Depression screening: a practical strategy

,

Applied Evidence

Depression screening: a practical strategy

J Fam Pract. 2003 February;52(2):127-134

By

Donald E. Nease Jr, MD

PDF Download

References

1. Katon W, Schulberg H. Epidemiology of depression in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 1992;14:237-47.

2. Magruder-Habib K, Zung WW, Feussner JR. Improving physicians’ recognition and treatment of depression in general medical care. Results from a randomized clinical trial. Med Care 1990;28:239-50.

3. Coyne JC, Schwenk TL, Fechner-Bates S. Nondetection of depression by primary care physicians reconsidered. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 1995;17:3-12.

4. Williams JW, Mulrow CD, Kroenke K, et al. Case-finding for depression in primary care: a randomized trial. Am J Med 1999;106:36-43.

5. Greenberg PE, Stiglin LE, Finkelstein SN, Berndt ER. The economic burden of depression in 1990. J Clin Psychiatry 1993;54:405-18.

6. Katon W, Von Korff M, Lin E, et al. Distressed high utilizers of medical care. DSM-III-R diagnoses and treatment needs. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 1990;12:355-62.

7. Von Korff M, Ormel J, Katon W, Lin EH. Disability and depression among high utilizers of health care. A longitudinal analysis. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1992;49:91-100.

8. Wells KB, Stewart A, Hays RD, et al. The functioning and well-being of depressed patients. Results from the Medical Outcomes Study. JAMA 1989;262:914-9.

9. Ford DE, Mead LA, Chang PP, Cooper-Patrick L, Wang NY, Klag MJ. Depression is a risk factor for coronary artery disease in men: the precursors study. Arch Intern Med 1998;158:1422-6.

10. Pignone MP, Gaynes BN, Rushton JL, et al. Screening for depression in adults: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002;136:765-76.

11. US. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for depression: recommendations and rationale. Ann Intern Med 2002;136:760-4.

12. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB. Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ primary care study. Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders. Patient Health Questionnaire. JAMA 1999;282:1737-44.

13. Valenstein M, Vijan S, Zeber JE, Boehm K, Buttar A. The cost-utility of screening for depression in primary care. Ann Intern Med 2001;134:345-60.

14. Jaen CR, Stange KC, Nutting PA. Competing demands of primary care: a model for the delivery of clinical preventive services. J Fam Pract 1994;38:166-71.

15. Klinkman MS. Competing demands in psychosocial care. A model for the identification and treatment of depressive disorders in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 1997;19:98-111.

16. American Psychiatric Association, American Psychiatric Association, Task Force on DSM-IV. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV-TR. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.

17. Schwenk TL, Coyne JC, Fechner-Bates S. Differences between detected and undetected patients in primary care and depressed psychiatric patients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 1996;18:407-15.

18. Williams JW, Jr, Noel PH, Cordes JA, Ramirez G, Pignone M. Is this patient clinically depressed? JAMA 2002;287:1160-70.

19. Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Gibbon M, First MB. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID). I: History, rationale, and description. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1992;49:624-9.

20. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983;67:361-70.

21. Silverstone PH. Poor efficacy of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale in the diagnosis of major depressive disorder in both medical and psychiatric patients. J Psychosom Res 1994;38:441-50.

22. Wells KB, Sherbourne C, Schoenbaum M, et al. Impact of disseminating quality improvement programs for depression in managed primary care: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000;283:212-20.

23. Stewart AL, Hays RD, Ware JE, Jr. The MOS short-form general health survey. Reliability and validity in a patient population. Med Care 1988;26:724-35.

24. Rost K, Nutting P, Smith J, Coyne JC, Cooper-Patrick L, Rubenstein L. The role of competing demands in the treatment provided primary care patients with major depression. Arch Fam Med 2000;9:150-4.

25. Leon AC, Portera L, Olfson M, et al. False positive results: a challenge for psychiatric screening in primary care. Am J Psychiatry 1997;154:1462-4.

26. Nease DE, Jr, Klinkman MA, Volk RJ. Improved detection of depression in primary care through severity detection. J Fam Pract 2002;51:1065-70.

27. Spitzer RL, Williams J, Kroenke K, Linzer M, deGruy FV, Hann SR, et al. Utility of a new procedure for diagnosing mental disorders in primary care: the PRIME-MD 1000 study. JAMA 1994;272:1749-56.

28. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 2001;16:606-13.

29. Coyne JC, Fechner-Bates S, Schwenk TL. Prevalence, nature, and comorbidity of depressive disorders in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 1994;16:267-76.

30. Wells K, Burnam M, Rogers W, Hays R, Camp P. The course of depression in adult outpatients: results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1992;49:788-94.

31. Lambert MJ, Hatch DR, Kingston MD, Edwards BC. Zung, Beck, and Hamilton Rating Scales as measures of treatment outcome: a meta-analytic comparison. J Consult Clin Psychol 1986;54:54-9.

32. Beck A, Ward C, Mendelson M, Mock J, Erbaugh J. An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1961;4:561-71.

33. Zung WW, Richards CB, Short MJ. Self-rating depression scale in an outpatient clinic. Further validation of the SDS. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1965;13:508-15.

34. Radloff LS. The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement 1977;1:385-401.

35. Sheikh JI, Yesavage JA. Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS): Recent evidence and development of a shorter version. In: Clinical Gerontology: A Guide to Assessment and Intervention. New York: Haworth Press; 1986;165-73.

Practice recommendations

A 2-stage strategy, combining an assessment of severity with depression criteria, can help a physician focus on the most severe cases without missing less severe ones that still need treatment (B).
Because of its brevity, relatively high positive predictive value, and ability to inform the clinician on both depression severity and diagnostic criteria, the PRIME-MD Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) is the best available depression screening tool for primary care (B).
One-time screening is cost-effective; physicians may elect to screen more often based on risk factors (A).

What is the most efficient and accurate way for a busy primary care physician to screen patients for depression? Many screening tools exist, but they are not equally effective.

A careful review of the literature strongly favors a 2-stage strategy assessing both depression severity and criteria. In this article, we describe this optimal approach against the background of other available resources.

Health and economic impact of depression

In the average family practice, around 6 cases of depression go unrecognized each week. This real-world estimate derives from studies that consistently report a 10% prevalence of depression in primary care patients¹ but a rate of recognition by primary care clinicians of only 29% to 35%.^2-4 Depression is a common condition with a large impact on quality of life and productivity, one that indirectly affects other health states, including cardiovascular disease.^5-9 It is responsible for an estimated economic cost in the US of over $40 billion annually. As a result, depression screening has been an active area of research, and a variety of organizations have issued guidelines recommending routine screening for depression in primary care.

The need for an efficient, reliable screening tool

Based on a recent review of the evidence on depression screening outcomes in primary care settings,¹⁰ the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) updated its screening recommendation in 2002 to include an endorsement of depression screening in adults “in clinical practices that have systems in place to assure accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and follow-up” (strength of recommendation [SOR]=A).¹¹ This endorsement leaves the primary care clinician with no guidance about how or when to screen for depression.

Despite lack of guidance in the USPTF guidelines, we believe depression screening can be done efficiently and reliably in primary care. However, one must begin by understanding that depression screening is different from screening for cancer or cardiovascular risk factors (Table 1). The burdens of interpretation of depression screening results are especially noteworthy. For example, the PRIME-MD Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) is reported to have a sensitivity of 61% and specificity of 94% for any mood or depressive disorder.¹² This results in a positive predictive value (PPV) of 50% using a reasonable estimate of 10% prevalence for depression in primary care settings.¹³

Put simply, following administration and scoring of the PHQ, the clinician is left with little better odds than a coin toss of identifying a patient that has an active major depressive disorder requiring treatment. If there was no objective help, clinicians would have only their clinical judgment to resolve this, all during an office visit that contains many other competing agendas and demands.^14,15

We have reviewed the evidence on depression screening instruments with the intent to highlight an instrument that clinicians can efficiently and reliably use to find depressed and impaired patients in their practice whom they might otherwise miss.

TABLE 1
Burdens of screening for cancer, hyperlipidemia, and depression

	Cancer		Hyperlipidemia		Depression
Burden of performance	Low	Simple test or performance of billable procedure	Low	Blood test	High	Time-intensive administration & scoring
Burden of interpretation	Low	Confirmatory testing often referred to specialists	Low	No confirmatory reference standard testing	High	High false positive rate w/burdensome reference standard
Burden of treatment	Low	Treatment done by specialists	High	Requires activation of patient & frequent monitoring	High	Requires activation of patient & frequent monitoring

Two types of screening instruments

Depression screening instruments can be grouped into 2 categories:

depression assessment scales, which ask patients to rate the severity or frequency of various symptoms
symptom count instruments, which are based on depression criteria.

Depression assessment scales preceded symptom count instruments, and many were developed prior to the establishment of formal diagnostic criteria within the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual ofMental Disorders (DSM) system.¹⁶Table 2 lists available examples of depression assessment scales and symptom count instruments, along with websites where you may access further information and the instruments themselves.

TABLE 2
Accuracy and ease of administration of commonly available screening instruments

Instrument	Time and scoring	LR+ (95% CI)	LR– (95% CI)	PPV (95% CI)	Web source
Assessment scale
Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)³²	2–5 min; simple	4.2 (1.2–13.6)	0.17 (0.1–0.3)	29.6% (10.7–57.6)	www.psychcorpcenter.com/content/bdi-II.htm
Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D)³⁴	2–5 min; simple	3.3 (2.5–4.4)	0.24 (0.2–0.3)	24.8% (20–30.6)	http://www.mhhe.com/hper/health/personal health/labs/Stress/activ2-2.html
Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS)³⁵	2–5 min; simple>	3.3 (2.4–4.7)	0.16 (0.1–0.3)	24.8% (19.4–32)	http://www.stanford.edu/~yesavage/GDS.html
Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale* (HADS)²⁰	2–5 min; simple	7.0 (2.9–11.2)	0.3 (0.3–0.4)	41.3% (22.6–52.8)	www.clinical-supervision.com/hads.htm
Zung Self Assessment Depression Scale (Zung SDS)³³	2–5 min; simple	3.3 (1.3–8.1)	0.35 (0.2–0.8)	24.8% (11.5–44.8)	http://fpinfo.medicine.uiowa.edu/calculat.htm
Symptom count
Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders ^†(PRIME-MD)²⁷	2 min; complex	2.7 (2.0–3.7)	0.14 (0.1–0.3)	21.3% (16.7–27)	Available upon request to Robert Spitzer, MD: RLS8@columbia.edu
PRIME-MD Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)	5–7 min; simple	10.2^‡ (6.5–17.5)	0.4^‡ (0.3–0.5)	50.4% (39.4–63.6)	fpinfo.medicine.uiowa.edu/calculat.htm
Symptom-Driven Diagnostic System for Primary Care^†(SDDS-PC)	2 min; simple	3.5 (2.4–5.1)	0.2 (0.1–0.4)	25.9% (19.4–33.8)	No website available
PRIME-MD Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9)	2 –5 min; simple	12.2 (8.4–18)	0.28 (0.2–0.5)	55% (45.7–64.3)	www.depression-primarycare.org/ap1.html
* Unless noted by (*), adapted from Williams et al.¹⁸
† Values reflect the initial brief screening portion of these instruments.
‡ PHQ vaues obtained from original position and reflect diagnosis of “any mood disorders.”
LR+, positive likelihood ratio; LR–, negative likelihood ratio; PPV, positive predictive value; CI, confidence interval