depression in primary care settings

    Arch Fam Med

    (1995)
  • L. Eisenberg

    Treating depression and anxiety in primary care

    N Eng J Med

    (1992)
  • A.J. Rush

    Linking efficacy and effectiveness research in the evaluation of psychotherapies

  • R.B. Elson et al.

    Computerized patient records in primary caretheir role in medicating guideline-driven physician behavior change

    Arch Fam Med

    (1995)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text