Kernick D P
St Thomas Medical Group, Exeter.
Br J Gen Pract. 1997 Feb;47(415):95-8.
With increasing demand for health care, evidence-based medicine combined with health economics offers a method of optimizing allocation of limited resources. Depression is an illness that has a high prevalence with important medical, social and economic implications. More than 90% of depression is diagnosed and treated in general practice.
To review the effectiveness of an evidence-based approach combined with health economics in deciding whether a tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) or a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) should be used in the treatment of depression in general practice.
An evidence-based strategy tested the two treatments against the criteria of appropriateness, efficacy, effectiveness and value for money.
Although both drugs were equally efficacious, their relative effectiveness and value for money could not be accurately defined.
An evidence-based approach does not make clear whether SSRIs or TCAs should be used for the treatment of depression in general practice. Research questions arising from general practice should be addressed in a relevant setting and should yield answers that will complement and support a more pragmatic system of medicine rather than seek to direct it.
随着医疗保健需求的增加,循证医学与卫生经济学相结合提供了一种优化有限资源分配的方法。抑郁症是一种高患病率的疾病,具有重要的医学、社会和经济影响。超过90%的抑郁症在全科医疗中得到诊断和治疗。
回顾循证方法与卫生经济学相结合在决定全科医疗中治疗抑郁症应使用三环类抗抑郁药(TCA)还是选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRI)方面的有效性。
一种循证策略根据适当性、疗效、有效性和性价比标准对这两种治疗方法进行了测试。
尽管两种药物疗效相当,但它们的相对有效性和性价比无法准确界定。
循证方法并未明确在全科医疗中治疗抑郁症应使用SSRI还是TCA。全科医疗中产生的研究问题应在相关背景下解决,得出的答案应补充和支持更务实的医疗体系,而非试图对其进行指导。