Skip to main content

Table 2 Study Characteristics

From: Does GP training in depression care affect patient outcome? - A systematic review and meta-analysis

Study Country Recruitment, Inclusion Criteria Randomization Na Intervention, Role of GP Training Control Group Comparison Quality
Baker (2001) [36] GB Consecutive patients; ≥ 18 yrs
Patients seeking consultation for new-onset depression
Practices 402 Tailored intervention to promote guideline implementation (additional feedback, educational visits, group discussions)
Additional to guideline
UCb Patients of experimental group vs. control group 30
Bosmans (2006) [33] NL Consecutive patients; ≥ 55 yrs
PRIME-MD = MD
Practices 145 4 hrs training session on screening, diagnosis and treatment as in Dutch guidelines UC Patients of experimental group vs. control group 39
Gask (2004) [38] GB GP referral;
16-65 yrs
Intention or current treatment of depression (symptoms < 6 mo)
HAM-D ≥ 13
Practice 189 Acquisition of clinical skills, 5 lectures à 2 hrs on assessment and treatment;
Sole intervention
WL Patients of experimental group vs. control group 36
Kendrick (2001) [34]
Thompson (2000) [35]
GB Consecutive patients;
≥ 16 yrs
HADS-D ≥ 8
Practice 733 Guideline implementation & GP training (4 h seminars, educators available for 9 more mo);
Additional to guideline
WL Patients of experimental group vs. control group
Sensitivity of recognition rates of experimental group vs. control group
36
King (2002) [41] GB Consecutive patients;
≥ 18 yrs
HADS-D/A ≥ 11
Practice 272 Training of GPs in brief cognitive behaviour therapy (4 half day workshops);
Sole intervention
WL Patients of experimental group vs. control group 34
Llewellyn-Jones (1999)
[40]
AUS Residential facility;
≥ 65 yrs
GDS ≥ 10
MMSE ≥ 18
Patient 220 Shared Care Intervention, including GP training & education, health education and promotion, psychoeducation;
Central part of complex intervention
WLc Experimental group vs. control group 33
Rost (2001) [44]
Pyne (2003) [43]
Rost (2005) [45]
USA GP referral;
DSM III-R MD (latter two studies exclude patients currently in treatment)
Practice 479 QuEST intervention, 4 academic telephone calls to implement guidelines, nurse w/8-hour face-to-face training;
Guidelines implementation
UC Patients of experimental group vs. control groupd 38
Worrall (1999) [39] CAN GP referral;
GP diagnosis and severity rating, later CES-D ≥ 16
Practice 147 3-hour sessions on guideline implementation + possible consultation of psychiatrist;
Guidelines implementation
UCb Patients of experimental group vs. control group 26
  1. a At baseline;b Receipt of guidelines by mail;c Assessment of control group during first period of study, followed by intervention and assessment of experimental group;d Rost et al. (2001): comparison recently treated patients vs. patients beginning new treatment episode, analysis for both intervention groups.
  2. Abbreviations: CES-D - Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale; CIDI - Composite International Diagnostic Interview; GDS - Geriatric Depression Scale; GP - General Practitioner; HADS-D/A - Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; HAM-D - Hamilton Depression Scale; MD - Major Depression; MMSE - Mini Mental Status Examination; mo - month(s); PRIME-MD - Primary care Evaluation of Mental Disorders; QI - Quality Improvement; UC - Usual Care; w/- with; WL - Waiting List; yrs - years.