Beyond the medical file: a scoping review on patients’ perspectives on guideline-oriented depression treatment in primary care

Katharina Biersack, Heribert Sattel, Petra Schönweger, Lea Kaspar, Nadine Lehnen, Jochen Gensichen, Peter Henningsen, the POKAL group
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.12.27.23297265

Abstract

Objectives Depressive disorders are common in the primary care setting. Primary care practitioners must deal with different disorders and keep up with evidence-based treatment. Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) offer accessible information about up-to-date care but are poorly implemented. Research on the implementation of CPGs has focused on the practitioners’ perspective but has neglected the patients’ perspective largely.

This scoping review aimed to identify terms related to the concept of ‘patients’ perspectives on depression treatment in primary care building a comprehensive framework and to identify researched barriers and facilitators to partaking in care.

Methods We conducted a scoping review on Medline and Psycinfo. Eligible publications contained information from the patients’ point of view on depression treatment in primary care in OECD member states. We used the PCC-framework to obtain inclusion criteria. Publications until August 2nd 2023 were considered.

Results We included 232 publications. Current literature focuses on behavioral and easily collected measures like satisfaction and on patient-sided barriers and facilitators to adherence. Other treatment-related behaviors are less researched. Patients often report exclusively or mainly physical symptoms in their visits which can impede diagnosis.

Conclusion This review provides a comprehensive framework for the concept. Research on the patients’ perspective on depression treatment in primary care is still inconclusive.

Registration This review is registered via OSF (https://osf.io/p9rnc).

1. Introduction

Depressive disorders are very common in the community and often reason for disability and absenteeism [1,2]. Undetected and inadequately treated cases of depression are a burden to patients, health system, and society [3]. Most patients are not seen and treated in specialist care but at the office of their local GP [2]. Still, depression is often undiagnosed and, even after diagnosis, still untreated [4]. To this day, the reasons for these gaps are not completely clear, nor are there tailored and effective strategies.

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have long been used to bridge the gap between best practice and real-world primary care. Most high and middle-income countries have national guidelines for depression treatment, developed by specialists and stakeholders [5]. However, many guidelines are not adequately implemented in primary care settings over long periods of time [6]. Despite their aim of improving accessibility to information and effective treatment strategies, CPGs face implementation challenges.

Primary care professionals deal with a wide range of disorders and must stay updated on numerous CPGs. As a result, not all guidelines are equally known and implemented. This can be attributed, in part, to guidelines themselves, as only a few provide effective implementation guidance. For example, the German national CPG for depression treatment mentions “implementation” only twice in its 257 pages with no clear guidance on the topic [7]. A systematic review by Lee et al. in 2020 concluded that so far guideline implementation is inadequately planned, reported, and measured globally [8].

On the practitioners’ side, barriers naturally emerge when striving for evidence-based treatment for all patients and disorders in primary care. Barriers to CPG usage in primary care, such as lack of education or limited consultation time, have been a subject of interest and research among clinicians and stakeholders [9]. A recent simulation study revealed that primary care professionals would require more than 26 hours per day to implement, use, and document according to all current CPGs. 1.6 hours would be solely dedicated to mood disorders [10].

To improve the implementation of evidence-based treatment for depressed patients in primary care, various reviews highlight systemic problems requiring large-scale policies [8,9,11]. However, it takes considerable time before these policies effectively enhance patient care. In the meantime, research should focus on identifying gaps and exploring alternative approaches to aid implementation.

One significant gap lies in understanding patients’ perspectives on treatment. Patient-reported and - relevant outcomes are a topic of growing interest as patient-centered care is required to decide whatis meaningful and valuable to the individual patient [12]. Patients’ perspectives, their values and preferences should be considered in the clinical decision-making process [13]. Up to now, patient-reported outcomes often consist in symptom-related questionnaires but do neglect patients’ point of view on domains such as satisfaction, expectations and contextual information [14]. Moreover, patient-relevant outcomes are underrepresented in the current literature despite being important in the treatment [15]. Currently, there are no frameworks or reviews available on how patients, as key stakeholders, perceive their care. Just recently, a review emphasized the need for increased patient participation in guideline development and to date only few guidelines involve patients in the process [5].

Could patients’ perspectives serve as the missing link between evidence and practice? Patients’ experiences with depression treatment in primary care, barriers to help-seeking, and factors affecting their understanding of and engagement in treatment are vital for effective implementation strategies. With this scoping review we provide a systematic overview to help guide future research.

2. Aim

This scoping review aimed at identifying concepts related to ‘patients’ perspectives on primary care’ in a systematic manner, to provide a comprehensive framework with domains and superordinate domains.

Primary aim was to identify the scientific methods and concepts related to patients’ perspectives on depression treatment in primary care.

Secondary we aimed to identify already researched barriers and facilitators towards evidence-based treatment of depression in primary care.

3. Methods

3.1. Search strategy

We conducted a scoping review searching the databases of Medline and Psycinfo with no limitation to publication dates up to August 2nd, 2023. By choosing these sources we felt confident to identify and screen all relevant publications to meet our research goals. We conducted our scoping review in accordance with the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis [16]. We registered the review and gave details of our method via Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/p9rnc).

3.2. Inclusion criteria

For the design of our review and the research questions we used the PCC-Framework (population, context, concept) recommended for scoping reviews by JBI which is applicable for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies [16]. See table 1 for details. For the applied search terms see appendix 1. We included publications available in English, German, Spanish or French as we felt confident enough to judge and extract information in these languages.

View this table:
Table 1. PCC-Framework.

3.2.1. Population

We included studies with adult persons suffering from depression when being studied. We decided not to include studies solely on children and adolescents as treatment and needs are very specific and may be tailored more to age than to the disorder itself. We defined ‘depression’ as an, up-to-date, ICD or DSM based diagnosis before conducting the review.

We changed our approach to defining depression compared to our study protocol. It proved too exclusive to include only publications with a clear stated definition of the diagnosis of depression, as many publications included subjects diagnosed by their PCP without further specification. To tackle our goal to provide a scope to the field we decided to include all studies that stated how they diagnosed depression. We excluded several qualitative studies on the grounds that they refused to define depression because it contradicted their approach.

If the study included both depressed and dysthymic patients, it was still included for reasons of practicality. For the same reason, we included studies conducted in patients who were selected because of an antidepressant prescription if the authors stated that the prescription was for the treatment of depression and not for some other disorder e.g., anxiety. We also included publications in which the diagnosis was given by the PCP even if their approach was not clearly stated. We narrowed the search to OECD-member states for means of comparability of the studied context.

3.2.2. Context

Because we were interested in the context of primary care i.e., how patients and other stakeholders are understanding and using it, we tried to be as inclusive as possible with the concept of primary care. We selected papers that referred to the setting as ‘primary care’ and defined the setting. Patients did not necessarily have to be recruited in primary care but had to give information about their diagnosis or treatment in that context. We included all ambulatory settings meeting our criteria.

3.2.3. Concept

To define the concept of patients’ perspectives on care we scoped accessible and recent literature. We decided to include papers that contained information from the patients’ own account of their care and had to relate not just to symptomatology but also to the care itself. To find search terms beyond ‘perspective’ we looked for related topics which we balanced with existing Mesh-terms (See also registration). After finding subcategories for our main concept, we divided these into three conceptual domains: patients’ behavior, patients’ preconception, and patients’ experience.

3.2.3.1. Preconception

We sought to include patients’ own concept of depression and treatment and its importance for the beginning and continuity of care. After scoping the literature, we identified various pre-existing concepts describing aspects of the mind related to action e.g., ‘attitude’, ‘belief’, ‘knowledge’, or ‘expectation’. To bring these different terms and concepts together, we agreed on the term ‘preconception’. The chosen term points to the idea of conditions preceding the patient-doctor-encounter we were interested in.

3.2.3.2. Experience

To conceptualize terms describing the patients’ point of view while in treatment we used the term ‘Experience’. We included studies in which patients were a distinguishable group and their information added to the concept.

3.2.3.3. Behavior

We decided to include behavioral means into our definition of the concept because behavior is directly related to motivation and can hint to potential barriers and facilitators. It is also easy to detect and describe from a research point of view. Among the terms we searched for were ‘consultation’ or ‘help seeking’. To look for patterns of symptom report, we included studies that used open ended measures to describe the complaints with which patients initially presented. We excluded studies in which symptoms were given via broad psychometric testing because these findings tend to be pre-empted by the questionnaires and are not indicative for spontaneous accounts. We used the search terms ‘symptoms’ and ‘complaints’ for that purpose.

3.3. Barriers, facilitators, and subpopulations

The second and third research question did not directly impact the search strategy or PCC-framework. By defining all above-mentioned concepts as inclusive as possible and as exclusive as needed we felt comfortable that we included all relevant publications to answer the remaining questions.

We defined ‘barriers and facilitators to depression treatment in primary care from the patients’ point of view’ as factors that impede or help with therapy-related patient behaviors. We sought to include all studies using the terms ‘barrier’ or ‘facilitator’ but did not want to exclude relevant papers researching outcomes falling under our definition which used different terms.

3.4. Review and synthesis process

We evaluated every step of the review process within our research group following a mixed deductive and inductive approach. After prescoping we decided on the superordinate domains i.e., ‘preconception’, ‘experience’, and ‘behavior’ which helped build the research strategy. After inclusion we extracted and grouped arising topics within domains and superordinate domains inductively.

We uploaded our searches of Medline and Psycinfo into the software of Rayyan and conducted the abstract screening via this platform. Screening was conducted by three independent raters continuously evaluating adherence to inclusion criteria, adapting them when needed.

4. Results

4.1. Search results

The conducted search of the databases identified 16.830 results. After the removal of 2771 duplicates, we included 14059 studies in the screening of title and abstract. Following the mentioned PCC-scheme we could exclude 13534 abstracts. Within the remaining 525 studies, 14 papers could not be retrieved even after directly contacting authors and libraries. During screening of full texts, we excluded 34 studies because they did not offer new data, 1 study because it lacked peer-review, 141 studies due to wrong population, 56 because of wrong context and 47 because of wrong concept. We included 232 studies into our data synthesis. The results are presented in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) flow diagram [17]. See figure 1.

Figure 1.
Figure 1.

Flow diagram describing search strategy and results.

4.2. Studies’ characteristics and methodology

Within included articles, the grand majority (41%, n=95) were conducted in the US, 24% (n=54) in EU countries, 25% (n=57) in the UK and 6% (n=13) in Australia. The remaining studies were conducted in Canada (n=3), Israel (n=3), Japan (n=2), New Zealand (n=2) and Norway (n=1). Two studies included data from more than one location [18,19]. Because we excluded non-OECD states as context in our review showing the local distribution of included reports bears limited information.

Sixty three percent of included publications used exclusively quantitative measures for the looked-for outcomes, while 37% used a qualitative or mixed methods approach. For the distribution by year of publication see figure 2.

Figure 2.
Figure 2.

Temporal distribution of publications.

4.3. Population

Most publications (38,8%) used self-rating scales to define depression and identify subjects, most studies used the PHQ-9, PHQ-8, or PHQ-2. Twenty six percent defined ‘depressed patient’ as diagnosed by their primary care practitioner. Other publications used the prescription of antidepressants for depression, patient chart, or patient history, or gave details on used checklists for diagnosis. See also table 2.

View this table:
Table 2. Description of depression diagnosis in included publications. Total numbers and percentages.

4.4. Context

We defined primary care as all outpatient settings dedicated to primary and generalist care. Table 3 gives details on used terms in the included publications. The most used name for the primary care setting was ‘general practice’ and ‘general practitioner’ (44%). Less used but trending in more recent publications was ‘collaborative care’ (2%).

View this table:
Table 3. Description of primary care context in included publications. Total numbers and percentages.

4.5. Patients’ perspectives on depression treatment in primary care

4.5.1. Identified terms and domains

In an inductive process we identified relevant domains for the concept and the premeditated superordinate categories, i.e., preconception, experience, and behavior, served well as a framework for the established research terms. See table 4 for the grouped domains and superordinate domains as well as the number of their occurrences among the included publications.

View this table:
Table 4.

Patients’ perspectives on depression treatment in primary care: Number of occurrences of named topics, grouped into domains and superordinate domains within the premeditated framework i.e., ‘preconception’, ‘experience’ and ‘behavior’.

We identified 105 occurrences within ‘preconception’, 128 total occurrences within ‘experience’ and 150 occurrences within ‘behavior’. The most frequently occurring single domains were ‘concept of depression’ (45), ‘health service use’ (45), ‘experience of depression’ (41), and ‘adherence’ (38). See also figure 3.

Figure 3.
Figure 3.

Patients’ perspectives on depression treatment in primary care: number of occurrences of domains and superordinate domains i.e., ‘preconception’ (orange), ‘experience’ (green) and ‘behavior’ (yellow).

Some terms e.g., ‘preference’, were difficult to group as a whole because of heterogenous scientific approaches. While some studies asked for treatment preferences in more naïve patients, other educated their participants thoroughly before asking to decide. Even other publications did not specify how informed their subjects were when asked for treatment preference or studied a heterogenous group in respect to that.

4.5.2. Identified Barriers and Facilitators

We screened all included studies for named barriers and facilitators of treatment. We defined ‘barrier’ or ‘facilitator’ as given means by which patients’ behavior is subjectively or observably impeded or helped. Included papers necessarily included details on barriers and facilitators, which we categorized as ‘experience’, as well as behaviors they were seen in relation too. Many of the publications used for this specific synthesis also contained terms from the domain ‘preconception’ e.g., ‘stigma’ was given as a barrier to seeking help, while ‘attitude to drugs’ was commonly mentioned as impeding adherence to treatment.

Overall, we identified 61 publications testing and exploring barriers and facilitators to care. We grouped the matches using a chronological approach as to which stage of treatment is impeded o helped with i.e., diagnosis, treatment, and maintenance. Secondly, we grouped the mentioned behaviors according to our prior approach landing on ‘help-seeking’, ‘disclosure’, ‘initiation’, ‘adherence’, ‘weaning-off medication’ and ‘self-management’. Most publications (34 in total) dealt with ‘adherence’ and its barriers and facilitators. Only few publications addressed help-seeking and the maintenance of treatment. For full results see table 5.

View this table:
Table 5. Publications on barriers and facilitators to depression treatment in primary care from the patients’ point of view.

Further we extracted, categorized, and grouped specific barriers and facilitators and synthetized them according to which behavior they are influencing. Tables 6 to 9 show the results. We assigned the extracted items to the categories ‘personal’, ‘contextual’, and ‘socioeconomic’.

View this table:
Table 6. Barriers to help seeking. Synthesis of data drawn from publications in table 2, limited to quantitative findings.
View this table:
Table 7. Barriers to disclosure. Synthesis of data drawn from publications in table 2, limited to quantitative findings.
View this table:
Table 8. Barriers to initiation. Synthesis of data drawn from publications in table 2, limited to quantitative findings.
View this table:
Table 9. Barriers to adherence. Synthesis of data drawn from publications in table 2, limited to quantitative findings.

Table 5 contains all publications dealing with barriers and facilitators. For the synthesis in table 6 to 9 we only included quantitative results from mentioned publications. To comprehensively extract qualitative findings conducting a detailed qualitative meta-synthesis would have been needed.

Overall, most barriers and facilitators were grouped as either illness- or treatment-related or attitudinal. Socioeconomic factors, the impact of practitioners’ characteristics and the doctor-patient relationship were less researched.

4.5.3. Presenting Complaints

Building on the concept of ‘barriers and facilitators’ we looked for other relevant topics that might influence treatment. We decided to take a closer look at presenting complaints as to which symptoms patients report when depression is present or even diagnosed. While psychological complaints such as ‘low mood’ point practitioners into the right direction, the primary presentation of physical symptoms might on the other hand impede diagnosis.

We included all publications on ‘presenting complaints’ with the exception of two [208,210] which did not report the relevant data in a manner that appeared useful for the synthesis. Tylee et al. studied number and timing symptom report within the consultation [214]. We included the publication into the following table for an overview over the methodology without extracting the ‘percentage of somatic complaints’.

Due to our inclusion criteria, all outcomes for this category derived from open-ended questions. The reported symptoms were further categorized by the authors. We defined ‘somatic complaints’ as physical, vegetative, or somatic symptoms. Table 10 provides an overview of included publications and extracted data.

View this table:
Table 10. Publications covering presenting complaints.

Between 44 and 100% of studied patients presented only with physical symptoms. The percentage of patients also reporting physical symptoms when seeking help for depression was given between 22 and 85%. Some publications also studied the correlation between depression state and number of symptoms given, which we did not further synthesize [82,214].

5. Discussion

5.1. Characteristics of publications and overall findings

Even though depression is very common and often treated exclusively in the primary care context, still most research towards depression care is conducted in specialized contexts [251]. Looking at the patients’ perspective of care beyond symptoms is sometimes a secondary topic, when conducting a randomized-controlled-trial, but has also been a researched outcome since at least the 1970s. The majority of publications related to our research questions were published in the early 2000s. Including patients as important stakeholders not just as subjects but also in planning and conducting research has been a growing trend in recent years [252]. It is to be expected that this will lead to more publications on the patient’s perspective in years to come.

Even though we limited our findings to OECD member states for the screening process it is still notable that most publications stemmed from the Anglo-American region. Our research zooms in on a very distinct context that depends on not only individual but also social on political parameters. We cannot say if findings from the US apply for German primary care settings or vice versa. On the other hand, primary care itself and its research is a heterogenous field with a multitude of settings and scientific approaches.

Based on the literature we provide a comprehensive framework for the concept ‘patients’ perspective’ which can be used for future studies, applied internationally, and be built on creating networks and foci for research and intervention. The implementation of the patients’ perspectives in future guidelines and policy is essential to work towards more accessible care for all patients with depression. The primary care context provides an ideal setting for impactful research and intervention [253].

5.2. Patients’ perspectives on depression treatment in primary care

With this work we provide an overview of current literature on patients’ perspectives on depression treatment in primary care. We defined and evaluated a structured approach to the concept trying to grasp its width and depth. By evaluating the method throughout the entire process, we ensured an objective and understandable approach of literature synthesis.

We identified and grouped domains we consider relevant to the concept of patients’ perspective. The premeditated superordinate domains seemed useful for that process.

Comparing superordinate domains, their terms, and their numbers of occurrences, we found that research approaches and scientific research towards them varies. Behavioral terms have been studied since at least the 1970s and provide clear comparable quantitative measures. The fact that patients’ behavior is observable and close to a physician-centered approach is a possible explanation.

Apart from behavioral terms we found that ‘satisfaction’ and ‘preference’ are commonly studied outcomes. They rarely constitute main outcomes of studies but are easily retrievable data derived from longitudinal and cross-sectional studies. After quality appraisal these publications can be included in separate systematic reviews. Based on our review, we recommend that these outcomes should be included in intervention studies. We also recommend to precisely state how these outcomes were generated to provide accessible and comparable data for evidence synthesis and future research.

Surprisingly, we did not find many publications researching patients’ expectations [44,86]. Even though many terms grouped in ‘preconception’ are related to ‘expectation’ it is rarely directly addressed in studies. Terms like ‘acceptability’, ‘preference’ and ‘satisfaction’ are possibly dependent on expectations and could be predicted by them. Further research could close that gap and lead to an early intervention instead of hindsight, as measured by ‘satisfaction’. Current research stresses the link between patient-provider-relationship and satisfaction [254].

The terms ‘experience of depression’ and ‘experience of treatment’ are broad and more complex to be synthesized. Publications on those terms used a qualitative approach. We did not perform a qualitative meta synthesis, which would be an interesting next step regarding these domains.

5.3. Barriers and facilitators to treatment faced by patients

According to our definition of ‘barriers and facilitators’ i.e., conditions and interventions impeding and helping with care, we identified and grouped related topics. ‘Barriers and facilitators’ showed an overlap between all three superordinate domains. While by our definition closely linked to behavior, we categorized ‘barriers and facilitators’ themselves as ‘experience’. Certain terms we categorized as ‘preconception’ were also identified as specific barriers e.g., ‘stigma’ and ‘attitude to care’.

For scoping, we found this framework to be adequately clear and inclusive.

Most research focused on adherence and lack thereof, often contributing as a secondary outcome to large-scaled medication studies. While drug-associated barriers like ‘side effects’ may not be specific to the primary care setting, barriers and facilitators describing the patient-provider-relationship may be. This has been shown for other medical issues and drugs [255].

Preference for the prescribed treatment [86], participation [167], and education [234] have been described as helpful to improve patients’ motivation for and therefore adherence to care. Nevertheless, more research is needed to build from these findings.

We did not find research on geographic and other community factors as a barrier to help-seeking and care, even though we believe it to be a challenge faced especially by under-served communities, who might be underrepresented in current research [256]. Among our inclusions, socioeconomic factors are less researched than personal and contextual factors.

Overall, factors that were not directly related to treatment and illness e.g., attitudinal or relationship aspects, were less researched. With the rise of integrated concepts like collaborative care [257], we believe these aspects as important to be included into future research and policy.

Among our included publications there are also other topics arising that are related to barriers and facilitators to care even though they do not clearly frame it that way. Not just if patients disclose symptoms but also the type of presenting complaints influences if they are diagnosed correctly.

Among publications studying the quality and quantity of complaints there is a trend towards patients reporting physical symptoms. Three of the identified studies correlated the quality (physical vs. psychological), quantity and timing of complaints with the correct recognition of the depressive state by the GP and found that the report of physical symptoms as well as the delayed report of psychological symptoms reduce the chances of being diagnosed with depression [195,213,214]. Reporting mainly physical complaints might also be a contextual effect. Williamson et al. compared patients visiting a family practice with those consulting a psychiatric clinic and found this to be a distinction i.e., primary care patients reporting more somatic symptoms [209]. Other contextual effects such as sociocultural aspects, national and regional, might also play a role on patients’ symptom report [18]. It is important to further research presenting complaints and behaviors with the questions whether and to what degree they can impede proper diagnosis.

Data about patient-sided barriers and facilitators towards depression treatment in primary care still seems inconclusive with contradictory and heterogenous approaches and results. More research and synthesis are needed for which we provided a framework.

5.4. Strengths and limitations

To our knowledge, this is the first literature review on patients’ perspectives on depression treatment in primary care offering a comprehensive framework for future studies.

We conducted a premeditated and thorough search for all relevant studies. Because the findings were limited to studies set in the primary care context, we naturally excluded other designs and studies that may have contributed to the question of patients’ perspectives, especially preconceptions.

We limited our search to MEDLINE and Psycinfo, not specifically looking for grey literature. We believe our data to be representative of current research and our framework to be applicable for possibly missed publications.

We still think that the identified research topics point out important factors for treatment. We conceptualized the abstract term ‘perspective’ for the purpose of our research and found it sufficiently broad and specific. We do not claim our concept of ‘perspective’ to be the only valid one. We encourage future investigators to critique and build from our concept.

In the planning stage of this project, we were advised on its design by patients from the Munich Alliance Against Depression (Münchner Bündnis gegen Depression e.V.) an interest group organized in Germany for patients with a history of depression.

6. Conclusion

This scoping review conceptualizes ‘patients’ perspective on depression treatment in primary care’ as a scientific field with its domains, subdomains, and research approaches and provides a comprehensive overview of current literature, providing a framework for future studies. Patients’ behavioral measures are an easy way to implement patients’ perspectives as a secondary outcome into prospective and cross-sectional study designs.

Findings about specific barriers and facilitators of care which are already described and studied are summarized as well as grouped in an approachable and systematic manner to help guide future research. While illness- and treatment-related barriers and facilitators are commonly researched, there is less data on how the patient-provider-relationship impacts patient behavior. While adherence is focused on most commonly, there is little evidence on what hinders or encourages help-seeking, disclosure, or maintenance. Patients often present with physical symptoms when seeking help for depression which can hinder or delay diagnosis.

Patients’ perspectives on depression treatment in primary care are an essential aspect of the maintenance and improvement of evidence-based care and should be included in guidelines and policies.

7. Clinical implications

Even though there is a trend towards more patient participation in research [258], clinical practice guidelines still rarely consult patients and their experiences in the process of making decisions on recommendations and implementation.

The purpose of this framework is three-fold: First, it can be used as a base for questionnaires researching the concept of patients’ perspectives on depression treatment in primary care. Quantifiable measures, such as satisfaction, adherence, or preference, are easy to integrate into clinical trials and offer the possibility for comparison and meta-analysis.

Second, patient-related measures about their experience and expectations can help to guide policies, to validate and evaluate models of quality of care, to improve guideline development processes, and consequently can make treatment more patient-centered, targeted and efficient. Effective implementation of guidelines and changes in heuristics in primary care require research that includes perspectives of all relevant stakeholders along with contextual factors. To create and test tailored implementation strategies it is crucial to comprehensively understand contextual barriers and facilitators [259]. Especially barriers to help-seeking are an important gap. A better understanding of help-seeking and facilitating interventions seems promising to help with early diagnosis in primary care, prevent chronicity, and reduce the burden of depression.

Third, the synthesis of barriers and facilitators offers a theoretical base on which networks can be built to better understand what the possible targets for intervention are. In particular, an understanding of contextual barriers from the patients’ point of view can help to tailor effective implementation strategies.

Figure 4 shows a theoretical model of how patients’ perspectives on care can be included into the forming and implementation of clinical practice guidelines to help with evidence-based and effective treatment of depression in primary care.

Figure 4.
Figure 4.

Model of impact of patients’ perspectives on clinical practice guidelines, primary care, and vice-versa.

Data Availability

All relevant data for the evidence synthesis is given in the appendix. Complete search and review files (Rayyan export files) can be acquired by emailing the corresponding author.

https://osf.io/p9rnc

S 1 Appendix

S2 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist

Acknowledgements

The POKAL-Group (PrädiktOren und Klinische Ergebnisse bei depressiven ErkrAnkungen in der hausärztLichen Versorgung (POKAL, DFG-GrK 2621)) consists of the following principle investigators: Tobias Dreischulte, Peter Falkai, Jochen Gensichen, Peter Henningsen, Markus Bühner, Caroline Jung-Sievers, Helmut Krcmar, Karoline Lukaschek, Gabriele Pitschel-Walz and Antonius Schneider. The following doctoral students are members of the POKAL-Group: Katharina Biersack, Constantin Brand, Vita Brisnik, Christopher Ebert, Julia Eder, Feyza Gökce, Carolin Haas, Lisa Hattenkofer, Lukas Kaupe, Jonas Raub, Philipp Reindl-Spanner, Hannah Schillok, Petra Schönweger, Clara Teusen, Marie Vogel, Victoria von Schrottenberg, Jochen Vukas and Puya Younesi.

References

  1. 1.↵
    Vandeleur CL, Fassassi S, Castelao E, Glaus J, Strippoli M-PF, Lasserre AM, et al. Prevalence and correlates of DSM-5 major depressive and related disorders in the community. Psychiatry Res. 2017; 250:50–8. Epub 2017/01/23. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2017.01.060 PMID: 28142066.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    Stahmeyer JT, Märtens C, Eidt-Koch D, Kahl KG, Zeidler J, Eberhard S. The State of Care for Persons With a Diagnosis of Depression. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2022; 119:458–65. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.m2022.0204 PMID: 35506291.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    Johnston KM, Powell LC, Anderson IM, Szabo S, Cline S. The burden of treatment-resistant depression: A systematic review of the economic and quality of life literature. J Affect Disord. 2019; 242:195–210. Epub 2018/06/27. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2018.06.045 PMID: 30195173.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    Trautmann S, Beesdo-Baum K. The Treatment of Depression in Primary Care. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2017; 114:721–8. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2017.0721 PMID: 29143731.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    Zafra-Tanaka JH, Goicochea-Lugo S, Villarreal-Zegarra D, Taype-Rondan A. Characteristics and quality of clinical practice guidelines for depression in adults: a scoping review. BMC Psychiatry. 2019; 19:76. Epub 2019/02/20. doi: 10.1186/s12888-019-2057-z PMID: 30786870.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    Jin Y-H, Tan L-M, Khan KS, Deng T, Huang C, Han F, et al. Determinants of successful guideline implementation: a national cross-sectional survey. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021; 21:19. Epub 2021/01/14. doi: 10.1186/s12911-020-01382-w PMID: 33446198.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Neuropsychopharmakologie und Pharmakopsychiatrie e.V., Arzneimittelkommission der deutschen Ärzteschaft, Arzneimittelkommission der Deutschen Apotheker, Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft Selbsthilfe von Menschen mit Behinderung, chronischer Erkrankung und ihren Angehörigen e. V., Bundespsychotherapeutenkammer, Bundesverband der Angehörigen psychisch erkrankter Menschen e. V., et al. Nationale VersorgungsLeitlinie Unipolare Depression - Langfassung. Bundesärztekammer (BÄK); Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung (KBV); Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften (AWMF); 2022.
  8. 8.↵
    Lee Y, Brietzke E, Cao B, Chen Y, Linnaranta O, Mansur RB, et al. Development and implementation of guidelines for the management of depression: a systematic review. Bull World Health Organ. 2020; 98:683–697H. Epub 2020/08/27. doi: 10.2471/BLT.20.251405 PMID: 33177758.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    Correa VC, Lugo-Agudelo LH, Aguirre-Acevedo DC, Contreras JAP, Borrero AMP, Patiño-Lugo DF, et al. Individual, health system, and contextual barriers and facilitators for the implementation of clinical practice guidelines: a systematic metareview. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020; 18:74. Epub 2020/06/29. doi: 10.1186/s12961-020-00588-8 PMID: 32600417.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    Porter J, Boyd C, Skandari MR, Laiteerapong N. Revisiting the Time Needed to Provide Adult Primary Care. J Gen Intern Med. 2023; 38:147–55. Epub 2022/07/01. doi: 10.1007/s11606-022-07707-x PMID: 35776372.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    Wood E, Ohlsen S, Ricketts T. What are the barriers and facilitators to implementing Collaborative Care for depression? A systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2017; 214:26–43. Epub 2017/02/22. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.02.028 PMID: 28266319.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    Epstein RM, Street RL. The values and value of patient-centered care. Ann Fam Med. 2011; 9:100–3. doi: 10.1370/afm.1239 PMID: 21403134.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    Kersting C, Hülsmann J, Weckbecker K, Mortsiefer A. Patients’ perspective on supposedly patient-relevant process and outcome parameters: a cross-sectional survey within the ‘PRO patients study’. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022; 22:72. Epub 2022/01/14. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-07437-6 PMID: 35031052.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    Pilkonis PA, Yu L, Dodds NE, Johnston KL, Maihoefer CC, Lawrence SM. Validation of the depression item bank from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in a three-month observational study. J Psychiatr Res. 2014; 56:112–9. Epub 2014/05/29. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.05.010 PMID: 24931848.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    Kersting C, Kneer M, Barzel A. Patient-relevant outcomes: what are we talking about? A scoping review to improve conceptual clarity. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020; 20:596. Epub 2020/06/29. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05442-9 PMID: 32600321.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    Aromataris E, Munn Z. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. Adelaide, Australia: Joanna Briggs Institute; 2020.
  17. 17.↵
    Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018; 169:467–73. Epub 2018/09/04. doi: 10.7326/M18-0850 PMID: 30178033.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    Waza K, Graham AV, Zyzanski SJ, Inoue K. Comparison of symptoms in Japanese and American depressed primary care patients. Fam Pract. 1999; 16:528–33. doi: 10.1093/fampra/16.5.528 PMID: 10533952.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. 19.↵
    McCracken C, Dalgard OS, Ayuso-Mateos JL, Casey P, Wilkinson G, Lehtinen V, et al. Health service use by adults with depression: community survey in five European countries. Evidence from the ODIN study. Br J Psychiatry. 2006; 189:161–7. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.105.015081 PMID: 16880487.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.
    Johnson DA. Depression: treatment compliance in general practice. Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl. 1981; 290:447–53. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1981.tb00751.x PMID: 6939323.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.
    Cooper LA, Brown C, Vu HT, Palenchar DR, Gonzales JJ, Ford DE, et al. Primary care patients’ opinions regarding the importance of various aspects of care for depression. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2000; 22:163–73. doi: 10.1016/s0163-8343(00)00073-6 PMID: 10880709.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  22. 22.
    Lin EHB, Korff M von, Ludman EJ, Rutter C, Bush TM, Simon GE, et al. Enhancing adherence to prevent depression relapse in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2003; 25:303–10. doi: 10.1016/s0163-8343(03)00074-4 PMID: 12972220.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  23. 23.
    Brook OH, van Hout HP, Stalman WA, Haan M de. Nontricyclic Antidepressants. Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology. 2006; 26:643–7. doi: 10.1097/01.jcp.0000246217.34024.53.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.
    Mergl R, Henkel V, Allgaier A-K, Kramer D, Hautzinger M, Kohnen R, et al. Are treatment preferences relevant in response to serotonergic antidepressants and cognitive-behavioral therapy in depressed primary care patients? Results from a randomized controlled trial including a patients’ choice arm. Psychother Psychosom. 2011; 80:39–47. Epub 2010/10/23. doi: 10.1159/000318772 PMID: 20975325.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.
    Jaffray M, Cardy AH, Reid IC, Cameron IM. Why do patients discontinue antidepressant therapy early? A qualitative study. Eur J Gen Pract. 2014; 20:167–73. Epub 2013/10/25. doi: 10.3109/13814788.2013.838670 PMID: 24160364.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.
    Vannoy S, Park M, Maroney MR, Unützer J, Apesoa-Varano EC, Hinton L. The Perspective of Older Men With Depression on Suicide and Its Prevention in Primary Care. Crisis. 2018; 39:397–405. Epub 2018/04/05. doi: 10.1027/0227-5910/a000511 PMID: 29618265.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.
    Weich S, Morgan L, King M, Nazareth I. Attitudes to depression and its treatment in primary care. Psychol Med. 2007; 37:1239–48. Epub 2007/06/11. doi: 10.1017/S0033291707000931 PMID: 17559705.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  28. 28.
    Serrano MJ, Vives M, Mateu C, Vicens C, Molina R, Puebla-Guedea M, et al. Therapeutic adherence in primary care depressed patients: a longitudinal study. Actas Esp Psiquiatr. 2014; 42:91–8.
    OpenUrl
  29. 29.
    Pyne JM, Rost KM, Farahati F, Tripathi SP, Smith J, Williams DK, et al. One size fits some: the impact of patient treatment attitudes on the cost-effectiveness of a depression primary-care intervention. Psychol Med. 2005; 35:839–54. doi: 10.1017/s0033291704003332 PMID: 15997604.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  30. 30.
    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. doi: 10.1001/archfami.9.2.150 PMID: 10693732.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  31. 31.
    Deen TL, Fortney JC, Pyne JM. Relationship between satisfaction, patient-centered care, adherence and outcomes among patients in a collaborative care trial for depression. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011; 38:345–55. doi: 10.1007/s10488-010-0322-z PMID: 20978932.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.
    Finucane A, Mercer SW. An exploratory mixed methods study of the acceptability and effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for patients with active depression and anxiety in primary care. BMC Psychiatry. 2006; 6:14. Epub 2006/04/07. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-6-14 PMID: 16603060.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.
    Maidment R, Livingston G, Katona C. Just keep taking the tablets: adherence to antidepressant treatment in older people in primary care. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2002; 17:752–7. doi: 10.1002/gps.688 PMID: 12211126.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  34. 34.
    Givens JL, Datto CJ, Ruckdeschel K, Knott K, Zubritsky C, Oslin DW, et al. Older patients’ aversion to antidepressants. A qualitative study. J Gen Intern Med. 2006; 21:146–51. Epub 2005/12/07. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.00296.x PMID: 16336620.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  35. 35.
    Stecker T, Alvidrez J. Patient decision-making regarding entry into psychotherapy to treat depression. Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2007; 28:811–20. doi: 10.1080/01612840701415967 PMID: 17654113.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.
    Bogner HR, Cahill E, Frauenhoffer C, Barg FK. Older primary care patient views regarding antidepressants: A mixed methods approach. J Mental Health. 2009; 18:57–64. doi: 10.1080/09638230701677795 PMID: 19693280.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. 37.
    Fortney JC, Pyne JM, Edlund MJ, Stecker T, Mittal D, Robinson DE, et al. Reasons for antidepressant nonadherence among veterans treated in primary care clinics. J Clin Psychiatry. 2011; 72:827–34. Epub 2010/11/16. doi: 10.4088/JCP.09m05528blu PMID: 21208579.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  38. 38.
    Stark A, Kaduszkiewicz H, Stein J, Maier W, Heser K, Weyerer S, et al. A qualitative study on older primary care patients’ perspectives on depression and its treatments - potential barriers to and opportunities for managing depression. BMC Fam Pract. 2018; 19:2. Epub 2018/01/03. doi: 10.1186/s12875-017-0684-3 PMID: 29295706.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.
    Körner H, Newman C, Limin M, Kidd MR, Saltman D, Kippax S. ’The black dog just came and sat on my face and built a kennel’: Gay men making sense of ‘depression’. Health (London). 2011; 15:417–36. Epub 2010/12/15. doi: 10.1177/1363459310372511 PMID: 21169202.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.
    Gask L, Aseem S, Waquas A, Waheed W. Isolation, feeling ‘stuck’ and loss of control: understanding persistence of depression in British Pakistani women. J Affect Disord. 2011; 128:49–55. Epub 2010/07/14. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2010.06.023 PMID: 20633932.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.
    Dickinson R, Knapp P, House AO, Dimri V, Zermansky A, Petty D, et al. Long-term prescribing of antidepressants in the older population: a qualitative study. Br J Gen Pract. 2010; 60:e144–55. doi: 10.3399/bjgp10X483913 PMID: 20353660.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  42. 42.
    Chew-Graham CA, Sharp D, Chamberlain E, Folkes L, Turner KM. Disclosure of symptoms of postnatal depression, the perspectives of health professionals and women: a qualitative study. BMC Fam Pract. 2009; 10:7. Epub 2009/01/21. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-10-7 PMID: 19159478.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.
    Saver BG, Van-Nguyen V, Keppel G, Doescher MP. A qualitative study of depression in primary care: missed opportunities for diagnosis and education. J Am Board Fam Med. 2007; 20:28–35. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2007.01.060026 PMID: 17204732.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    Keeley RD, West DR, Tutt B, Nutting PA. A qualitative comparison of primary care clinicians’ and their patients’ perspectives on achieving depression care: implications for improving outcomes. BMC Fam Pract. 2014; 15:13. Epub 2014/01/15. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-15-13 PMID: 24428952.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. 45.
    Gordon I, Ling J, Robinson L, Hayes C, Crosland A. Talking about depression during interactions with GPs: a qualitative study exploring older people’s accounts of their depression narratives. BMC Fam Pract. 2018; 19:173. Epub 2018/11/03. doi: 10.1186/s12875-018-0857-8 PMID: 30390637.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.
    ’You’re depressed’; ‘no I’m not’: GPs’ and patients’ different models of depression. UMDS MSc in General Practice Teaching Group. Br J Gen Pract. 1999; 49:123–4.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  47. 47.
    Brown C, Dunbar-Jacob J, Palenchar DR, Kelleher KJ, Bruehlman RD, Sereika S, et al. Primary care patients’ personal illness models for depression: a preliminary investigation. Fam Pract. 2001; 18:314–20. doi: 10.1093/fampra/18.3.314 PMID: 11356741.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  48. 48.
    Bogner HR, Dahlberg B, Vries HF de, Cahill E, Barg FK. Older patients’ views on the relationship between depression and heart disease. Fam Med. 2008; 40:652–7.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  49. 49.
    Wittink MN, Joo JH, Lewis LM, Barg FK. Losing faith and using faith: older African Americans discuss spirituality, religious activities, and depression. J Gen Intern Med. 2009; 24:402–7. Epub 2009/01/21. doi: 10.1007/s11606-008-0897-1 PMID: 19156471.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  50. 50.
    Gabbay M, Shiels C, Bower P, Sibbald B, King M, Ward E. Patient-practitioner agreement: does it matter. Psychol Med. 2003; 33:241–51. doi: 10.1017/s0033291702006992 PMID: 12622303.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. 51.
    Cornford CS, Hill A, Reilly J. How patients with depressive symptoms view their condition: a qualitative study. Fam Pract. 2007; 24:358–64. Epub 2007/07/13. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmm032 PMID: 17630269.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  52. 52.
    Hansson M, Chotai J, Bodlund O. Patients’ beliefs about the cause of their depression. J Affect Disord. 2010; 124:54–9. Epub 2009/11/18. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2009.10.032 PMID: 19923007.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. 53.
    van Geffen ECG, Heerdink ER, Hugtenburg JG, Siero FW, Egberts ACG, van Hulten R. Patients’ perceptions and illness severity at start of antidepressant treatment in general practice. Int J Pharm Pract. 2010; 18:217–25. doi: 10.1111/j.2042-7174.2010.00035.x PMID: 20636673.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. 54.
    Lynch J, Moore M, Moss-Morris R, Kendrick T. Are patient beliefs important in determining adherence to treatment and outcome for depression? Development of the beliefs about depression questionnaire. J Affect Disord. 2011; 133:29–41. Epub 2011/04/19. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2011.03.019 PMID: 21507489.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  55. 55.
    Lynch J, Moore M, Moss-Morris R, Kendrick T. Do patients’ illness beliefs predict depression measures at six months in primary care; a longitudinal study. J Affect Disord. 2015; 174:665–71. Epub 2014/12/11. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2014.12.005 PMID: 25590645.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  56. 56.
    Aznar-Lou I, Iglesias-González M, Rubio-Valera M, Peñarrubia-Maria MT, Mendive JM, Murrugarra-Centurión AG, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and treatment approach to depression in primary care: predictive factors. Fam Pract. 2019; 36:3–11. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmy098 PMID: 30423158.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  57. 57.
    Brown C, Battista DR, Bruehlman R, Sereika SS, Thase ME, Dunbar-Jacob J. Beliefs about antidepressant medications in primary care patients: relationship to self-reported adherence. Med Care. 2005; 43:1203–7. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000185733.30697.f6 PMID: 16299431.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  58. 58.
    Badger F, Nolan P. Concordance with antidepressant medication in primary care. Nurs Stand. 2006; 20:35–40. doi: 10.7748/ns2006.09.20.52.35.c4492 PMID: 16989339.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. 59.
    Russell J, Kazantzis N. Medication beliefs and adherence to antidepressants in primary care. N Z Med J. 2008; 121:14–20.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  60. 60.
    Turner KM, Sharp D, Folkes L, Chew-Graham C. Women’s views and experiences of antidepressants as a treatment for postnatal depression: a qualitative study. Fam Pract. 2008; 25:450–5. Epub 2008/09/30. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmn056 PMID: 18826994.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  61. 61.
    Danielsson U, Bengs C, Lehti A, Hammarström A, Johansson EE. Struck by lightning or slowly suffocating - gendered trajectories into depression. BMC Fam Pract. 2009; 10:56. Epub 2009/08/11. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-10-56 PMID: 19671133.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  62. 62.
    Yeung A, Chang D, Gresham RL, Nierenberg AA, Fava M. Illness beliefs of depressed Chinese American patients in primary care. The Journal of nervous and mental disease. 2004; 192:324–7. doi: 10.1097/01.nmd.0000120892.96624.00 PMID: 15060408.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  63. 63.
    Saito M, Kawabata H, Murakami M, Maezawa M. Factors in the awareness of depression, focusing on perceptual dissimilarities between PCPs and patients: an exploratory and qualitative research. Hokkaido Igaku Zasshi. 2011; 86:79–83.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  64. 64.
    Kwong K, Chung H, Cheal K, Chou JC, Chen T. Disability beliefs and help-seeking behavior of depressed Chinese-American patients in a primary care setting. J Soc Work Disabil Rehabil. 2012; 11:81–99. doi: 10.1080/1536710X.2012.677602 PMID: 22630598.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  65. 65.
    Cornford CS, Umeh K, Manshani N. Heroin users’ experiences of depression: a qualitative study. Fam Pract. 2012; 29:586–92. Epub 2012/02/22. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cms014 PMID: 22357579.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  66. 66.
    Simmonds RL, Tylee A, Walters P, Rose D. Patients’ perceptions of depression and coronary heart disease: a qualitative UPBEAT-UK study. BMC Fam Pract. 2013; 14:38. Epub 2013/03/19. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-14-38 PMID: 23509869.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  67. 67.
    Chen JA, Hung GC-L, Parkin S, Fava M, Yeung AS. Illness beliefs of Chinese American immigrants with major depressive disorder in a primary care setting. Asian J Psychiatr. 2015; 13:16–22. Epub 2014/12/22. doi: 10.1016/j.ajp.2014.12.005 PMID: 25563074.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  68. 68.
    Frémont P, Gérard A, Sechter D, Vanelle JM, Vidal M. L’alliance thérapeutique au début d’une prise en charge pour dépression par le généraliste. Encephale. 2008; 34:205–10. Epub 2008/04/14. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2008.03.001 PMID: 18597730.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  69. 69.
    van den Boogaard TM, Verhaak PFM, van Dyck R, Spinhoven P. The impact of causal attributions on diagnosis and successful referral of depressed patients in primary care. Soc Sci Med. 2011; 73:1733–40. Epub 2011/10/13. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.09.027 PMID: 22036103.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  70. 70.
    Campbell DG, Bonner LM, Bolkan CR, Lanto AB, Zivin K, Waltz TJ, et al. Stigma Predicts Treatment Preferences and Care Engagement Among Veterans Affairs Primary Care Patients with Depression. Ann Behav Med. 2016; 50:533–44. doi: 10.1007/s12160-016-9780-1 PMID: 26935310.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  71. 71.
    Schomerus G, Stolzenburg S, Freitag S, Speerforck S, Janowitz D, Evans-Lacko S, et al. Stigma as a barrier to recognizing personal mental illness and seeking help: a prospective study among untreated persons with mental illness. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2019; 269:469–79. Epub 2018/04/20. doi: 10.1007/s00406-018-0896-0 PMID: 29679153.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  72. 72.
    Brown C, Schulberg HC, Madonia MJ. Clinical presentations of major depression by African Americans and whites in primary medical care practice. J Affect Disord. 1996; 41:181–91. doi: 10.1016/s0165-0327(96)00085-7 PMID: 8988450.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  73. 73.
    Schneider A, Körner T, Mehring M, Wensing M, Elwyn G, Szecsenyi J. Impact of age, health locus of control and psychological co-morbidity on patients’ preferences for shared decision making in general practice. Patient Educ Couns. 2006; 61:292–8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2005.04.008 PMID: 15896943.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  74. 74.
    Kessler D, Lloyd K, Lewis G, Gray DP. Cross sectional study of symptom attribution and recognition of depression and anxiety in primary care. BMJ. 1999; 318:436–9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7181.436 PMID: 9974461.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  75. 75.
    Parker G, Parker K. Influence of symptom attribution on reporting depression and recourse to treatment. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2003; 37:469–74. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1614.2003.01205.x PMID: 12873333.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  76. 76.
    Lawrence V, Murray J, Banerjee S, Turner S, Sangha K, Byng R, et al. Concepts and causation of depression: a cross-cultural study of the beliefs of older adults. Gerontologist. 2006; 46:23–32. doi: 10.1093/geront/46.1.23 PMID: 16452281.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  77. 77.
    Elwy AR, Glickman ME, Bokhour BG, Dell NS, Mueller NM, Zhao S, et al. Using Mixed Methods to Examine the Role of Veterans’ Illness Perceptions on Depression Treatment Utilization and HEDIS Concordance. Med Care. 2016; 54:e35–42. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000056 PMID: 24374425.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  78. 78.
    Saint Arnault D, Woo S. The Importance of Perceived Need in Help Seeking for Japanese Women: A Preliminary Investigation of Sociocultural Contributions. Arch Psychiatr Nurs. 2017; 31:572–7. Epub 2017/07/28. doi: 10.1016/j.apnu.2017.07.006 PMID: 29179823.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  79. 79.
    Vega WA, Rodriguez MA, Ang A. Addressing stigma of depression in Latino primary care patients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2010; 32:182–91. Epub 2009/12/05. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2009.10.008 PMID: 20302993.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  80. 80.
    Chen JA, Shapero BG, Trinh N-HT, Chang TE, Parkin S, Alpert JE, et al. Association Between Stigma and Depression Outcomes Among Chinese Immigrants in a Primary Care Setting. J Clin Psychiatry. 2016; 77:e1287–e1292. doi: 10.4088/JCP.15m10225 PMID: 27631145.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  81. 81.
    Lopez V, Sanchez K, Killian MO, Eghaneyan BH. Depression screening and education: an examination of mental health literacy and stigma in a sample of Hispanic women. BMC Public Health. 2018; 18:646. Epub 2018/05/22. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5516-4 PMID: 29788998.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  82. 82.↵
    Heinz I, Baldofski S, Beesdo-Baum K, Knappe S, Kohls E, Rummel-Kluge C. “Doctor, my back hurts and I cannot sleep.” Depression in primary care patients: Reasons for consultation and perceived depression stigma. PLoS One. 2021; 16:e0248069. Epub 2021/03/05. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248069 PMID: 33667268.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  83. 83.
    Pollock K, Grime J. Patients’ perceptions of entitlement to time in general practice consultations for depression: qualitative study. BMJ. 2002; 325:687.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  84. 84.
    Taylor AK, Palmer VJ, Davidson S, Fletcher S, Gunn J. Patient reported self-help strategies and the perceived benefits for managing sub-threshold depressive symptoms: A nested qualitative study of Australian primary care attendees. Health Soc Care Community. 2022; 30:e2097–e2108. Epub 2021/11/12. doi: 10.1111/hsc.13646 PMID: 34766664.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  85. 85.
    Beattie A, Shaw A, Kaur S, Kessler D. Primary-care patients’ expectations and experiences of online cognitive behavioural therapy for depression: a qualitative study. Health Expect. 2009; 12:45–59. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00531.x PMID: 19250152.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  86. 86.↵
    Raue PJ, Schulberg HC, Heo M, Klimstra S, Bruce ML. Patients’ depression treatment preferences and initiation, adherence, and outcome: a randomized primary care study. Psychiatr Serv. 2009; 60:337–43. doi: 10.1176/ps.2009.60.3.337 PMID: 19252046.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  87. 87.
    Palmer V, Gunn J, Kokanovic R, Griffiths F, Shrimpton B, Hurworth R, et al. Diverse voices, simple desires: a conceptual design for primary care to respond to depression and related disorders. Fam Pract. 2010; 27:447–58. Epub 2010/04/08. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmq016 PMID: 20378630.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  88. 88.
    Wills CE, Holmes-Rovner M. Preliminary validation of the Satisfaction With Decision scale with depressed primary care patients. Health Expect. 2003; 6:149–59. doi: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.2003.00220.x PMID: 12752743.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  89. 89.
    Dwight-Johnson M, Sherbourne CD, Liao D, Wells KB. Treatment preferences among depressed primary care patients. J Gen Intern Med. 2000; 15:527–34. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.08035.x PMID: 10940143.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  90. 90.
    Bedi N, Chilvers C, Churchill R, Dewey M, Duggan C, Fielding K, et al. Assessing effectiveness of treatment of depression in primary care. Partially randomised preference trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2000; 177:312–8. doi: 10.1192/bjp.177.4.312 PMID: 11116771.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  91. 91.
    Dwight-Johnson M, Unutzer J, Sherbourne C, Tang L, Wells KB. Can quality improvement programs for depression in primary care address patient preferences for treatment. Med Care. 2001; 39:934–44. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200109000-00004 PMID: 11502951.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  92. 92.
    Löwe B, Schulz U, Gräfe K, Wilke S. Medical patients’ attitudes toward emotional problems and their treatment. What do they really want. J Gen Intern Med. 2006; 21:39–45. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0266.x PMID: 16423121.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  93. 93.
    Gum AM, Areán PA, Hunkeler E, Tang L, Katon W, Hitchcock P, et al. Depression treatment preferences in older primary care patients. Gerontologist. 2006; 46:14–22. doi: 10.1093/geront/46.1.14 PMID: 16452280.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  94. 94.
    Backenstrass M, Joest K, Frank A, Hingmann S, Mundt C, Kronmüller K-T. Preferences for treatment in primary care: a comparison of nondepressive, subsyndromal and major depressive patients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2006; 28:178–80. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2005.10.001 PMID: 16516070.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  95. 95.
    Johnson MD, Meredith LS, Hickey SC, Wells KB. Influence of patient preference and primary care clinician proclivity for watchful waiting on receipt of depression treatment. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2006; 28:379–86. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2006.07.006 PMID: 16950372.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  96. 96.
    Dobscha SK, Corson K, Gerrity MS. Depression treatment preferences of VA primary care patients. Psychosomatics. 2007; 48:482–8. doi: 10.1176/appi.psy.48.6.482 PMID: 18071094.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  97. 97.
    Hodges L, Butcher I, Kleiboer A, McHugh G, Murray G, Walker J, et al. Patient and general practitioner preferences for the treatment of depression in patients with cancer: how, who, and where. J Psychosom Res. 2009; 67:399–402. Epub 2009/04/24. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2009.03.008 PMID: 19837202.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  98. 98.
    Dwight Johnson M, Apesoa-Varano C, Hay J, Unutzer J, Hinton L. Depression treatment preferences of older white and Mexican origin men. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2013; 35:59–65. Epub 2012/11/06. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2012.08.003 PMID: 23141027.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  99. 99.
    Waltz TJ, Campbell DG, Kirchner JE, Lombardero A, Bolkan C, Zivin K, et al. Veterans with depression in primary care: provider preferences, matching, and care satisfaction. Fam Syst Health. 2014; 32:367–77. Epub 2014/08/04. doi: 10.1037/fsh0000071 PMID: 25090611.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  100. 100.
    Magnani M, Sasdelli A, Bellino S, Bellomo A, Carpiniello B, Politi P, et al. Treating Depression: What Patients Want; Findings From a Randomized Controlled Trial in Primary Care. Psychosomatics. 2016; 57:616–23. Epub 2016/05/13. doi: 10.1016/j.psym.2016.05.004 PMID: 27393388.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  101. 101.
    Davis TD, Campbell DG, Bonner LM, Bolkan CR, Lanto A, Chaney EF, et al. Women Veterans with Depression in Veterans Health Administration Primary Care: An Assessment of Needs and Preferences. Womens Health Issues. 2016; 26:656–66. Epub 2016/09/30. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2016.08.001 PMID: 27697494.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  102. 102.
    Avey JP, Dirks LG, Dillard DA, Manson SM, Merrick M, Smith JJ, et al. Depression management interests among Alaska Native and American Indian adults in primary care. J Affect Disord. 2018; 239:214–9. Epub 2018/06/07. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2018.05.075 PMID: 30025310.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  103. 103.
    Backhaus L, Pabst A, Löbner M, Riedel-Heller S, Luppa M. Behandlungspräferenzen depressiver Allgemeinarztpatienten. Psychiatr Prax. 2020; 47:39–42. Epub 2019/08/14. doi: 10.1055/a-0961-1628 PMID: 31412368.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  104. 104.
    Dorow M, Löbner M, Pabst A, Stein J, Riedel-Heller SG. Preferences for Depression Treatment Including Internet-Based Interventions: Results From a Large Sample of Primary Care Patients. Front Psychiatry. 2018; 9:181. Epub 2018/05/17. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00181 PMID: 29867605.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  105. 105.
    Winklerfelt Hammarberg S af, Björkelund C, Nejati S, Magnil M, Hange D, Svenningsson I, et al. Clinical effectiveness of care managers in collaborative primary health care for patients with depression: 12- and 24-month follow-up of a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial. BMC Prim Care. 2022; 23:198. Epub 2022/08/09. doi: 10.1186/s12875-022-01803-x PMID: 35945493.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  106. 106.
    Johnson DA. Treatment of depression in general practice. Br Med J. 1973; 2:18–20. doi: 10.1136/bmj.2.5857.18 PMID: 4695689.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  107. 107.
    Scott AI, Freeman CP. Edinburgh primary care depression study: treatment outcome, patient satisfaction, and cost after 16 weeks. BMJ. 1992; 304:883–7. doi: 10.1136/bmj.304.6831.883 PMID: 1392754.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  108. 108.
    Gilmore KA, Hargie O. Quality issues in the treatment of depression in general practice. Int J Health Care Qual Assur Inc Leadersh Health Serv. 2000; 13:34–41. doi: 10.1108/09526860010311071 PMID: 11183226.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  109. 109.
    Meredith LS, Orlando M, Humphrey N, Camp P, Sherbourne CD. Are better ratings of the patient-provider relationship associated with higher quality care for depression. Med Care. 2001; 39:349–60. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200104000-00006 PMID: 11329522.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  110. 110.
    Webster J, Pritchard MA, Linnane JW, Roberts JA, Hinson JK, Starrenburg SE. Postnatal depression: use of health services and satisfaction with health-care providers. J Qual Clin Pract. 2001; 21:144–8. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1762.2001.00432.x PMID: 11856412.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  111. 111.
    Orlando M, Meredith LS. Understanding the causal relationship between patient-reported interpersonal and technical quality of care for depression. Med Care. 2002; 40:696–704. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200208000-00009 PMID: 12187183.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  112. 112.
    Solberg LI, Fischer LR, Rush WA, Wei F. When depression is the diagnosis, what happens to patients and are they satisfied. Am J Manag Care. 2003; 9:131–40.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  113. 113.
    Mellor D, Davison T, McCabe M, Kuruvilla G, Moore K, Ski C. Satisfaction with general practitioner treatment of depression among residents of aged care facilities. J Aging Health. 2006; 18:435–57. doi: 10.1177/0898264306286199 PMID: 16648395.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  114. 114.
    DeJesus RS, Howell L, Williams M, Hathaway J, Vickers KS. Collaborative care management effectively promotes self-management: patient evaluation of care management for depression in primary care. Postgrad Med. 2014; 126:141–6. doi: 10.3810/pgm.2014.03.2750 PMID: 24685978.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  115. 115.
    Edwards L, Thomas C, Gregory A, Yardley L, O’Cathain A, Montgomery AA, et al. Are people with chronic diseases interested in using telehealth? A cross-sectional postal survey. J Med Internet Res. 2014; 16:e123. Epub 2014/05/08. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3257 PMID: 24811914.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  116. 116.
    Aragonès E, Rambla C, López-Cortacans G, Tomé-Pires C, Sánchez-Rodríguez E, Caballero A, et al. Effectiveness of a collaborative care intervention for managing major depression and chronic musculoskeletal pain in primary care: A cluster-randomised controlled trial. J Affect Disord. 2019; 252:221–9. Epub 2019/04/08. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2019.04.004 PMID: 30986737.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  117. 117.
    Saur CD, Steffens DC, Harpole LH, Fan M-Y, Oddone EZ, Unützer J. Satisfaction and Outcomes of Depressed Older Adults With Psychiatric Clinical Nurse Specialists in Primary Care. J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc. 2007; 13:62–70. doi: 10.1177/1078390307301938.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  118. 118.
    Pitrou I, Berbiche D, Vasiliadis H-M. Mental health and satisfaction with primary care services in older adults: a study from the patient perspective on four dimensions of care. Fam Pract. 2020; 37:459–64. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmaa019 PMID: 32201895.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  119. 119.
    Green BL, Watson MR, Kaltman SI, Serrano A, Talisman N, Kirkpatrick L, et al. Knowledge and Preferences Regarding Antidepressant Medication Among Depressed Latino Patients in Primary Care. The Journal of nervous and mental disease. 2017; 205:952–9. doi: 10.1097/NMD.0000000000000754 PMID: 29076955.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  120. 120.
    Lee King PA, Cederbaum JA, Kurzban S, Norton T, Palmer SC, Coyne JC. Role of patient treatment beliefs and provider characteristics in establishing patient-provider relationships. Fam Pract. 2015; 32:224–31. Epub 2015/01/01. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmu085 PMID: 25556196.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  121. 121.
    Horevitz E, Organista KC, Arean PA. Depression Treatment Uptake in Integrated Primary Care: How a “Warm Handoff” and Other Factors Affect Decision Making by Latinos. Psychiatr Serv. 2015; 66:824–30. Epub 2015/04/15. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201400085 PMID: 25873022.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  122. 122.
    Newman C, Kippax S, Mao L, Saltman D, Kidd M. Roles ascribed to general practitioners by gay men with depression. Aust Fam Physician. 2010; 39:667–71.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  123. 123.
    Nichols GA, Brown JB. Following depression in primary care: do family practice physicians ask about depression at different rates than internal medicine physicians. Arch Fam Med. 2000; 9:478–82. doi: 10.1001/archfami.9.5.478 PMID: 10810955.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  124. 124.
    Pollock K. Maintaining face in the presentation of depression: constraining the therapeutic potential of the consultation. Health (London). 2007; 11:163–80. doi: 10.1177/1363459307074692 PMID: 17344270.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  125. 125.
    Sternke EA, Abrahamson K, Bair MJ. Comorbid Chronic Pain and Depression: Patient Perspectives on Empathy. Pain Manag Nurs. 2016; 17:363–71. Epub 2016/10/19. doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2016.07.003 PMID: 27769812.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  126. 126.
    Gartland D, Hegarty K, Papadopoullos S, Brown S. Patterns of health service utilisation of mothers experiencing mental health problems and intimate partner violence: Ten-year follow-up of an Australian prospective mother and child cohort. PLoS One. 2022; 17:e0269626. Epub 2022/06/15. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269626 PMID: 35704627.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  127. 127.
    van Voorhees BW, Cooper LA, Rost KM, Nutting P, Rubenstein LV, Meredith L, et al. Primary care patients with depression are less accepting of treatment than those seen by mental health specialists. J Gen Intern Med. 2003; 18:991–1000. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2003.21060.x PMID: 14687257.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  128. 128.
    Johnston O, Kumar S, Kendall K, Peveler R, Gabbay J, Kendrick T. Qualitative study of depression management in primary care: GP and patient goals, and the value of listening. Br J Gen Pract. 2007; 57:872–9. doi: 10.3399/096016407782318026 PMID: 17976282.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  129. 129.
    Wittkampf KA, van Zwieten M, Smits FT, Schene AH, Huyser J, van Weert HC. Patients’ view on screening for depression in general practice. Fam Pract. 2008; 25:438–44. Epub 2008/10/03. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmn057 PMID: 18836095.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  130. 130.
    Andrews G, Carter GL. What people say about their general practitioners’ treatment of anxiety and depression. Med J Aust. 2001; 175:S48–51. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2002.tb04287.x PMID: 11556437.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  131. 131.
    Prins MA, Verhaak PFM, van der Meer K, Penninx BWJH, Bensing JM. Primary care patients with anxiety and depression: need for care from the patient’s perspective. J Affect Disord. 2009; 119:163–71. Epub 2009/05/05. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2009.03.019 PMID: 19419771.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  132. 132.
    Prins M, Bosmans J, Verhaak P, van der Meer K, van Tulder M, van Marwijk H, et al. The costs of guideline-concordant care and of care according to patients’ needs in anxiety and depression. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011; 17:537–46. Epub 2010/06/25. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01490.x PMID: 20586845.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  133. 133.
    Katon W, Korff M von, Lin E, Walker E, Simon GE, Bush T, et al. Collaborative management to achieve treatment guidelines. Impact on depression in primary care. JAMA. 1995; 273:1026–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  134. 134.
    Gask L, Rogers A, Oliver D, May C, Roland M. Qualitative study of patients’ perceptions of the quality of care for depression in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 2003; 53:278–83.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  135. 135.
    Rossom RC, Solberg LI, Vazquez-Benitez G, Crain AL, Beck A, Whitebird R, et al. The effects of patient-centered depression care on patient satisfaction and depression remission. Fam Pract. 2016; 33:649–55. Epub 2016/08/17. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmw068 PMID: 27535330.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  136. 136.
    Badger F, Nolan P. Attributing recovery from depression. Perceptions of people cared for in primary care. J Clin Nurs. 2007; 16:25–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01581.x PMID: 17518866.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  137. 137.
    Hansson M, Chotai J, Bodlund O. What made me feel better? Patients’ own explanations for the improvement of their depression. Nord J Psychiatry. 2012; 66:290–6. Epub 2012/01/03. doi: 10.3109/08039488.2011.644807 PMID: 22211274.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  138. 138.
    Canty HR, Sauter A, Zuckerman K, Cobian M, Grigsby T. Mothers’ Perspectives on Follow-up for Postpartum Depression Screening in Primary Care. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2019; 40:139–43. doi: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000628 PMID: 30422838.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  139. 139.
    Poole L, Frost R, Rowlands H, Black G. Experience of depression in older adults with and without a physical long-term condition: findings from a qualitative interview study. BMJ Open. 2022; 12:e056566. Epub 2022/02/24. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056566 PMID: 35210344.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  140. 140.
    Manning C, Marr J. ’Real-life burden of depression’ surveys--GP and patient perspectives on treatment and management of recurrent depression. Curr Med Res Opin. 2003; 19:526–31. doi: 10.1185/030079903125002117 PMID: 14594525.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  141. 141.
    Arve S, Lauri S, Lehtonen A, Tilvis RS. Patient’s and general practitioner’s different views on patient’s depression. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 1999; 28:247–57. doi: 10.1016/s0167-4943(99)00012-6 PMID: 15374086.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  142. 142.
    Izquierdo A, Sarkisian C, Ryan G, Wells KB, Miranda J. Older depressed Latinos’ experiences with primary care visits for personal, emotional and/or mental health problems: a qualitative analysis. Ethn Dis. 2014; 24:84–91.
    OpenUrl
  143. 143.
    Jones AL, Mor MK, Haas GL, Gordon AJ, Cashy JP, Schaefer JH, et al. The Role of Primary Care Experiences in Obtaining Treatment for Depression. J Gen Intern Med. 2018; 33:1366–73. Epub 2018/06/08. doi: 10.1007/s11606-018-4522-7 PMID: 29948804.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  144. 144.
    Knowles SE, Lovell K, Bower P, Gilbody S, Littlewood E, Lester H. Patient experience of computerised therapy for depression in primary care. BMJ Open. 2015; 5:e008581. Epub 2015/11/30. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008581 PMID: 26621513.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  145. 145.
    Templeton L, Velleman R, Persaud A, Milner P. The experiences of postnatal depression in women from black and minority ethnic communities in Wiltshire, UK. Ethn Health. 2003; 8:207–21. doi: 10.1080/1355785032000136425 PMID: 14577996.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  146. 146.
    Barg FK, Mavandadi S, Givens JL, Knott K, Zubritsky C, Oslin DW. When late-life depression improves: what do older patients say about their treatment. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2010; 18:596–605. doi: 10.1097/jgp.0b013e3181b7f0f9 PMID: 20593539.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  147. 147.
    Holopainen D. The experience of seeking help for postnatal depression. Aust J Adv Nurs. 2002; 19:39–44.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  148. 148.
    Calderón Gómez C, Retolaza Balsategui A, Payo Gordon J, La Bacigalupe De Hera A, Zallo Atxutegi E, Mosquera Metcalfe I. Perspectivas de los pacientes diagnosticados de depresión y atendidos por médicos de familia y psiquiatras. Aten Primaria. 2012; 44:595–602. Epub 2012/05/08. doi: 10.1016/j.aprim.2012.02.009 PMID: 22575484.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  149. 149.
    Fosgerau CF, Davidsen AS. Patients’ perspectives on antidepressant treatment in consultations with physicians. Qual Health Res. 2014; 24:641–53. Epub 2014/04/08. doi: 10.1177/1049732314528813 PMID: 24714618.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  150. 150.
    Wikberg C, Pettersson A, Westman J, Björkelund C, Petersson E-L. Patients’ perspectives on the use of the Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale self-assessment version in primary care. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2016; 34:434–42. Epub 2016/11/02. doi: 10.1080/02813432.2016.1248635 PMID: 27804312.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  151. 151.
    Malpass A, Shaw A, Kessler D, Sharp D. Concordance between PHQ-9 scores and patients’ experiences of depression: a mixed methods study. Br J Gen Pract. 2010; 60:e231–8. doi: 10.3399/bjgp10X502119 PMID: 20529486.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  152. 152.
    Gensichen J, Guethlin C, Sarmand N, Sivakumaran D, Jäger C, Mergenthal K, et al. Patients’ perspectives on depression case management in general practice - a qualitative study. Patient Educ Couns. 2012; 86:114–9. Epub 2011/04/06. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.02.020 PMID: 21474266.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  153. 153.
    Knowles SE, Chew-Graham C, Adeyemi I, Coupe N, Coventry PA. Managing depression in people with multimorbidity: a qualitative evaluation of an integrated collaborative care model. BMC Fam Pract. 2015; 16:32. Epub 2015/03/05. doi: 10.1186/s12875-015-0246-5 PMID: 25886864.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  154. 154.
    Taylor AK, Gilbody S, Bosanquet K, Overend K, Della Bailey, Foster D, et al. How should we implement collaborative care for older people with depression? A qualitative study using normalisation process theory within the CASPER plus trial. BMC Fam Pract. 2018; 19:116. Epub 2018/07/18. doi: 10.1186/s12875-018-0813-7 PMID: 30021506.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  155. 155.
    Richards JE, Hohl SD, Whiteside U, Ludman EJ, Grossman DC, Simon GE, et al. If You Listen, I Will Talk: the Experience of Being Asked About Suicidality During Routine Primary Care. J Gen Intern Med. 2019; 34:2075–82. Epub 2019/07/25. doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-05136-x PMID: 31346911.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  156. 156.
    Rogers A, May C, Oliver D. Experiencing depression, experiencing the depressed: The separate worlds of patients and doctors. J Mental Health. 2001; 10:317–33. doi: 10.1080/09638230020023840.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  157. 157.
    Bennett M, Walters K, Drennan V, Buszewicz M. Structured pro-active care for chronic depression by practice nurses in primary care: a qualitative evaluation. PLoS One. 2013; 8:e75810. Epub 2013/09/12. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075810 PMID: 24069451.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  158. 158.
    Grung I, Anderssen N, Haukenes I, Ruths S, Smith-Sivertsen T, Hetlevik Ø, et al. Patient experiences with depression care in general practice: a qualitative questionnaire study. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2022; 40:253–60. Epub 2022/05/23. doi: 10.1080/02813432.2022.2074069 PMID: 35603990.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  159. 159.
    Mohr DC, Hart SL, Howard I, Julian L, Vella L, Catledge C, et al. Barriers to psychotherapy among depressed and nondepressed primary care patients. Ann Behav Med. 2006; 32:254–8. doi: 10.1207/s15324796abm3203_12 PMID: 17107299.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  160. 160.
    Chew-Graham C, Kovandžić M, Gask L, Burroughs H, Clarke P, Sanderson H, et al. Why may older people with depression not present to primary care? Messages from secondary analysis of qualitative data. Health Soc Care Community. 2012; 20:52–60. Epub 2011/07/12. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2524.2011.01015.x PMID: 21749528.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  161. 161.
    Bell RA, Franks P, Duberstein PR, Epstein RM, Feldman MD, Fernandez y Garcia E, et al. Suffering in silence: reasons for not disclosing depression in primary care. Ann Fam Med. 2011; 9:439–46. doi: 10.1370/afm.1277 PMID: 21911763.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  162. 162.
    Keller AO, Valdez CR, Schwei RJ, Jacobs EA. Disclosure of Depression in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study of Women’s Perceptions. Womens Health Issues. 2016; 26:529–36. Epub 2016/08/13. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2016.07.002 PMID: 27531601.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  163. 163.
    Robinson J, Khan N, Fusco L, Malpass A, Lewis G, Dowrick C. Why are there discrepancies between depressed patients’ Global Rating of Change and scores on the Patient Health Questionnaire depression module? A qualitative study of primary care in England. BMJ Open. 2017; 7:e014519. Epub 2017/05/04. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014519 PMID: 28473513.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  164. 164.
    Leydon GM, Rodgers L, Kendrick T. A qualitative study of patient views on discontinuing long-term selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Fam Pract. 2007; 24:570–5. Epub 2007/11/20. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmm069 PMID: 18032401.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  165. 165.
    Hansen MC, Cabassa LJ. Pathways to depression care: help-seeking experiences of low-income Latinos with diabetes and depression. J Immigr Minor Health. 2012; 14:1097–106. doi: 10.1007/s10903-012-9590-x PMID: 22367667.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  166. 166.
    Bair MJ, Matthias MS, Nyland KA, Huffman MA, Stubbs DL, Kroenke K, et al. Barriers and facilitators to chronic pain self-management: a qualitative study of primary care patients with comorbid musculoskeletal pain and depression. Pain Med. 2009; 10:1280–90. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2009.00707.x PMID: 19818038.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  167. 167.↵
    Loh A, Leonhart R, Wills CE, Simon D, Härter M. The impact of patient participation on adherence and clinical outcome in primary care of depression. Patient Educ Couns. 2007; 65:69–78. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.05.007 PMID: 17141112.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  168. 168.
    Clever SL, Ford DE, Rubenstein LV, Rost KM, Meredith LS, Sherbourne CD, et al. Primary care patients’ involvement in decision-making is associated with improvement in depression. Med Care. 2006; 44:398–405. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000208117.15531.da PMID: 16641657.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  169. 169.
    Moise N, Ye S, Alcántara C, Davidson KW, Kronish I. Depressive symptoms and decision-making preferences in patients with comorbid illnesses. J Psychosom Res. 2017; 92:63–6. Epub 2015/12/02. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2015.12.001 PMID: 26682488.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  170. 170.
    Solberg LI, Crain AL, Rubenstein L, Unützer J, Whitebird RR, Beck A. How much shared decision making occurs in usual primary care of depression. J Am Board Fam Med. 2014; 27:199–208. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2014.02.130164 PMID: 24610182.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  171. 171.
    Katon W, Korff M von, Lin E, Lipscomb P, Russo J, Wagner E, et al. Distressed high utilizers of medical care. DSM-III-R diagnoses and treatment needs. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1990; 12:355–62. doi: 10.1016/0163-8343(90)90002-t PMID: 2245919.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  172. 172.
    Callahan CM, Hui SL, Nienaber NA, Musick BS, Tierney WM. Longitudinal study of depression and health services use among elderly primary care patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1994; 42:833–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1994.tb06554.x PMID: 8046192.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  173. 173.
    Ford JD, Trestman RL, Steinberg K, Tennen H, Allen S. Prospective association of anxiety, depressive, and addictive disorders with high utilization of primary, specialty and emergency medical care. Soc Sci Med. 2004; 58:2145–8. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.08.017 PMID: 15047073.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  174. 174.
    Shvartzman P, Weiner Z, Vardy D, Friger M, Sherf M, Biderman A. Health services utilization by depressive patients identified by the MINI questionnaire in a primary care setting. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2005; 23:18–25. doi: 10.1080/02813430510018383 PMID: 16025869.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  175. 175.
    Rhodes AE, Bethell J, Bondy SJ. Suicidality, depression, and mental health service use in Canada. Can J Psychiatry. 2006; 51:35–41. doi: 10.1177/070674370605100107 PMID: 16491982.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  176. 176.
    Glaesmer H, Gunzelmann T, Martin A, Brähler E, Rief W. Die Bedeutung psychischer Beschwerden für die medizinische Inanspruchnahme und das Krankheitsverhalten Alterer. Psychiatr Prax. 2008; 35:187–93. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1067367 PMID: 18478502.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  177. 177.
    Busch MA, Neuner B, Aichberger MC, Hapke U, Riedel-Heller SG, Luppa M. Depressive Symptomatik und Inanspruchnahme von Gesundheits- und Pflegeleistungen bei Personen im Alter ab 50 Jahren in Deutschland. Ergebnisse einer bevölkerungsbasierten Querschnittstudie. Psychiatr Prax. 2013; 40:214–9. Epub 2013/03/25. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1333026 PMID: 23529658.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  178. 178.
    Gunn J, Cameron J, Densley K, Davidson S, Fletcher S, Palmer V, et al. Uptake of mental health websites in primary care: Insights from an Australian longitudinal cohort study of depression. Patient Educ Couns. 2018; 101:105–12. Epub 2017/07/11. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.07.008 PMID: 28739180.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  179. 179.
    Liu M, McCurry SM, Belza B, Dobra A, Buchanan DT, Vitiello MV, et al. Effects of Osteoarthritis Pain and Concurrent Insomnia and Depression on Health Care Use in a Primary Care Population of Older Adults. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2019; 71:748–57. Epub 2019/05/10. doi: 10.1002/acr.23695 PMID: 30067892.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  180. 180.
    Andrew JE, Wileman SM, Howie FL, Cameron IM, Naji SA, Eagles JM. Comparison of consultation rates in primary care attenders with and without seasonal affective disorder. J Affect Disord. 2001; 62:199–205. doi: 10.1016/s0165-0327(00)00148-8 PMID: 11223107.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  181. 181.
    Ronalds C, Kapur N, Stone K, Webb S, Tomenson B, Creed F. Determinants of consultation rate in patients with anxiety and depressive disorders in primary care. Fam Pract. 2002; 19:23–8. doi: 10.1093/fampra/19.1.23 PMID: 11818346.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  182. 182.
    Menchetti M, Cevenini N, Ronchi D de, Quartesan R, Berardi D. Depression and frequent attendance in elderly primary care patients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2006; 28:119–24. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2005.10.007 PMID: 16516061.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  183. 183.
    Ferrari S, Galeazzi GM, Mackinnon A, Rigatelli M. Frequent attenders in primary care: impact of medical, psychiatric and psychosomatic diagnoses. Psychother Psychosom. 2008; 77:306–14. Epub 2008/07/04. doi: 10.1159/000142523 PMID: 18600036.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  184. 184.
    Widmer RB, Cadoret RJ. Depression in primary care: changes in pattern of patient visits and complaints during a developing depression. J Fam Pract. 1978; 7:293–302.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  185. 185.
    Widmer RB, Cadoret RJ. Depression in family practice: changes in pattern of patient visits and complaints during subsequent developing depressions. J Fam Pract. 1979; 9:1017–21.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  186. 186.
    Cadoret RJ, Widmer RB, Troughton EP. Somatic complaints -- harbinger of depression in primary care. J Affect Disord. 1980; 2:61–70. doi: 10.1016/0165-0327(80)90022-1 PMID: 6448881.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  187. 187.
    Wilson DR, Widmer RB, Cadoret RJ, Judiesch K. Somatic symptoms. A major feature of depression in a family practice. J Affect Disord. 1983; 5:199–207. doi: 10.1016/0165-0327(83)90042-3 PMID: 6224832.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  188. 188.
    Katon W, Rutter CM, Lin E, Simon G, Korff M von, Bush T, et al. Are there detectable differences in quality of care or outcome of depression across primary care providers. Med Care. 2000; 38:552–61. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200006000-00002 PMID: 10843308.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  189. 189.
    Eilat-Tsanani S, Merom A, Romano S, Reshef A, Lavi I, Tabenkin H. The effect of postpartum depression on women’s consultations with physicians. Isr Med Assoc J. 2006; 8:406–10.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  190. 190.
    Romans-Clarkson SE, Walton VA, Dons DJ, Mullen PE. Which women seek help for their psychiatric problems. N Z Med J. 1990; 103:445–8.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  191. 191.
    Arroyo Cardona E, Auquer Framis F, Buñuel Álvarez JC, Rubio Montañés ML, Adalid Villar C, Cordón Granados F, et al. Hiperfrecuentación en atención primaria: estudio de los factores psicosociales. Aten Primaria. 1998; 22:627–30. Available from: https://www.elsevier.es/es-revista-atencion-primaria-27-articulo-hiperfrecuentacion-atencion-primaria-estudio-factores-14986.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  192. 192.
    Druss BG, Rask K, Katon WJ. Major depression, depression treatment and quality of primary medical care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008; 30:20–5. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2007.08.015 PMID: 18164936.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  193. 193.
    van Geffen ECG, Gardarsdottir H, van Hulten R, van Dijk L, Egberts ACG, Heerdink ER. Initiation of antidepressant therapy: do patients follow the GP’s prescription. Br J Gen Pract. 2009; 59:81–7. doi: 10.3399/bjgp09X395067 PMID: 19192372.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  194. 194.
    Larsen KK, Vestergaard CH, Schougaard LMV, Larsen LP, Jessen A, May O, et al. Contacts to general practice and antidepressant treatment initiation after screening for anxiety and depression in patients with heart disease. Dan Med J. 2016; 63.
  195. 195.↵
    Menchetti M, Belvederi Murri M, Bertakis K, Bortolotti B, Berardi D. Recognition and treatment of depression in primary care: effect of patients’ presentation and frequency of consultation. J Psychosom Res. 2009; 66:335–41. Epub 2008/12/16. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2008.10.008 PMID: 19302892.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  196. 196.
    Suija K, Kalda R, Maaroos H-I. Patients with depressive disorder, their co-morbidity, visiting rate and disability in relation to self-evaluation of physical and mental health: a cross-sectional study in family practice. BMC Fam Pract. 2009; 10:38. Epub 2009/06/01. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-10-38 PMID: 19486534.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  197. 197.
    Vuorilehto MS, Melartin TK, Riihimäki K, Isometsä ET. Pharmacological and psychosocial treatment of depression in primary care: Low intensity and poor adherence and continuity. J Affect Disord. 2016; 202:145–52. Epub 2016/05/24. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2016.05.035 PMID: 27262636.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  198. 198.
    Pirard P, Baubet T, Motreff Y, Rabet G, Marillier M, Vandentorren S, et al. Use of mental health supports by civilians exposed to the November 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020; 20:959. Epub 2020/10/20. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05785-3 PMID: 33076901.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  199. 199.
    Gomà-I-Freixanet M, Calvo-Rojas V, Portell M. Psychosocial characteristics and affective symptomatology associated with patient self-initiated consultations in Spanish general practice. Health Soc Care Community. 2020; 28:2312–9. Epub 2020/06/08. doi: 10.1111/hsc.13052 PMID: 32511850.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  200. 200.
    Oxman TE, Harrigan J, Kues J. Diagnostic patterns of family physicians for somatoform, depressive, and anxiety disorders. J Fam Pract. 1983; 17:439–46.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  201. 201.
    Katon W, Berg AO, Robins AJ, Risse S. Depression--medical utilization and somatization. West J Med. 1986; 144:564–8.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  202. 202.
    Karlsson H, Lehtinen V, Joukamaa M. Psychiatric morbidity among frequent attender patients in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1995; 17:19–25. doi: 10.1016/0163-8343(94)00059-m PMID: 7737490.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  203. 203.
    Yamada K, Maeno T, Ono M, Sato T, Otsubo T, Isse K. Depression in a family practice in Japan: doctor shopping and patient complaints. Prim Care Psych. 2005; 10:7–12. doi: 10.1185/135525705X40355.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  204. 204.
    Al-Windi A. The influence of complaint symptoms on health care utilisation, medicine use, and sickness absence. A comparison between retrospective and prospective utilisation. J Psychosom Res. 2005; 59:139–46. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2005.02.012 PMID: 16198186.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  205. 205.
    Patel S, Kai J, Atha C, Avery A, Guo B, James M, et al. Clinical characteristics of persistent frequent attenders in primary care: case-control study. Fam Pract. 2015; 32:624–30. Epub 2015/10/08. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmv076 PMID: 26450918.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  206. 206.
    Carmassi C, Dell’Oste V, Ceresoli D, Moscardini S, Bianchi E, Landi R, et al. Frequent attenders in general medical practice in Italy: a preliminary report on clinical variables related to low functioning. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2019; 15:115–25. Epub 2018/12/24. doi: 10.2147/NDT.S179013 PMID: 30636877.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  207. 207.
    McKelvey RS, Pfaff JJ, Acres JG. The relationship between chief complaints, psychological distress, and suicidal ideation in 15-24-year-old patients presenting to general practitioners. Med J Aust. 2001; 175:550–2. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2001.tb143718.x PMID: 11795548.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  208. 208.↵
    Cremniter D, Delcros J, Guelfi JD, Fermanian J. Une enquête sur les états dépressifs en médecine générale. Encephale. 1982; 8:523–37.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  209. 209.↵
    Williamson PS, Yates WR. The initial presentation of depression in family practice and psychiatric outpatients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1989; 11:188–93; discussion 216-21. doi: 10.1016/0163-8343(89)90040-6 PMID: 2721942.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  210. 210.↵
    Gerber PD, Barrett JE, Barrett JA, Oxman TE, Manheimer E, Smith R, et al. The relationship of presenting physical complaints to depressive symptoms in primary care patients. J Gen Intern Med. 1992; 7:170–3. doi: 10.1007/BF02598007 PMID: 1487765.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  211. 211.
    Cornwell J, Hull S. Do GPs prescribe antidepressants differently for South Asian patients. Fam Pract. 1998; 15 Suppl 1:S16–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  212. 212.
    Diamond EL, Gage L, Epting R. Symptoms associated with the diagnosis and treatment of depression in family practice. Fam Pract Res J. 1987; 6:206–14.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  213. 213.↵
    Kirmayer LJ, Robbins JM, Dworkind M, Yaffe MJ. Somatization and the recognition of depression and anxiety in primary care. AJP. 1993; 150:734–41. doi: 10.1176/ajp.150.5.734 PMID: 8480818.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  214. 214.↵
    Tylee A, Freeling P, Kerry S, Burns T. How does the content of consultations affect the recognition by general practitioners of major depression in women. Br J Gen Pract. 1995; 45:575–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  215. 215.
    Damush TM, Wu J, Bair MJ, Sutherland JM, Kroenke K. Self-management practices among primary care patients with musculoskeletal pain and depression. J Behav Med. 2008; 31:301–7. Epub 2008/06/14. doi: 10.1007/s10865-008-9156-5 PMID: 18553130.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  216. 216.
    Foster JM, Gallagher D. An exploratory study comparing depressed and nondepressed elders’ coping strategies. J Gerontol. 1986; 41:91–3. doi: 10.1093/geronj/41.1.91 PMID: 3941263.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  217. 217.
    Osei-Bonsu PE, Bokhour BG, Glickman ME, Rodrigues S, Mueller NM, Dell NS, et al. The role of coping in depression treatment utilization for VA primary care patients. Patient Educ Couns. 2014; 94:396–402. Epub 2013/11/05. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.10.021 PMID: 24315160.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  218. 218.
    Badger F, Nolan P. Use of self-chosen therapies by depressed people in primary care. J Clin Nurs. 2007; 16:1343–52. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.01769.x PMID: 17584353.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  219. 219.
    Bazargan M, Ani CO, Hindman DW, Bazargan-Hejazi S, Baker RS, Bell D, et al. Correlates of complementary and alternative medicine utilization in depressed, underserved african american and Hispanic patients in primary care settings. J Altern Complement Med. 2008; 14:537–44. doi: 10.1089/acm.2007.0821 PMID: 18537468.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  220. 220.
    Magnezi R, Glasser S, Shalev H, Sheiber A, Reuveni H. Patient activation, depression and quality of life. Patient Educ Couns. 2014; 94:432–7. Epub 2013/11/05. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.10.015 PMID: 24331277.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  221. 221.
    Dowrick C, Kokanovic R, Hegarty K, Griffiths F, Gunn J. Resilience and depression: perspectives from primary care. Health (London). 2008; 12:439–52. doi: 10.1177/1363459308094419 PMID: 18818274.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  222. 222.
    Pung A, Fletcher SL, Gunn JM. Mobile App Use by Primary Care Patients to Manage Their Depressive Symptoms: Qualitative Study. J Med Internet Res. 2018; 20:e10035. Epub 2018/09/27. doi: 10.2196/10035 PMID: 30262449.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  223. 223.
    Faber M von, van der Geest G, van der Weele GM, Blom JW, van der Mast RC, Reis R, et al. Older people coping with low mood: a qualitative study. Int Psychogeriatr. 2016; 28:603–12. Epub 2015/12/17. doi: 10.1017/S1041610215002264 PMID: 26674197.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  224. 224.
    Kloppe T, Pohontsch NJ, Scherer M. Types of Utilization and Types of Treatment Response in a Collaborative Care Approach for Depressive Disorders in Old Age in Primary Care. Front Psychiatry. 2020; 11:565929. Epub 2020/10/23. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.565929 PMID: 33192688.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  225. 225.
    Lin EH, Korff M von, Katon W, Bush T, Simon GE, Walker E, et al. The role of the primary care physician in patients’ adherence to antidepressant therapy. Med Care. 1995; 33:67–74. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199501000-00006 PMID: 7823648.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  226. 226.
    Brook OH, van Hout H, Stalman W, Nieuwenhuyse H, Bakker B, Heerdink E, et al. A pharmacy-based coaching program to improve adherence to antidepressant treatment among primary care patients. Psychiatr Serv. 2005; 56:487–9. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.56.4.487 PMID: 15812103.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  227. 227.
    Bogner HR, Lin JY, Morales KH. Patterns of early adherence to the antidepressant citalopram among older primary care patients: the prospect study. Int J Psychiatry Med. 2006; 36:103–19. doi: 10.2190/DJH3-Y4R0-R3KG-JYCC PMID: 16927582.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  228. 228.
    Akerblad A-C, Bengtsson F, Knorring L von, Ekselius L. Response, remission and relapse in relation to adherence in primary care treatment of depression: a 2-year outcome study. Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2006; 21:117–24. doi: 10.1097/01.yic.0000199452.16682.b8 PMID: 16421464.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  229. 229.
    Knorring L von, Akerblad A-C, Bengtsson F, Carlsson A, Ekselius L. Cost of depression: effect of adherence and treatment response. Eur Psychiatry. 2006; 21:349–54. Epub 2006/06/13. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2006.04.005 PMID: 16777385.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  230. 230.
    Kales HC, Nease DE, Sirey JA, Zivin K, Kim HM, Kavanagh J, et al. Racial differences in adherence to antidepressant treatment in later life. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2013; 21:999–1009. Epub 2013/02/06. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2013.01.046 PMID: 23602306.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  231. 231.
    Demyttenaere K, Enzlin P, Dewé W, Boulanger B, Bie J de, Troyer W de, et al. Compliance with antidepressants in a primary care setting, 1: Beyond lack of efficacy and adverse events. J Clin Psychiatry. 2001; 62 Suppl 22:30–3.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  232. 232.
    Dernovsek MZ, Tavcar R, Sajovic M. Observation of treatment of depression in primary care setting in first week - what happens in first week of treatment with antidepressants. Psychiatr Danub. 2008; 20:227–30.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  233. 233.
    Hérique A, Kahn J-P. Réalités et recommandations dans la prescription et l’observance des antidépresseurs en médecine générale : évaluation des pratiques dans le traitement de la dépression en Lorraine et Champagne-Ardenne. Encephale. 2009; 35:73–9. Epub 2008/05/16. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2007.12.010 PMID: 19250997.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  234. 234.↵
    Ruoff G. A method that dramatically improves patient adherence to depression treatment. J Fam Pract. 2005; 54:846–52.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  235. 235.
    Harrison P, Carr E, Goldsmith K, Young A, Ashworth M, Fennema D, et al. Antidepressant Advisor (ADeSS): a decision support system for antidepressant treatment for depression in UK primary care - a feasibility study. BMJ Open. 2023; 13:e060516. Epub 2023/03/03. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060516 PMID: 36868594.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  236. 236.
    Jeffery A, Bhanu C, Walters K, Wong IC, Osborn D, Hayes JF. Polypharmacy and antidepressant acceptability in comorbid depression and type 2 diabetes: a cohort study using UK primary care data. Br J Gen Pract. 2023; 73:e392–e398. Epub 2023/04/27. doi: 10.3399/BJGP.2022.0295 PMID: 37105749.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  237. 237.
    van Hook MP. Women’s help-seeking patterns for depression. Soc Work Health Care. 1999; 29:15–34. doi: 10.1300/J010v29n01_02 PMID: 10482127.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  238. 238.
    Holloway EE, Sturrock BA, Lamoureux EL, Keeffe JE, Rees G. Help seeking among vision-impaired adults referred to their GP for depressive symptoms: patient characteristics and outcomes associated with referral uptake. Aust J Prim Health. 2015; 21:169–75. doi: 10.1071/py13085 PMID: 26509203.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  239. 239.
    Gormley N, O’Leary D. Time to initial medical presentation in a first-admission group with depression. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1998; 97:166–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1998.tb09981.x PMID: 9517913.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  240. 240.
    Shin JK. Help-seeking behaviors by Korean immigrants for depression. Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2002; 23:461–76. doi: 10.1080/01612840290052640 PMID: 12079599.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  241. 241.
    Lawrence V, Banerjee S, Bhugra D, Sangha K, Turner S, Murray J. Coping with depression in later life: a qualitative study of help-seeking in three ethnic groups. Psychol Med. 2006; 36:1375–83. Epub 2006/07/20. doi: 10.1017/S0033291706008117 PMID: 16854247.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  242. 242.
    Callister LC, Beckstrand RL, Corbett C. Postpartum depression and help-seeking behaviors in immigrant Hispanic women. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2011; 40:440–9. Epub 2011/06/03. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2011.01254.x PMID: 21639863.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  243. 243.
    Waitzfelder B, Stewart C, Coleman KJ, Rossom R, Ahmedani BK, Beck A, et al. Treatment Initiation for New Episodes of Depression in Primary Care Settings. J Gen Intern Med. 2018; 33:1283–91. Epub 2018/02/08. doi: 10.1007/s11606-017-4297-2 PMID: 29423624.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  244. 244.
    Cornwell BL, Szymanski BR, Bohnert KM, McCarthy JF. Treatment Initiation Following Positive Depression Screens in Primary Care: a Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis of Integrated Mental Health Services. J Gen Intern Med. 2021; 36:561–3. Epub 2020/06/03. doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-05694-5 PMID: 32495097.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  245. 245.
    O’Connor DW, Rosewarne R, Bruce A. Depression in primary care. 1: elderly patients’ disclosure of depressive symptoms to their doctors. Int Psychogeriatr. 2001; 13:359–65. doi: 10.1017/s1041610201007748 PMID: 11768382.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  246. 246.
    Blanchard MR, Waterreus A, Mann AH. The nature of depression among older people in inner London, and the contact with primary care. Br J Psychiatry. 1994; 164:396–402. doi: 10.1192/bjp.164.3.396 PMID: 8199793.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  247. 247.
    Corrigan PW, Swantek S, Watson AC, Kleinlein P. When do older adults seek primary care services for depression. The Journal of nervous and mental disease. 2003; 191:619–22. doi: 10.1097/01.nmd.0000087190.09305.b6 PMID: 14504573.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  248. 248.
    Sleath B, Tulsky JA, Peck BM, Thorpe J. Provider-patient communication about antidepressants among veterans with mental health conditions. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2007; 5:9–17. doi: 10.1016/j.amjopharm.2007.03.002 PMID: 17608243.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  249. 249.
    Malpass A, Kessler D, Sharp D, Shaw A. ’I didn’t want her to panic’: unvoiced patient agendas in primary care consultations when consulting about antidepressants. Br J Gen Pract. 2011; 61:e63–71. doi: 10.3399/bjgp11X556218 PMID: 21276326.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  250. 250.
    Ghods BK, Roter DL, Ford DE, Larson S, Arbelaez JJ, Cooper LA. Patient-physician communication in the primary care visits of African Americans and whites with depression. J Gen Intern Med. 2008; 23:600–6. Epub 2008/02/09. doi: 10.1007/s11606-008-0539-7 PMID: 18264834.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  251. 251.↵
    Steffen A, Thom J, Jacobi F, Holstiege J, Bätzing J. Trends in prevalence of depression in Germany between 2009 and 2017 based on nationwide ambulatory claims data. J Affect Disord. 2020; 271:239–47. Epub 2020/04/18. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.03.082 PMID: 32479322.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  252. 252.↵
    Domecq JP, Prutsky G, Elraiyah T, Wang Z, Nabhan M, Shippee N, et al. Patient engagement in research: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014; 14:89. Epub 2014/02/26. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-89 PMID: 24568690.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  253. 253.↵
    Gensichen J, Lukaschek K, Jung-Sievers C, Falkai P, Schmitt A, Henningsen P, et al. Predictors and outcomes in primary depression care (POKAL) - a research training group develops an innovative approach to collaborative care. BMC Prim Care. 2022; 23:309. Epub 2022/12/02. doi: 10.1186/s12875-022-01913-6 PMID: 36460965.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  254. 254.↵
    Chandra S, Ward P, Mohammadnezhad M. Factors Associated With Patient Satisfaction in Outpatient Department of Suva Sub-divisional Health Center, Fiji, 2018: A Mixed Method Study. Front Public Health. 2019; 7:183. Epub 2019/07/02. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00183 PMID: 31312630.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  255. 255.↵
    Chang T-J, Bridges JFP, Bynum M, Jackson JW, Joseph JJ, Fischer MA, et al. Association Between Patient-Clinician Relationships and Adherence to Antihypertensive Medications Among Black Adults: An Observational Study Design. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021; 10:e019943. Epub 2021/07/09. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.019943 PMID: 34238022.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  256. 256.↵
    Guagliardo MF. Spatial accessibility of primary care: concepts, methods and challenges. Int J Health Geogr. 2004; 3:3. Epub 2004/02/26. doi: 10.1186/1476-072X-3-3 PMID: 14987337.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  257. 257.↵
    Härter M, Watzke B, Daubmann A, Wegscheider K, König H-H, Brettschneider C, et al. Guideline-based stepped and collaborative care for patients with depression in a cluster-randomised trial. Sci Rep. 2018; 8:9389. Epub 2018/06/20. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-27470-6 PMID: 29925893.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  258. 258.↵
    McCarron TL, Clement F, Rasiah J, Moran C, Moffat K, Gonzalez A, et al. Patients as partners in health research: A scoping review. Health Expect. 2021; 24:1378–90. Epub 2021/06/21. doi: 10.1111/hex.13272 PMID: 34153165.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  259. 259.↵
    Baker R, Camosso-Stefinovic J, Gillies C, Shaw EJ, Cheater F, Flottorp S, et al. Tailored interventions to address determinants of practice. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015; 2015:CD005470. Epub 2015/04/29. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005470.pub3 PMID: 25923419.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Posted December 27, 2023.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email
Beyond the medical file: a scoping review on patients’ perspectives on guideline-oriented depression treatment in primary care
Katharina Biersack, Heribert Sattel, Petra Schönweger, Lea Kaspar, Nadine Lehnen, Jochen Gensichen, Peter Henningsen, the POKAL group
medRxiv 2023.12.27.23297265; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.12.27.23297265
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools

Subject Area