Cited by 209Treatment of Major DepressionMental Health Treatment and AccessAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The treatment of depression: prescribing patterns of antidepressants in primary care in the UK

Donoghue, J. M., Tylee, A.·1996·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Consensus has been achieved about how depression should be treated in primary care, and guidelines have been issued by the Royal Colleges of General Practitioners and Psychiatrists, and by the British Association for Psychopharmacology. One of the principal recommendations is to prescribe antidepressant medicine at effective doses. This study was established to investigate how current prescribing practices in primary care compared with these guidelines. Method: Information on prescribing of antidepressant medicines was obtained using three independent data sources: Prescribing Analysis and Cost (PACT) data; medical notes; and a large, computerised patient record database. Results: Data were obtained on populations in excess of 1.5 million people, and over 80 000 prescriptions were reviewed. All three data sources showed very similar patterns of prescribing, in particular that as many as 88% of prescriptions for older tricyclic antidepressants are prescribed by GPs at doses below those recommended by the consensus guidelines. Newer antidepressants – lofepramine and the SSRIs – are prescribed comparatively well. Conclusions: Prescribing of antidepressants by GPs is not in line with the consensus recommendations on dosage. This may have major educational implications for GPs. A pragmatic approach to improve prescribing in the short term may be to advocate the use of lofepramine or the SSRIs as first line treatment for depression. This study validates the use of PACT data as a useful audit tool in this area of clinical practice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1192/bjp.168.2.164

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Donoghue, J. M., & Tylee, A.
Affiliations
  • Clatterbridge Hospital (GB)
  • St George's Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Donoghue, J. M.
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
1996-02
Volume
168
Issue
2
Pages
164-168
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2106075952
Cited by
209
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
15.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
depression, antidepressant prescribing, prescribing patterns, primary care, guideline adherence, tricyclic antidepressants, lofepramine, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, dose optimization, general practitioners
MeSH terms
Antidepressive Agents, Depressive Disorder, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Drug Administration Schedule, Drug Utilization, United Kingdom, Humans, Medical Audit, Patient Care Team, Primary Health Care, Treatment Outcome, Practice Guidelines as Topic

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