Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Evaluation of a system of structured, pro-active care for chronic depression in primary care: a randomised controlled trial

By Marta Buszewicz, Mark Griffin, Elaine M. McMahon, Jennifer Beecham and Michael King


Background: People with chronic depression are frequently lost from effective care, with resulting psychological, physical and social morbidity and considerable social and financial societal costs. This randomised controlled trial will evaluate whether regular structured practice nurse reviews lead to better mental health and social outcomes for these patients and will assess the cost-effectiveness of the structured reviews compared to usual care. The hypothesis is that structured, pro-active care of patients with chronic depression in primary care will lead to a cost-effective improvement in medical and social outcomes when compared with usual general practitioner (GP) care. Methods/Design: Participants were recruited from 42 general practices throughout the United Kingdom. Eligible participants had to have a history of chronic major depression, recurrent major depression or chronic dsythymia confirmed using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). They also needed to score 14 or above on the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) at recruitment. Once consented, participants were randomised to treatment as usual from their general practice (controls) or the practice nurse led intervention. The intervention includes a specially prepared education booklet and a comprehensive baseline assessment of participants' mood and any associated physical and psycho-social factors, followed by regular 3 monthly reviews by the nurse over the 2 year study period. At these appointments intervention participants' mood will be reviewed, together with their current pharmacological and psychological treatments and any relevant social factors, with the nurse suggesting possible amendments according to evidence based guidelines. This is a chronic disease management model, similar to that used for other long-term conditions in primary care. The primary outcome is the BDI-II, measured at baseline and 6 monthly by self-complete postal questionnaire. Secondary outcomes collected by self-complete questionnaire at baseline and 2 years include social functioning, quality of life and data for the economic analyses. Health service data will be collected from GP notes for the 24 months before recruitment and the 24 months of the study. Discussion: 558 participants were recruited, 282 to the intervention and 276 to the control arm. The majority were recruited via practice database searches using relevant READ codes

Topics: RA0421 Public health. Hygiene. Preventive Medicine
Publisher: BioMed Central
Year: 2010
DOI identifier: 10.1186/1471-244X-10-61
OAI identifier:
Provided by: LSE Research Online

Suggested articles


  1. (2001). A Randomised Trial of Relapse Prevention of Depression in Primary Care’. Archives of General Psychiatry doi
  2. (1996). A: ’Long term outcome of patients with neurotic illness in general practice’. doi
  3. (1992). A: ’Negotiating behaviour change in medical settings: The development of brief motivational interviewing’. doi
  4. (2003). A: ’Standardised Assessment of Personality - Abbreviated Scale (SAPAS): preliminary validation of a brief screen for personality disorder’. doi
  5. (1998). A: ’The role of costconsequence analysis in healthcare decision-making’. Pharmacoeconomics doi
  6. (2001). Altman DG: ’Analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow up measurements’. doi
  7. (2002). AR: ’Something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue: a framework for the marriage of health econometrics and cost-effectiveness analysis’. Health Economics doi
  8. (1995). Barocka A: ’Residual symptoms after partial remission: An important outcome in depression’. Psychological Medicine doi
  9. (2000). Cost of depression among adults in England in doi
  10. (1998). Cost-effectiveness of treatments for major depression in primary care practice’. Archives General Psychiatry doi
  11. (1992). Costing psychiatric interventions’. Measuring Mental Health Needs Gaskell: LondonThornicroft
  12. (2008). Costs. Department of Health,
  13. (2002). DB: ’Statistical Analysis With Missing Data’. doi
  14. (2000). E: ’Randomised trial of monitoring, feedback and management of care by telephone to improve treatment of depression in primary care’. doi
  15. (2002). Effectiveness of teaching general practitioners skills in brief cognitive behaviour therapy to treat patients with depression: randomised controlled trial’. doi
  16. (1996). et al: ’A multifaceted intervention to improve treatment of depression in primary care’. doi
  17. (1999). et al: ’Can enhanced acute-phase treatment of depression improve long-term outcomes? A report of randomised trials in primary care’.
  18. (2000). et al: ’Office of National Statistics: Psychiatric morbidity among adults living in private households doi
  19. (1994). et al: ’The predictors of persistence of depression in primary care’. doi
  20. (1995). EuroQol: the current state of play’. Health Policy doi
  21. (1997). Fortnightly review: A regular review of the long term follow-up of depression’. doi
  22. (2001). Improving outcomes in depression: the whole process of care needs to be enhanced’. doi
  23. (1997). Improving the treatment of depression in primary care: problems and prospects’.
  24. (2000). Low intensity treatment of depression in primary care: Is it problematic?’ General Hospital Psychiatry doi
  25. (2003). Managing depression as a chronic disease: a randomised trial of ongoing treatment in primary care’. doi
  26. (1999). Multiple Imputation: a primer’. Statistical Methods in Medical Research doi
  27. (1989). Nelder JA: ’Generalized Linear Models’. doi
  28. (1998). Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis’. Medical Decision Making doi
  29. (2005). Nurses as leaders in chronic care’. doi
  30. (2001). of Mental Health: ’Challenges in Preventing Relapse in Major Depression’. doi
  31. (1992). on behalf of conference participants: ’Recognition and management of depression in general practice: consensus statement’. doi
  32. (1996). Organising care for patients with chronic illness’. Millbank Quarterly doi
  33. (2001). Psychometric Evaluation of the Beck Depression Inventory-II With Primary Care Medical Patients’. Health Psychology doi
  34. (2005). Qualitative data from a feasibility study of structured, proactive care for chronic depression in primary care’.
  35. (2000). Randomised controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitivebehaviour therapy and usual general practitioner care in the management of depression as well as mixed anxiety and depression in primary care’. Health Technology Assessment doi
  36. (2001). Should depression be managed as a chronic disease?’ doi
  37. (1990). The Read clinical classification’. doi
  38. (2009). The Unit Costs of Health and Social Care. PSSRU,
  39. (2002). The Work and Social Adjustment Scale: a simple measure of impairment in functioning’.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.