Cited by 44Primary Care and Health OutcomesMental Health Treatment and AccessHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention

The effects of financial incentives for case finding for depression in patients with diabetes and coronary heart disease: interrupted time series analysis

Open access
McLintock, Kate, Russell, Amy M, Alderson, Sarah L, West, Robert, House, Allan, Westerman, Karen, Foy, Robbie·2014·BMJ Open

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effects of Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) incentivised case finding for depression on diagnosis and treatment in targeted and non-targeted long-term conditions. Design: Interrupted time series analysis. Setting: General practices in Leeds, UK. Participants: 65 (58%) of 112 general practices shared data on 37 229 patients with diabetes and coronary heart disease targeted by case finding incentives, and 101 008 patients with four other long-term conditions not targeted (hypertension, epilepsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma). Intervention: Incentivised case finding for depression using two standard screening questions. Main outcome measures: Clinical codes indicating new depression-related diagnoses and new prescriptions of antidepressants. We extracted routinely recorded data from February 2002 through April 2012. The number of new diagnoses and prescriptions for those on registers was modelled with a binomial regression, which provided the strength of associations between time periods and their rates. Results: New diagnoses of depression increased from 21 to 94/100 000 per month in targeted patients between the periods 2002–2004 and 2007–2011 (OR 2.09; 1.92 to 2.27). The rate increased from 27 to 77/100 000 per month in non-targeted patients (OR 1.53; 1.46 to 1.62). The slopes in prescribing for both groups flattened to zero immediately after QOF was introduced but before incentivised case finding (p<0.01 for both). Antidepressant prescribing in targeted patients returned to the pre-QOF secular upward trend (Wald test for equivalence of slope, z=0.73, p=0.47); the slope was less steep for non-targeted patients (z=−4.14, p<0.01). Conclusions: Incentivised case finding increased new depression-related diagnoses. The establishment of QOF disrupted rising trends in new prescriptions of antidepressants, which resumed following the introduction of incentivised case finding. Prescribing trends are of concern given that they may include people with mild-to-moderate depression unlikely to respond to such treatment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005178

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [37]Spence D Reid I Head to head: are antidepressants overprescribed? BMJ 2013; 346: f190 23341567
  2. [41]National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Depression in adults: the treatment and management of depression in adults. NICE Clinical Guideline 90. 2009: 9 31886986

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McLintock, K., Russell, A. M., Alderson, S. L., West, R., House, A., Westerman, K., & Foy, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • NHS England (GB)
Corresponding author
McLintock, Kate
Venue
BMJ Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2014-08
Volume
4
Issue
8
Pages
e005178
ISSN
2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2041878767
Cited by
44
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
FWCI
8.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • BMJ Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (PB-PG-0110-21046)
  • University of Leeds
  • Research for Patient Benefit Programme
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Keywords
depression, case finding, financial incentives, Quality and Outcomes Framework, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, antidepressant prescribing, depression screening, chronic disease, general practice, overdiagnosis
MeSH terms
Antidepressive Agents, Coronary Disease, Depression, Diabetes Mellitus, United Kingdom, Humans, Physician Incentive Plans, Quality of Health Care, Reimbursement, Incentive, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Prescriptions, General Practice, Physicians, Primary Care, Quality Improvement, Interrupted Time Series Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review