Antidepressants: general practitioners’ opinions and clinical practice.
Saved in:
| Title: | Antidepressants: general practitioners’ opinions and clinical practice. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Rambelomanana, S. (AUTHOR), Depont, F. (AUTHOR), Forest, K. (AUTHOR), Hébert, G. (AUTHOR), Blazejewski, S. (AUTHOR), Fourrier‐Réglat, A. (AUTHOR), Molimard, M. (AUTHOR), Moore, N. (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. Jun2006, Vol. 113 Issue 6, p460-467. 8p. 3 Charts, 1 Graph. |
| Subjects: | General practitioners, Antidepressants, Psychiatric drugs, Monoamine oxidase inhibitors, Neurotransmitter uptake inhibitors, Mental depression |
| Abstract: | Objective: To describe and compare general practitioners’ (GPs) opinions on antidepressant drugs and their prescriptions to depressed patients. Method: Between November 2000 and July 2001 a representative sample of French GPs was asked their opinion of the 15 most prescribed antidepressants, and then to describe the treatments of the current depressive episode of four depressive patients each, their changes and the reasons thereof. Results: One hundred and eighty-one GPs and 778 patients participated. The best-ranked antidepressants by the GPs were paroxetine, fluoxetine, sertraline and clomipramine for efficacy, and paroxetine, tianeptine, sertraline and fluoxetine for tolerability. In patients, the drugs most often prescribed were fluoxetine, paroxetine, and sertraline. Those least often stopped for intolerance were moclobemide (0%), dosulepine (0%), venlafaxine (4.5%) and citalopram (5.0%), and maprotiline (0%), citalopram (1.7%) and venlafaxine (2.3%) for lack of efficacy. The best predictor for prescription of antidepressants was the GPs’ overall ranking, itself depending on opinions of the tolerability and efficacy of the drug. However, opinions of tolerability and efficacy were not related to the rates of treatment discontinuation for intolerability or inefficacy. Conclusion: Prescriber opinion does not seem related to actual product performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Objective: To describe and compare general practitioners’ (GPs) opinions on antidepressant drugs and their prescriptions to depressed patients. Method: Between November 2000 and July 2001 a representative sample of French GPs was asked their opinion of the 15 most prescribed antidepressants, and then to describe the treatments of the current depressive episode of four depressive patients each, their changes and the reasons thereof. Results: One hundred and eighty-one GPs and 778 patients participated. The best-ranked antidepressants by the GPs were paroxetine, fluoxetine, sertraline and clomipramine for efficacy, and paroxetine, tianeptine, sertraline and fluoxetine for tolerability. In patients, the drugs most often prescribed were fluoxetine, paroxetine, and sertraline. Those least often stopped for intolerance were moclobemide (0%), dosulepine (0%), venlafaxine (4.5%) and citalopram (5.0%), and maprotiline (0%), citalopram (1.7%) and venlafaxine (2.3%) for lack of efficacy. The best predictor for prescription of antidepressants was the GPs’ overall ranking, itself depending on opinions of the tolerability and efficacy of the drug. However, opinions of tolerability and efficacy were not related to the rates of treatment discontinuation for intolerability or inefficacy. Conclusion: Prescriber opinion does not seem related to actual product performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0001690X |
| DOI: | 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2006.00793.x |
