Suppr超能文献

使用英国质量和结果框架抑郁指标评估抑郁严重程度:系统评价。

Assessing depression severity using the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework depression indicators: a systematic review.

机构信息

Health and Social Care Directorate, National Institute for Healthand Care Excellence (NICE), Manchester.

出版信息

Br J Gen Pract. 2013 May;63(610):e309-17. doi: 10.3399/bjgp13X667169.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Depression is a major cause of chronic ill-health and is managed in primary care. Indicators on depression severity assessment were introduced into the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) in 2006 and 2009. QOF is a pay-for-performance scheme and indicators should have evidence to support their use; potential unintended consequences should also have been considered.

AIM

To review the effectiveness of routine assessment of depression severity using structured tools in primary care, and to determine the views of GPs and patients regarding their use.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHOD

Studies were identified by searching electronic databases; study selection, data abstraction, and quality assessment were carried out by one reviewer, with checks from other authors and GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation) tables completed for included effectiveness studies.

RESULTS

Eight studies met the eligibility criteria. There was very low-quality evidence that assessing severity in a structured way at diagnosis using a validated tool led to interventions that were appropriate to the severity of depression. Patients and GPs had different perceptions of the assessment of depression at diagnosis, with patients being more positive. GPs highlighted unintended consequences. There was low-quality evidence that structured assessment at follow-up led to increased rates of remission and response, but changes to management were not seen. Patients used this assessment to measure their own response to treatment.

CONCLUSION

Any estimate of the effect of structured assessment of depression severity in UK general practice is uncertain. GPs consider routine use of questionnaires as incentivised by the QOF has unintended consequences, which could adversely affect patient care.

摘要

背景

抑郁症是导致慢性健康不良的主要原因,在初级保健中进行管理。2006 年和 2009 年,英国质量和结果框架(QOF)引入了抑郁症严重程度评估指标。QOF 是一种按绩效付费的计划,指标应该有证据支持其使用;还应该考虑潜在的意外后果。

目的

综述初级保健中使用结构化工具常规评估抑郁症严重程度的有效性,并确定全科医生和患者对其使用的看法。

设计

系统评价。

方法

通过搜索电子数据库来确定研究;由一名评审员进行研究选择、数据提取和质量评估,其他作者和 GRADE(推荐、评估、制定和评估分级)表进行检查,完成纳入的有效性研究。

结果

八项研究符合入选标准。有非常低质量的证据表明,在诊断时使用经过验证的工具以结构化方式评估严重程度,会导致针对抑郁症严重程度的适当干预措施。患者和全科医生对诊断时的抑郁症评估有不同的看法,患者的看法更为积极。全科医生强调了意外后果。有低质量的证据表明,在随访时进行结构化评估会导致缓解率和反应率增加,但管理方式没有变化。患者使用此评估来衡量自己对治疗的反应。

结论

在英国全科实践中,任何对结构化评估抑郁症严重程度的效果的估计都是不确定的。全科医生认为,QOF 激励下常规使用问卷有意外后果,可能会对患者护理产生不利影响。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

8

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验