Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Failed Antidepressant Treatment Response in Major Depressive Disorder,Dysthymia,and Subthreshold Depression in Adults

Abstract

French

Objective:

This systematic review critically evaluated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for treating adults with major depressive disorder, dysthymia, or subthreshold or minor depression for recommendations following inadequate response to first-line treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).

Method:

Searches for CPGs (January 2004 to November 2014) in English included 7 bibliographic databases and grey literature sources using CPG and depression as the keywords. Two raters selected CPGs on depression with a national scope. Data extraction included definitions of adequate response and recommended treatment options. Two raters assessed quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument.

Results:

From 46,908 citations, 3167 were screened at full text. From these 21 CPG were applicable to adults in primary care and outpatient settings. Five CPGs consider patients with dysthymia or subthreshold or minor depression. None provides recommendations for those who do not respond to first-line SSRI treatment. For adults with MDD, most CPGs do not define an “inadequate response” or provide specific suggestions regarding how to choose alternative medications when switching to an alternative antidepressant. There is variability between CPGs in recommending combination strategies. AGREE II ratings for stakeholder involvement in CPG development, editorial independence, and rigor of development are domains in which depression guidelines are often less robust.

Conclusions:

About half of patients with depression require second-line treatment to achieve remission. Consistency and clarity in guidelines for second-line treatment of depression are therefore important for clinicians but lacking in most current guidelines. This may reflect a paucity of primary studies upon which to base conclusions.

Keywords

depression systematic review inadequate response clinical practice guidelines

Depressive disorders, including major depressive disorder (MDD), subthreshold depression, and dysthymia, are complex illnesses associated with disability and reduced quality of life. Depressive disorders impose a substantial societal and economic burden,^1

–6 have a negative impact on overall health,^7

–11 and are linked with increased incidence of various illnesses and diseases.^{12

–20} Although several modalities exist for treating depressive disorders, pharmacotherapy remains the most common first-line treatment strategy. The response to first-line treatment is moderate (40%-60%),^21
–23 while remission following antidepressant treatment is achieved in a minority of patients (from 30%-45%^21,22 to 53%²³). Evidence regarding the efficacy of antidepressants for treating dysthymia is sparse; approximately half of the trials indicate a superior response to antidepressant medications versus placebo.^24

–30 Few studies have focused on treating subthreshold (or minor) depression.^30
–32

Despite increases in prescribing of antidepressant medications,³³ discernible decreases in the prevalence of MDD have yet to be noted in countries where before-after comparisons have been feasible.^34,35 This may be because a substantial number of depressed individuals continue to receive inadequate treatment.³⁶ Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for depression treatment are intended to aid clinician decision making at various stages of treatment, including following an inadequate response to a first-line therapy as this is a common outcome of treatment. Little information exists, however, regarding the quality and consistency of current CPGs that address this clinical decision point.

To investigate consistency (or, alternatively, variability) in treatment recommendations for depression following inadequate antidepressant response, we systematically evaluated recent CPGs for MDD, dysthymia, and subthreshold/minor depression. To date, there has been limited formal evaluation of such guidelines. One group has previously assessed the quality of several national CPGs in treating depression in primary care settings specifically³⁷ using the initial version of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument.³⁸ The CPGs failed to “meet the criteria on rigor of development, applicability, and editorial independence.” This conclusion appears consistent with findings from another critical appraisal that used the AGREE to evaluate guidelines for treating psychotic depression.³⁹ Another group reported that of 29 CPGs for depression, only 10 indicated the level of evidence on which their recommendations were based.⁴⁰ Finally, in an evaluation of European CPGs for treating psychiatric illness, 8 of which addressed mood disorders specifically,⁴¹ the domain of editorial independence was rated lowest, while stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, and CPG applicability were rated moderately.

Objective

Given the relatively poor response rates to first-line antidepressant treatment, as well as the negative consequences of untreated depression, clear guidance regarding treatment options for nonresponders is important for clinicians. The goals of this review are therefore 1) to review systematically the recommendations for second-line treatment of depression and 2) to critically appraise CPGs (using the AGREE II) that included any approach for patients who have not responded to at least one adequate course of antidepressant pharmacotherapy.

Methods

This study stems from a comparative effectiveness review sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), US Department of Health and Human Services,⁴³ which provided copyright release for the publication of this article. The findings and conclusions presented in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. No statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the US Department of Health and Human Services. The comparative effectiveness review focused on 4 research questions related to depression treatment following unsatisfactory response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).⁴³ The current study reflects the findings pertaining to the evaluation of CPGs following response failure to an adequate course of antidepressant pharmacotherapy with a 4-year update (since 2011).

Search Strategy

The search strategy included CPGs published from 1980 to February 2015. We limited grey literature searches for CPGs published from January 1, 2004, to November 2014. The key search terms are outlined elsewhere.⁴³ The databases searched were MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, PsychINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, CINAHL, and AMED. The grey literature search (i.e., Internet) included systematic searches of relevant citations on the relevant websites (see online Appendix A). Members of a technical expert panel involved in preparation of the comparative effectiveness report were queried for any additional relevant sources. The reference lists of eligible citations and systematic reviews were also searched for potentially eligible citations.

Clinical Practice Guideline Selection

CPGs were defined as “systematically developed statements about specific clinical problems intended to assist practitioners and patients in making decisions about appropriate health care.”⁴⁴ We included full guidelines and consensus statements but excluded medical algorithms (i.e., decision-making tools) with no background or description of the process by which the algorithm was developed. CPGs were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review if they provided recommendations for treating adults (≥18 years of age) and adolescents (8 to 18 years) with a primary diagnosis of MDD, dysthymia, or subthreshold or minor depression who exhibited an “inadequate response” to pharmacological treatment with an antidepressant as the first line of treatment. CPGs for treating other forms of depression (e.g., postpartum depression, bipolar depression) were excluded, as were CPGs for treating depressive disorders in individuals with a primary neurological condition.

Standardized forms were pilot tested for study selection. Two reviewers independently screened citations; a third reviewer resolved conflicts.

Assessment of CPG Quality

The AGREE II is a validated checklist used to assess CPGs and compare across guidelines.^45
–47 Two raters used the AGREE II instrument to assess CPG quality.⁴² The AGREE II consists of 6 domains used to evaluate the rigor and transparency with which a guideline is developed (i.e., the quality and clarity of a guideline). In brief, the domains consist of the following: 1) scope and purpose (items 1-3), 2) stakeholder involvement (items 4-6), 3) rigor of development (items 7-14), 4) clarity of presentation (items 15-17), 5) applicability (items 18-21), 6) editorial independence (items 22-23), and 7) an overall assessment (item 24).

Data Extraction from and Syntheses of the CGPs

Qualitative syntheses of data extracted using standardized and piloted forms from the CPGs included information on the following: 1) patient population (i.e., individuals with MDD, dysthymia, or subthreshold or minor depression), 2) definition of an adequate/inadequate response, 3) types of interventions and treatment specifications (e.g., monotherapy vs. combination therapy), and 4) basic information regarding each of the CPGs included in the systematic review (e.g., country of origin, intended setting for CPG application, and intended users).

Results

We captured a total of 30 (39 publications) CPGs (Suppl. Figure S1, online Appendix B).^{48

–70} From the 30 CPGs, 18 (27 publications) were specific to adults,^{48
–50,53,55

–58,60

–65,67,69

–76} 9 specific to adolescents,^{77

–85} and 3 applicable to both adults and adolescents.^51,54,59 Summary information for the adolescent CPGs is reported elsewhere.⁴³

From the 21 CPGs for adults, 4 were updated within our search interval,^{49,51,53,68,69,86
–88} and we report only the most recent version of these updated guidelines.^49,51,53,69 Six CPGs published by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) are interrelated^{57,58,73

–76}; from these we evaluated 2 unique CPGs.^57,58 Six publications^{61
–63,89,90} are related to the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) guidelines, 3 of these are recommendations,^61
–63 and the remaining 3 are publications providing supporting documentation for the methods used in the guidelines.^63,89,90 Finally, 1 publication is a summary companion paper⁹¹ of another CPG from the American College of Physicians⁶⁷; the two were evaluated as a single CPG.

Seventy-three studies were excluded from this review because of the following: 1) publication prior to 2004 (n = 45), 2) exclusive focus on diagnosis or screening rather than treatment (n = 7), 3) not a population of interest (n = 15), and 4) a treatment algorithm was presented with no background or description of the process by which it was developed to confirm CPG status (n = 6).

Qualitative Syntheses of CPG Characteristics

Table 1 presents the characteristics of the CPGs for treating adults with MDD, dysthymia, and subsyndromal depression as a function of country of origin, setting, and intended users. Three CPGs were developed for specific populations, including elderly patients in the community⁶⁵ and in long-term care homes,⁶⁰ and inmates in federal prisoners.⁵³ One CPG included recommendations for patients with depression and cardiovascular disease.⁶⁴ The remaining CPGs were specific to adults with no specific comorbid conditions.

Table 1.

Characteristics of Evaluated Clinical Practice Guidelines Indicating Country, Disorder Type, Intended Setting, and Guideline Users.

	United States	Canada	United Kingdom	New Zealand/Australia	Other
Disorder
Major depressive disorder	Mitchell⁶⁹ Qaseem⁶⁷ Steinman⁶⁵ Davidson⁶⁴ Gelenburg⁴⁹ Federal Bureau of Prisons⁷⁰	Ravindran⁶³ Parikh⁶² Lam⁶¹ Conn⁶⁰	Anderson⁵⁹ NICE^57,58,73,76	Ellis⁵⁶ Malhi⁵⁵ NZGG⁵⁴	Bauer⁵³ Singapore Ministry of Health⁵¹ Nutt⁵⁰ Harter⁴⁸
Dysthymia/subthreshold depression	Gelenburg^49,a Qaseem^67,a		Anderson^59,a NICE^58,73,76	NZGG⁵⁴	Singapore Ministry of Health⁵¹
Setting
Primary care	Mitchell⁶⁹ Qaseem⁶⁷ Horsley⁹¹ USPSTF⁷⁸ Steinman⁶⁵ Davidson⁶⁴ Gelenburg⁴⁹ Federal Bureau of Prisons⁷⁰	Ravindran⁶³ Parikh⁶² Lam⁶¹ Conn⁶⁰	Anderson⁵⁹ NICE^58,73,76 NICE⁵⁷	Ellis⁵⁶ Malhi⁵⁵	Bauer⁵³ Singapore Ministry of Health⁵¹ Nutt⁵⁰ Harter⁴⁸
Outpatient mental health	Mitchell⁶⁹ Qaseem⁶⁷ Anderson⁵⁹ Gelenburg⁴⁹	Parikh⁶² Conn⁶⁰	Anderson⁵⁹ NICE^57,58,73,76	Ellis⁵⁶ Malhi⁵⁵ Harter⁴⁸
Inpatient mental health	Qaseem⁶⁷ Gelenburg⁴⁹	Parikh⁶² Conn⁶⁰	Anderson⁵⁹	Ellis⁵⁶
Intended users
Primary care physicians	Mitchell⁶⁹ Qaseem⁶⁷ Horsley⁹¹ USPSTF⁷⁸ Steinman⁶⁵ Davidson⁶⁴ Gelenburg⁴⁹ Federal Bureau of Prisons⁷⁰	Ravindran⁶³ Parikh⁶² Lam⁶¹ Conn⁶⁰	Anderson⁵⁹ NICE^57,74	Malhi⁵⁵	Bauer⁵³ Singapore Ministry of Health⁵¹ Nutt⁵⁰ Harter⁴⁸
Mental health specialists	Mitchell⁶⁹ Qaseem⁶⁷ Horsley⁹¹ USPSTF⁷⁸ Steinman⁶⁵ Davidson⁶⁴ Gelenburg⁴⁹	Parikh⁶² Lam⁶¹ Conn⁶⁰	Anderson⁵⁹ NICE⁷⁴	Ellis⁵⁶ Malhi⁵⁵	Singapore Ministry of Health⁵¹ Harter⁴⁸
Allied mental health disciplines	Mitchell⁶⁹	Parikh⁶²

NICE, National Institute for Clinical Excellence; NZGG, New Zealand Guidelines Group; USPSTF, United States Preventive Task Force Services.

^aDysthymia population included in the clinical practice guideline but no recommendations were specific to dysthymia patients who failed to respond to treatment on a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.

CPGs for Treating Patients with Dysthymia and Subsyndromal Depression

Six CPGs made specific note of dysthymia^49,51,54,59 or subthreshold depression.^58,67 Most CPGs do not provide an operational definition and/or distinction between these disorders, with 1 CPG including dysthymia under the label of subthreshold depression.⁵⁹ This definitional shortcoming was directly acknowledged in 1 CPG.⁵⁸

One CPG that did not distinguish dysthymia from minor/subthreshold depression did recommend second- and third-line interventions following insufficient response.⁵⁴ Another CPG⁵⁸ also notes the potential lack of discontinuity between subthreshold depressive symptoms and a MDD and provides recommendations for patients with subthreshold depression symptoms with inadequate response to first-line measures. The remaining guidelines^49,51,59,67 do not provide recommendations for treatment of patients with dysthymia and inadequate response.

CPGs for Treating Patients with MDD

All CPGs focused on treating adults with MDD are applicable to patients in primary care and outpatient settings; 6^{49,56,59,60,62,67} are also applicable to inpatient settings (Table 1). All CPGs are primarily intended for primary care practitioners, with the exception of 1 CPG developed specifically for psychiatrists.⁵⁶ All but 2 of the guidelines consider various interventions for treating adult MDD; these 2 CPGs include only pharmacological interventions⁶⁷ or computerized cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT).⁵⁷ The remaining 19 CPGs recommend a variety of pharmacological, psychological, and complementary and alternative medicine interventions.

Defining an Inadequate Response

Eight CPGs define response as a 50% reduction in depression symptoms and partial response as a 25% to 50% reduction in symptoms.^{49,53,54,59,61
–63,69,88} Of these, only 3 suggest different treatment strategies for those with a partial response compared to those with nonresponse to an antidepressant medication.^49,53,69 Only 1 CPG suggested a specific scale that clinicians should use to monitor symptom changes; that one recommended using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9).⁵⁴ One CPG emphasized that response should be assessed via a structured measure but provided no recommendation about what that measure should be or what threshold should be used for defining an adequate/inadequate response.⁴⁹ Two CPGs recommended evaluation of adherence to the medication as the first or early step before establishing inadequate response.^53,70 One CPG noted the inconsistencies in defining treatment nonresponders but opted to categorize patients in the context of next-step treatment options (i.e., tiered approach: if A does not work, proceed with B, etc.) rather than providing a specific definition of an inadequate/adequate treatment response.⁵⁸ The remaining CPGs did not provide a definition of inadequate response.^{48,55,56,59,66,67,74}

In addition, there is substantial variability regarding when an inadequate treatment response can be defined. CPGs suggest that an inadequate response can be defined at 2 to 4 weeks,^{48,53,59,87,88} 4 to 6 weeks,⁵⁴ and 4 to 8 weeks^49,70,86 after treatment initiation. One CPG defines an inadequate response as a partial improvement 6 to 8 weeks posttreatment.^67,87

Second-Line Treatment Recommendations

Four CPGs specific to treatment of MDD^57,60,64,65 do not provide recommendations for treating patients with an inadequate response to antidepressant interventions. Notably, no CPGs considered the specific type of first-line antidepressant when recommending second-line treatment. That is, the possibility of certain second-line treatments being more appropriate for certain first-line treatments is not reflected in current CPGs. Tables 2 and 3 present the recommended strategies for monotherapy and combination therapy following response failure to first-line treatment. Attempts were made to identify recommendations regarding specific medications. However, it is often unclear whether the information following the recommendation (e.g., “switch antidepressants”) is a selective summary of the available evidence or a recommended action. The CANMAT guidelines recommend a particular sequence of interventions following response failure to first-line treatment (second- and third-line therapies—i.e., stepped approach); however, there are several options within each intervention step.^61
–63 Other guidelines specify a stepped approach⁵⁸ or utilization of second- and third-line antidepressant medications after failure to respond to initial treatment^53,54 but are less explicit about which agents to consider.⁶⁷ Two others make a distinction between a partial response and treatment nonresponse and specified different approaches in each instance.^49,61

Table 2.

Treatment Recommendations in Clinical Practice Guidelines That Identified Strategies for Those That Failed Response in North America (United States and Canada).

		Monotherapy						Combined Therapy
Study	Starting Interval (wk)^a	Dose or Duration Change	Switch Other SSRI	Switch Non-SSRI	Switch to Augmenting Agent	Switch Nonpharm and CAM		Add Augmentor	Add Other SSRI	Add Non-SSRI AD	Add Nonpharm and CAM
United States
Mitchell⁶⁹	6	X	X	X		PSY^b/LT^b/AC/ECT^b/VNS^b/DBS^b/rTMS/MST		SSRI + T3^b or TCA or LI^b or AAP^b	X	SSRI + BUP^b or BUS or MIR^b	HOS, PSY, ECT, LT
Federal Bureau of Prisons⁷⁰	6 to 8		X	X				AD+T3 or LI	X	X	PSY, ECT
Gelenburg⁴⁹	4 to 8	X	X	X	QTP	PSY^c/rTMS/ECT		AD + LI or T3, or BUS or AAP (OLZ, ARI, RIS, QTP) or MOD or STIM	X	AD (non-MAO) + BUP SSRI + TCA or MIR/MIR + VEN	PSY^c/VNS/ECT
Qaseem⁶⁷	6 to 8		CIT, FLX, FU, PAX, SER	MIR				X	X	X	X
National Guideline Clearinghouse⁶⁶	NS	X	X	X		PSY		SSRI + LI (300 to 600 mg/d)		SSRI + DES	PSY
Canada
Lam⁶¹	1 to 4	X	ES, SER, VEN	DLX, MIR, MIL,^b AMI or CM or MAO				AD + ARI or LI or OLZ or RIS^b/AD + QTP or T3/AD + BUS or MOD or ZI or STIM	X	AD + BUP or MIR or MIN
Parikh⁶²	NS						BIB/BAC/CBT/CBASP/IPT/MBCT				CBT/IPT
Ravindran⁶³							OM3/SAM-e/DHEA/FA				CBT or IPT/LT/EX/Yoga/SleepD

AAP, atypical antipsychotics; AD, antidepressant; AC, acupuncture; AMI, amitryptiline; ARI, aripiprazole; BAC, behavioral activation therapy; BIB, bibliotherapy; BUS, buspirone; BUP, bupropion; CAM, complementary and alternative medicine; CBASP, cognitive behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy; CBT, cognitive behavioral therapy; CIT, citalopram; CM, clomipramine; DBS, deep brain stimulation; DES, desipramine; DHEA, dehydroepiandrosterone; DLX, duloxetine; ECT, electroconvulsive therapy; ES, estrogen; EX, exercise; FA, folic acid; FLX, fluoxetine; FU, fluvoxamine; HOS, hospitalization; IPT, interpersonal therapy; LI, lithium; LT, light therapy; MAO, monoamine oxidase inhibitor; MBCT, mindfulness-based cognitive therapy; MIN, mianserin; MIL, milnacipram; MIR, mirtazapine; MOD, modafinil; MST, magnetic seizure therapy; NS, not significant; OLZ, olanzapine; OM3, omega-3; PAX, paroxetine; PSY, psychotherapy; QTP, quetiapine; RIS, risperidone; rTMS, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; SAM-e, S-adenosyl-L-methionine; SER, sertraline; SleepD, sleep deprivation; SSRI, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; STIM, stimulants; T3, tri-iodothyronine; TCA, tricyclic antidepressants; TRP, tryptophan; VEN, venlafaxine; VNS, vagal nerve stimulation; X, specified as a possible treatment approach for those with inadequate response; ZI, ziprasidone.

^aTime interval indicates the number of weeks following the first-line therapy attempt, after which a new treatment strategy should be initiated.

^bApplicable to partial responders or treatment resistance and may require consultation with a specialist.

^cDepression-focused psychotherapy.

Table 3.

Treatment Recommendations in Clinical Practice Guidelines That Identified Strategies for Those That Failed Response in Europe and Other Countries.

		Monotherapy					Combined Therapy
Study	Starting Interval (wk)^a	Dose or Duration Change	Switch Other SSRI	Switch Non-SSRI	Switch to Augmenting Agent	Switch Nonpharm and CAM	Add Augmentor	Add Other SSRI	Add Non-SSRI AD	Add Nonpharm and CAM
New Zealand/Australia
Malhi⁵⁵	2 to 6	X	AD	AD		ECT	AD + LI or T3, or AAP or BE
New Zealand Guidelines Group⁵⁴	3 to 6	X	AD/ VEN^b	AD/ TCA^b			AD + LI
Ellis⁵⁶	NS	X	AD	AD		CBT	TCA + LI/SSRI + LI or T3 or PI		SSRI + TCA
United Kingdom
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence⁵⁸	6 to 8	X	X	X			AD + ARI or LI or OLZ or RIS or MIR or QTP	X	AD + MIR
Anderson⁵⁹	4 to 8	X	X	X		CBT/PSY/EX/ECT/rTMS/VNS/ABNS	SSRI + LI or OLZ or ARI, TCA + T3/AD + LTG or TRP, or MOD, STIM	AD + MIR		CBT/PSY/ES or AG or OM3 or FA
Other
Bauer^53,88	2 to 4	X	AD	VEN,TRC			AD + LI or T3, or ARI or QTP	(OLZ + FLX)	AD + PRA	PSY
Singapore Ministry of Health⁵¹	4 to 8	X	X	X			AD + LI or T3
Nutt⁵⁰	4	X	X	X		ECT	AD + LI or AAP or T3		AD + BU or MIR or MIN
Harber⁴⁸	3 to 4 6 for elderly	X	X	X or TRP or VEN			AD + LI or MIN	SSRI + MIR	TCA + MIR

^aTime interval indicates the number of weeks following the first-line therapy attempt, after which a new treatment strategy should be initiated.

^bOnly for those that have failed 2 previous courses of antidepressants.

AAP, atypical antipsychotics; ABNS, ablative neurosurgery; AD, antidepressant; AG, antiglucocorticoids; ARI, aripiprazole; BE, benzodiazepine; BUP, bupropion; CAM, complementary and alternative medicine; CBT, cognitive behavioral therapy; ECT, electroconvulsive therapy; ES, estrogen; EX, exercise; FA, folic acid; FLX, fluoxetine; LI, lithium; LT, light therapy; LTG, lamotrigine; MIR, mirtazapine; MOD, modafinil; NS, not significant; OLZ, olanzapine; OM3, omega-3; PI, Pindolol; PRA, presynaptic autoreceptors; PSY, psychotherapy; QTP, quetiapine; RIS, risperidone; rTMS, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; SSRI, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; STIM, stimulants; T3, tri-iodothyronine; TCA, tricyclic antidepressants; TRC, tranylcypromine; TRP, tryptophan; VEN, venlafaxine; VNS, vagal nerve stimulation; X, specified as a possible treatment approach for those with inadequate response; ZI, ziprasidone.

Quality Assessment of CPGs Using the AGREE II Instrument

Table 4 includes the domain scores for the AGREE II ratings of the 21 unique CPGs. All CPGs score high on scope and purpose (domain 1: 69%-100%). Scores on stakeholder involvement vary from 17% to 97%.^{61
–63,63,89,90} Five of the 21 CPGs indicate that patients’ views and preferences had been sought (i.e., an item in domain 2).^{48,56
–58,69} On the rigor of development (domain 3) element, scores vary from 12% to 84%. Scores are high for clarity of presentation (domain 4) (61%-94%), based on recommendations within the CPG overall, and not specific to recommendations regarding second-line treatments. When considering applicability (domain 5), scores are variable, ranging from 0% to 90%. The majority of CPGs score poorly on 2 items in this domain: 1) consideration of potential resource implications of applying recommendations and 2) presenting monitoring or auditing criteria. For editorial independence (domain 6), scores are again variable (12%-100%). In terms of raters’ overall assessment and recommendation of the CPGs for clinical use, only the NICE guideline⁵⁸ was strongly recommended by both raters. Two CPGs were not recommended,^63,64 while the remainder were recommended with provisos alterations by at least 1 of the 2 raters.

Table 4.

Scores from the AGREE II for Clinical Practice Guidelines for Adults.

Author	Organization	Scope and Purpose (Domain 1)	Stakeholder Involvement (Domain 2)	Rigor of Development (Domain 3)	Clarity of Presentation (Domain 4)	Applicability (Domain 5)	Editorial Independence (Domain 6)
1. Mitchell⁶⁹	Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement	100.00	97.22	81.25	83.33	89.58	100.00
2. Qaseem⁶⁷	American College of Physicians	94.44	58.33	59.38	77.78	11.36	87.50
3. National Guideline Clearing House⁶⁶	Kaiser Permanente	97.22	63.89	80.21	94.44	2.08	79.17
4. Steinman⁶⁵	Centers for Disease Control and Prevention	97.22	63.89	66.67	94.44	65.91	50.00
5. Davidson⁶⁴	National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute	91.67	61.11	42.71	80.56	0.00	12.50
6. Ravindran⁶³	Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments	86.11	38.89	68.75	80.56	2.27	70.83
7. Parikh⁶²	Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments	94.44	58.33	69.79	61.11	9.09	50.00
8. Lam⁶¹	Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments	97.22	63.89	85.42	77.78	0.00	70.83
9. Conn⁶⁰	Canadian Coalition for Seniors Mental Health	100.00	58.33	82.29	83.33	9.09	37.50
10. Anderson⁵⁹	British Association for Psychopharmacology	91.67	58.33	72.92	91.67	2.27	12.50
11. NICE CBT⁵⁸	National Institute for Clinical Excellence	97.22	88.89	77.08	88.89	70.45	50.00
12. NICE⁵⁷	National Institute for Clinical Excellence	94.44	83.33	78.13	69.44	88.64	45.83
13. Ellis⁵⁶	RANZCP	100.00	91.67	82.29	91.67	25.00	66.67
14. Malhi⁵⁵	NSCCMHDA	100.00	66.67	69.79	91.67	11.36	66.67
15. New Zealand Guidelines Group⁵⁴	Ministry of Health & New Zealand Guidelines Group	100.00	66.67	69.79	88.89	43.18	100.00
16. Bauer⁵³	World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry	94.44	58.33	56.25	77.78	16.67	54.17
17. Singapore Ministry of Health⁵¹	Ministry of Health Singapore	88.88	83.33	38.54	72.22	20.83	66.67
18. Nutt⁵⁰	International Consensus Group on Depression	94.44	69.44	12.5	77.78	54.45	66.67
19. Gelenburg⁴⁹	American Psychiatric Association	97.22	55.56	84.38	80.56	27.27	91.67
20. Harter⁴⁸	Association of Scientific Medical Societies of Germany and the German Association for Psychiatrists and Psychotherapy	69.44	61.11	48.96	80.56	27.27	91.67
21. Mitchell⁶⁹	American Federal Bureau of Prisons	97.00	16.67	26.04	88.89	39.58	16.67

CBT, cognitive behavioral therapy; NICE, National Institute for Clinical Excellence; NSCCMHDA, Northern Sydney Central Coast Mental Health Drug & Alcohol; RANZCP, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists.

Discussion

This systematic review evaluated 21 CPGs for treating adults with MDD or dysthymia/subsyndromal depression, limited to those that were published in English and applicable in a national context or developed by large national professional associations. Most guidelines address the issue of choosing second-line treatment strategies. None provides second-line treatment recommendations that considered the specific nature of the first-line treatment. The quality of the guidelines was highly variable, particularly in certain domains.

Quality of Current CPGs for Treating Depressive Disorders

The AGREE II instrument indicates that most guidelines provide good clarity regarding the aims and structure of the CPGs. Variation exists, however, in the guidelines for rigor of development, applicability, and editorial independence, which is consistent with other summaries of CPGs for depression.^37,39,41 The variability in these quality domains is amplified when the recommendations for treating individuals with an inadequate response to initial treatment are examined, perhaps because of the relative insufficiency of extant studies of second-line treatment strategies. Although some CPGs clearly state the limitations of the evidence from which they are developed, others did not. The uncertainty of the evidence therefore needs to be better highlighted in these and future CPGs. Transparency on the processes used to derive recommendations is key for future CPGs.

Although the CPGs generally rate in the moderate to high range for attempting to link available evidence with the recommendations, the AGREE II does not address the clinical sensibility (or ecological validity) of treatment strategies. The AGREE II also cannot confirm whether the best evidence is selected from which to draw conclusions. A variety of grading systems for evaluating the strength of the evidence used across guidelines contributes to this inconsistency. Future CPGs should evaluate the strength of their evidence using standardized evaluation approaches, such as the widely adopted Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE),⁹² which assesses the quality of evidence. The GRADE approach provides transparent criteria for assessing the quality of the evidence as well as separate criteria for the strength of recommendations.

Most CPGs do not include patient representation in the guideline development process; a majority of CPG panel members are physicians. Although the range of scores for editorial independence suggests that there could be improvement on this measure, there are limitations to the AGREE II approach to assessing this domain. For example, potential conflicts of interest in one CPG⁴⁹ were assessed in greater detail and showed that 100% of the CPG panel members disclosed financial relationships with industry (predominately pharmaceutical) and each member had ties with several different companies.⁹⁴

Scores for editorial independence were markedly heterogeneous, ranging from 12% to 100%, and only 8 from 21 CPGs scored at least 70% in the AGREE II domain, suggesting problems with lack of independence of guideline developers to funding body or lack of reporting of any potential conflict of interests of panel members. There are a number of studies suggesting links with guideline panel members and the quality and direction of reporting.^93
–95 There is the suggestion that even when disclosure of financial conflict of interest is transparent, this may not be sufficient to prevent potential biases.⁹⁶ Others suggest that bias is intractable, and so too is the problem of nondisclosure.⁹⁷ Groups that ensure greater safeguards to minimize competing interests of panel members may make different recommendations.^94,98 Future CPGs for MDD should consider the panel composition and manage competing interests of panel members.

Scores for the applicability domain tended to be the lowest. This domain evaluates the extent to which 1) facilitators/barriers for implementing the CPGs are recognized and discussed, 2) advice/tools on how the CPGs should be incorporated into practice are included, and 3) resource implications associated with implementing CPGs are acknowledged. As such, future CPGs should consider the feasibility of implementing the recommendations and discuss the potential barriers to this goal explicitly within the document.

Second-Line Treatment Strategies

No recommendations were identified specific for individuals with dysthymia or subthreshold or minor depression who had failed previous treatment. This may reflect a lack of current consensus regarding how to define a failed or inadequate response in patients with fewer or less severe baseline symptoms than those with MDD.

Recommendations for treatment following a failure of the first-line medication included dosing or treatment interval changes, switching to a different medication, or adopting an alternative therapy. These recommendations were generally nonspecific regarding optimal dosing, which alternative treatments should be considered, or the duration of treatment prior to initiating a change. Combination therapy recommendations generally identified the types of antidepressants and augmenting agents that should be considered following a first-line antidepressant nonresponse. There was high inconsistency across CPGs with regard to the types of augmenting agents to use, however.

There is also little attention given to the appropriateness of second-line strategies in the context of the first-line treatment. Dose increases may be a preferable strategy for some but not other antidepressant medications. Choosing a second antidepressant following the failure of a first might—or might not—be guided by the specific properties of the first failed antidepressant. Some augmentation agents might preferentially augment certain antidepressant medications in comparison to others. This lack of attention to the potential for second-line strategies to be guided by the first-line treatment may reflect a paucity of extant primary studies addressing these critical clinical questions.

Limitations

There are several limitations in this systematic CPG review. Our search was limited to guidelines published in English. We excluded guidelines that specifically focused on populations with other primary health conditions (i.e., cancer, diabetes). We also excluded CPGs that were not national in scope. We do not believe, however, that publication bias is an issue for CPGs whose aim is to be widely disseminated and adopted.

Additionally, the operational definition of CPGs adopted in the current systematic review excludes treatment algorithms, which aim to provide guidance with regard to treatment strategies, methods of implementation, and treatment steps.⁹⁹ Algorithms are often included in CPGs but in isolation do not constitute a guideline. Nevertheless, their use in clinical practice may be as relevant as the use of CPGs.¹⁰⁰ Future CPGs may wish to develop and incorporate algorithms within the guidelines that are evidence based or at the least identify that they represent best practices.

Conclusions and Future Recommendations

This review assessed CPGs from 2004 to 2014 for treating adults with depression (including dysthymia, subthreshold/minor depression, and MDD), with a focus on recommendations following failed response to first-line antidepressant pharmacotherapy. While there are many first-line treatment strategies for patients with depressive disorders, there is, in comparison, a paucity of information regarding the best approaches to adopt when that first-line treatment is inadequate. Given that approximately half of treated patients will require more than 1 treatment to achieve remission, better information regarding optimal second-line approaches is critical for reducing the burden of illness associated with this condition.

Consistent with previous studies,^39
–41 assessment of the CPGs using the AGREE II instrument revealed deficiencies in the domains of stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, and editorial independence. The evidence on which the guidelines are based is problematic with respect to the sufficiency of the evidence, its ecological validity, and its balanced representation in the guidelines.

Groups that wish to develop CPGs for depressive disorders might consider several factors in the future. First, a clear definition of inadequate response is required. Standardized methods for establishing adequacy of response (i.e., cutoff values using specific depression scales) in real-world settings should be included. Second, the representation of various stakeholders (including patients and payers) in the CPG development process should be prioritized in the future. Third, greater clarity with regard to the recommended clinical actions following a failed treatment response is critical. These recommended actions should emerge directly from the best available evidence. When existing evidence is lacking, CPGs should indicate that the evidence for a specific recommendation is insufficient. Finally, the impact of contextual factors on the applicability and feasibility of the CPG, such as practice setting (inpatient, outpatient) and type of clinician (e.g., primary care practitioner, psychiatrist), should also be highlighted.

Footnotes

Author Note

The authors are solely responsible for the content of the review. The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Parminder Raina holds a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Geroscience and the Raymond and Margaret Labarge Chair in Research and Knowledge Application for Optimal Aging.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The original systematic review was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHSA 290 2007 10060 I). The AHRQ provided peer review and approval of the final report for the original review.

Supplemental Material

Supplementary material is available online with this article.

References

Murray

Lopez

. Evidence-based health policy—lessons from the Global Burden of Disease Study. Science. 1996;274(5288):740–743.

World Health Organization. The World Health Report 2001: mental health: new understanding, new hope. Geneva (Switzerland): WHO; 2001.

The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs. Out of the shadows at last: transforming mental health, mental illness and addiction services in Canada. Ottawa: Parliment of Canada; 2006.

Tompson

Pierre

Boger

. Maternal depression, maternal expressed emotion, and youth psychopathology. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2010;38(1):105–117.

Ramchandani

Stein

. The impact of parental psychiatric disorder on children: avoiding stigma, improving care. Br Med J. 2003;327(7409):242–243.

Hoge

Lesikar

Guevara

. Mental disorders among U.S. military personnel in the 1990s: association with high levels of health care utilization and early military attrition. Am J Psychiatry. 2002;159(9):1576–1583.

Ciechanowski

Katon

Russo

. Depression and diabetes: impact of depressive symptoms on adherence, function, and costs. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160(21):3278–3285.

Aro

de Koning

Absetz

Schreck

. Psychosocial predictors of first attendance for organised mammography screening. J Med Screen. 1999;6(2):82–88.

McIntyre

Soczynska

Konarski

Kennedy

. The effect of antidepressants on glucose homeostasis and insulin sensitivity: synthesis and mechanisms. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2006;5(1):157–168.

10.

Murphy

Horton

Monson

. Cigarette smoking in relation to depression: historical trends from the Stirling County Study. Am J Psychiatry. 2003;160(9):1663–1669.

11.

Van Gool

Kempen

Penninx

. Relationship between changes in depressive symptoms and unhealthy lifestyles in late middle aged and older persons: results from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam. Age Ageing. 2003;32(1):81–87.

12.

Kop

. The integration of cardiovascular behavioral medicine and psychoneuroimmunology: new developments based on converging research fields. Brain Behav Immun. 2003;17(4):233–237.

13.

Corcos

Guilbaud

Hjalmarsson

. Cytokines and depression: an analogic approach. Biomed Pharmacother. 2002;56(2):105–110.

14.

Kop

Gottdiener

Tangen

. Inflammation and coagulation factors in persons > 65 years of age with symptoms of depression but without evidence of myocardial ischemia. Am J Cardiol. 2002;89(4):419–424.

15.

Musselman

Miller

Porter

. Higher than normal plasma interleukin-6 concentrations in cancer patients with depression: preliminary findings. Am J Psychiatry. 2001 8;158(8):1252–7.

16.

Penninx

Kritchevsky

Yaffe

. Inflammatory markers and depressed mood in older persons: results from the Health, Aging and Body Composition study. Biol Psychiatry. 2003;54(5):566–572.

17.

Taylor

Youngblood

Catellier

. Effects of antidepressant medication on morbidity and mortality in depressed patients after myocardial infarction. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(7):792–798.

18.

Wassertheil-Smoller

Shumaker

Ockene

. Depression and cardiovascular sequelae in postmenopausal women. The Women’s Health Initiative (WHI). Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(3):289–298.

19.

Gilmour

Depression and risk of heart disease. Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada; 2008. Report No.: 82-003-XPE.

20.

Patten

Williams

Lavorato

. Major depression as a risk factor for chronic disease incidence: longitudinal analyses in a general population cohort. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008;30(5):407–413.

21.

Carvalho

Cavalcante

Castelo

Lima

MCO

. Augmentation strategies for treatment-resistant depression: a literature review. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2007;32(5):415–428.

22.

Trivedi

Greer

Grannemann

. Exercise as an augmentation strategy for treatment of major depression. J Psychiatr Pract. 2006;12(4):205–213.

23.

Gartlehner

Hansen

Morgan

. Comparative benefits and harms of second-generation antidepressants for treating major depressive disorder: an updated meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(11):772–785.

24.

Vanelle

J-M

Attar-Levy

Poirier

M-F

. Controlled efficacy study of fluoxetine in dysthymia. Br J Psychiatry. 1997;170:345–350.

25.

Kocsis

Zisook

Davidson

. Double-blind comparison of sertraline, imipramine, and placebo in the treatment of dysthymia: psychosocial outcomes. Am J Psychiatry. 1997;154(3):390–395.

26.

Thase

Fava

Halbreich

. A placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial comparing sertraline and imipramine for the treatment of dysthymia. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1996;53(9):777–784.

27.

Devanand

Nobler

Cheng

. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of fluoxetine treatment for elderly patients with dysthymic disorder. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2005;13(1):59–68.

28.

Barrett

Williams

Oxman

. Treatment of dysthymia and minor depression in primary care: a randomized trial in patients aged 18 to 59 years. J Fam Pract. 2001;50(5):405–412.

29.

Ravindran

Guelfi

Lane

Cassano

. Treatment of dysthymia with sertraline: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in dysthymic patients without major depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 2000;61(11):821–827.

30.

Williams

Jr Barrett

Oxman

. Treatment of dysthymia and minor depression in primary care: a randomized controlled trial in older adults. JAMA. 2000;284(12):1519–1526.

31.

Judd

Rapaport

Yonkers

. Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of fluoxetine for acute treatment of minor depressive disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(10):1864–1871.

32.

Rocca

Calvarese

Faggiano

. Citalopram versus sertraline in late-life nonmajor clinically significant depression: a 1-year follow-up clinical trial. J Clin Psychiatry. 2005;66(3):360–369.

33.

Beck

Patten

. Adjustment to antidepressant utilization rates to account for depression in remission. Compr Psychiatry. 2004;45(4):268–274.

34.

Brugha

Jenkins

Bebbington

. Risk factors and the prevalence of neurosis and psychosis in ethnic groups in Great Britain. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2004;39(12):939–946.

35.

Kessler

Demler

Frank

. Prevalence and treatment of mental disorders, 1990 to 2003. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(24):2515–2523.

36.

Gonzalez

Vega

Williams

. Depression care in the United States: too little for too few. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010;67(1):37–46.

37.

Hegarty

Gunn

Blashki

. How could depression guidelines be made more relevant and applicable to primary care? A quantitative and qualitative review of national guidelines. Br J Gen Pract. 2009;59(562):e149–e156.

38.

Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines: the AGREE project. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12(1):18–23.

39.

Wijkstra

Schubart

Nolen

. Treatment of unipolar psychotic depression: the use of evidence in practice guidelines. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2009;10(4, Pt 2):409–415.

40.

Voellinger

Berney

Baumann

. Major depressive disorder in the general hospital: adaptation of clinical practice guidelines. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2003;25(3):185–193.

41.

Stiegler

Rummel

Wahlbeck

. European psychiatric treatment guidelines: is the glass half full or half empty? Eur Psychiatry. 2005;20(8):554–558.

42.

The AGREE Next Steps Consortium. Appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II (AGREE II). The AGREE Research Trust; 2009. Available from: http://www.agreetrust.org

43.

Santaguida

MacQueen

Keshavarz

Levine

Beyene

Raina

. Treatment for depression after unsatisfactory response to SSRIs. Rockville (MD): Agency for Research Healthcare and Quality; 2012. Report No.: 12-EHC050-EF.

44.

Field

Lohr

. Guidelines for clinical practice: from development to use. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 1992.

45.

Brouwers

Kho

Browman

. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ. 2010;182(18):E839–E842.

46.

Brouwers

Kho

Browman

. Development of the AGREE II, part 1: performance, usefulness and areas for improvement. CMAJ. 2010;182(10):1045–1052.

47.

Brouwers

Kho

Browman

. Development of the AGREE II, part 2: assessment of validity of items and tools to support application. CMAJ. 2010;182(10):E472–E478.

48.

Harter

Klesse

Bermejo

. Unipolar depression: diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations from the current S3/National Clinical Practice Guideline. Deutsches Arzteblatt International. 2010;107(40):700–708.

49.

Gelenberg

Freeman

Markowitz

Rosenbaum

. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder. Washington (DC): American Psychiatric Association; 2010.

50.

Nutt

Davidson

Gelenberg

. International consensus statement on major depressive disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2010;71(Suppl. E1):e08.

51.

Singapore Ministry of Health. Depression clinical practice guidelines. Singapore: Singapore Ministry of Health; 2012.

52.

Lenox-Smith

Jiang

. Venlafaxine extended release versus citalopram in patients with depression unresponsive to a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;23(3):113–119.

53.

Bauer

Pfennig

Severus

. World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for biological treatment of unipolar depressive disorders, part 1: update 2013 on the acute and continuation treatment of unipolar depressive disorders. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2013;14(5):334–385.

54.

New Zealand Guidelines Group. Identification of common mental disorders and management of depression in primary care. Wellington: New Zealand Guidelines Group; 2008.

55.

Malhi

Adams

Porter

. Clinical practice recommendations for depression. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2009;119(Suppl. 439):8–26.

56.

Ellis

; Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists Clinical Practice Guidelines Team for Depression. Australian and New Zealand clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of depression. Aust NZ J Psychiatry. 2004;38(6):389–407.

57.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Computerised cognitive behaviour therapy for depression and anxiety. London (UK): NICE; 2006.

58.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Depression in adults (update): depression: the treatment and management of depression in adults. London (UK): NICE; 2009. Report No.: final version of guideline 90.

59.

Anderson

Ferrier

Baldwin

. Evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants: a revision of the 2000 British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines. J Psychopharmacol (Oxf). 2008;22(4):343–396.

60.

Conn

Gibson

Feldman

. National guidelines for seniors’ mental health: the assessment and treatment of mental health issues in long-term care homes (focus on mood and behaviour symptoms). Can J Geriatr. 2006;9(Suppl. 2):S59–S64.

61.

Lam

Kennedy

Grigoriadis

. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) clinical guidelines for the management of major depressive disorder in adults. III. Pharmacotherapy. J Affect Disord. 2009;117(Suppl. 1):S26–S43.

62.

Parikh

Segal

Grigoriadis

. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) clinical guidelines for the management of major depressive disorder in adults. II. Psychotherapy alone or in combination with antidepressant medication. J Affect Disord. 2009;117(Suppl. 1):S15–S25.

63.

Ravindran

Lam

Filteau

. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) clinical guidelines for the management of major depressive disorder in adults. V. Complementary and alternative medicine treatments. J Affect Disord. 2009;117(Suppl. 1):S54–S64.

64.

Davidson

Kupfer

Bigger

. Assessment and treatment of depression in patients with cardiovascular disease: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Working Group Report. Psychosom Med. 2006;68(5):645–650.

65.

Steinman

Frederick

Prohaska

. Recommendations for treating depression in community-based older adults. Am J Prev Med. 2007;33(3):175–181.

66.

National Guideline Clearinghouse. Depression clinical practice guidelines. Washington (DC): National Guideline Clearinghouse; 2004.

67.

Qaseem

Snow

Denberg

. Using second-generation antidepressants to treat depressive disorders: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149(10):725–733.

68.

Jaehne

. Health care guideline: major depression in adults in primary care. 12th ed. Bloomington, MN: Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement; 2009.

69.

Mitchell

Trangle

Degan

. Adult depression in primary care. Bloomington, MN: Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement; 2013.

70.

Federal Bureau of Prisons. Management of major depressive disorders: Federal Bureau of Prisons clinical practice guidelines. Washington (DC): Federal Bureau of Prisons; 2014.

71.

Joffe

Singer

Levitt

MacDonald

. A placebo-controlled comparison of lithium and triiodothyronine augmentation of tricyclic antidepressants in unipolar refractory depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1993;50(5):387–393.

72.

Ravindran

. If a patient does not respond to a full dose of fluvoxamine for at least 12 weeks, what alternatives should be considered? J Psychiatry Neurosci. 1998;23(2):136.

73.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Depression: Management of depression in primary and secondary care. London (UK): NICE; 2004. Report No.: 23.

74.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Depression: the treatment and management of depression in adults. London (UK): NICE; 2009.

75.

Pilling

Anderson

Goldberg

. Guidelines: depression in adults, including those with a chronic physical health problem: summary of NICE guidance. Br Med J. 2009;339(7728):1025–1027.

76.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Depression in adults with a chronic physical health problem: treatment and management. London (UK): NICE; 2009. Report No.: NICE clinical guideline 91.

77.

Birmaher

Brent

Bernet

. Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with depressive disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(11):1503–1526.

78.

US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening and treatment for major depressive disorder in children and adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. J Am Acad Pediatr. 2009;123(4):1223–1228.

79.

Zuckerbrot

Cheung

M.H

Jensen

. Guidelines for adolescent depression in primary care (GLAD-PC), I: identification, assessment, and initial management. Pediatrics. 2009;120(5):1299–1312.

80.

Hughes

Emslie

Crismon

. Texas Children’s Medication Algorithm Project: update from Texas Consensus Conference Panel on medication treatment of childhood major depressive disorder. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(6):667–686.

81.

Cheung

Zuckerbrot

Jensen

. Guidelines for adolescent depression in primary care (GLAD-PC), II: treatment and ongoing management. J Am Acad Pediatr. 2007;120(5):e1313–e1326.

82.

Gallagher

. Evidence-based psychotherapies for depressed adolescents: a review and clinical guidelines. Prim Psychiatry. 2005;12(9):33–39.

83.

National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Depression in children and young people: Identification and management in primary, community and secondary care. London (UK): NICE; 2005.

84.

National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Depression in children and young people: identification and management in primary, community and secondary care. London (UK): NICE; 2015.

85.

McDermott

Baigent

Charen

. Clinical practice guidelines: depression in adolescents and young adults. Melbourne (Australia): BeyondBlue; 2011.

86.

Karasu

Gelenberg

Merriam

Wang

. Practice guideline for treatment of patients with depressive disorder. 2nd ed. Washington (DC): American Psychiatric Association; 2009.

87.

Mahendran

Yap

. Clinical practice guidelines for depression. Singapore Med J. 2005;46:610–615.

88.

Bauer

Bschor

Pfennig

. World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for biological treatment of unipolar depressive disorders in primary care. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2007;8(2):67–104.

89.

Kennedy

Lam

Parikh

. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) clinical guidelines for the management of major depressive disorder in adults: introduction. J Affect Disord. 2009;117:S1–S2.

90.

Anderson

Haddad

. CANMAT guidelines for depression: clear and user-friendly. J Affect Disord. 2009;117:S3–S4.

91.

Horsley

. ACP guideline on second-generation antidepressants for depression treatment. Am Fam Physician. 2009;80(3):291–294.

92.

GRADE working group 2012 [cited 2016 August 11]. Available from: http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/.

93.

Norris

Holmer

Ogden

. Conflict of interest disclosures for clinical practice guidelines in the national guideline clearinghouse. PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e47343.

94.

Cosgrove

Bursztajn

Erlich

. Conflicts of interest and the quality of recommendations in clinical guidelines. J Eval Clin Pract. 2013;19(4):674–681.

95.

Cosgrove

Krimsky

Wheeler

. Tripartite conflicts of interest and high stakes patent extensions in the DSM-5. Psychother Psychosom. 2014;83(2):106–113.

96.

Lenzer

Hoffman

Furberg

Ioannidis

. Ensuring the integrity of clinical practice guidelines: a tool for protecting patients. BMJ. 2013;347:f5535.

97.

Bastian

. Nondisclosure of financial interest in clinical practice guideline development: an intractable problem? PLoS Med. 2016;13(5):e1002030.

98.

Cosgrove

Shaughnessy

Wheeler

. The American Psychiatric Association’s guideline for major depressive disorder: a commentary. Psychother Psychosom. 2012;81(3):186–188.

99.

Adli

Bauer

Rush

. Algorithms and collaborative-care systems for depression: are they effective and why? A systematic review. Biol Psychiatry. 2006;59(11):1029–1038.

100.

Ioannidis

JPA

Evans

SJW

Gotzsche

. Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141(10):781–788.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.26 MB