Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2005 Oct;55(519):755-62.

A qualitative study exploring how GPs decide to prescribe antidepressants

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

A qualitative study exploring how GPs decide to prescribe antidepressants

Julia Hyde et al. Br J Gen Pract. 2005 Oct.

Abstract

Background: To influence GPs' prescribing policies and practices it is necessary to have an understanding of how they make decisions. The limited evidence available suggests that not only do GPs find making decisions about diagnosing and prescribing for depression problematic, but that decisions are severely constrained by lack of resources. As a result, it might be thought that GPs, in line with current guidelines, will inevitably prescribe antidepressants for patients presenting with symptoms of anxiety and depression. This study examines the accuracy of this view.

Aim: To explore how GPs decide to prescribe antidepressants.

Design: Focus groups with self-selected GPs.

Setting: Bristol and the surrounding district.

Method: Qualitative study of five focus groups with 27 GPs.

Results: GPs' decisions about whether an antidepressant would be an appropriate form of management are shaped by a set of rules based on 'clinical' and 'social' criteria. The preferred strategy is to 'wait and see', but antidepressants are prescribed earlier when symptoms are perceived to be persistent, unresolving, severe and 'classic'. Decisions to prescribe are also shaped by organisational constraints of time, lack of accessible alternative management options, cost of prescribing and perceived patient attitude.

Conclusion: The evidence from this study provides little support for the view that GPs take the easy option of prescribing antidepressants in the face of uncertainty. Evidence suggests that the GPs' prescribing was cautious, which indicates that GPs would support the initiative of recent draft guidelines regarding watchful waiting. This guidance, however, needs to be clear about what constitutes mild depression and address the question of prescribing to patients who are experiencing social adversity. Furthermore, alternatives to antidepressants such as counselling would need to be readily and equitably accessible. In addition, GPs need to be convinced that alternatives to antidepressants are at least as effective for patients with so-called 'mild depression'.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Murray CJ, Lopez AD. Alternative projections of mortality and disability by cause 1990–2020: Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet. 1997;349:1498–504. - PubMed
    1. Anderson IM, Nutt DJ, Deakin JF. Evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants: a revision of the 1993 British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines. British Association for Psychopharmacology. J Psychopharmacol. 2000;14(1):3–20. - PubMed
    1. Davidson JRT, Meltzer-Brody SE. The under-recognition and undertreatment of depression: what is the breadth and depth of the problem? J Clin Psychiatry. 1999;60(Suppl 7):4–9. - PubMed
    1. Heath I. Commentary: There must be limits to the medicalisation of human distress. BMJ. 1999;318:439–440. - PubMed
    1. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Depression: core interventions in the management of depression in primary and secondary care. http://www.nice.org.uk/page.aspx?o=cg023 (accessed 2 Sep 2005)

Publication types

Substances