Are Subjects in Pharmacological Treatment Trials of Depression Representative of Patients in Routine Clinical Practice?

OBJECTIVE: The methods used to evaluate the efficacy of antidepressants differ from treatment for depression in routine clinical practice. The rigorous inclusion exclusion criteria used to select subjects for participation in efficacy studies potentially limit the generalizability of these trials�...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American journal of psychiatry 2002-03, Vol.159 (3), p.469-473
Main Authors: Zimmerman, Mark, Mattia, Jill I., Posternak, Michael A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Ambulatory Care
Antidepressant drugs
Antidepressive Agents - therapeutic use
Biological and medical sciences
Clinical trials
Clinical Trials as Topic - methods
Clinical Trials as Topic - standards
Comorbidity
Depressive Disorder - diagnosis
Depressive Disorder - drug therapy
Depressive Disorder - epidemiology
Female
Humans
Male
Medical sciences
Mental Disorders - epidemiology
Methodology. Experimentation
Middle Aged
Patient Selection
Practice Patterns, Physicians' - standards
Psychiatric Status Rating Scales - statistics & numerical data
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychopathology. Psychiatry
Representativeness
Research Design - standards
Subjects
Suicide - psychology
Techniques and methods
Treatment Outcome
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:OBJECTIVE: The methods used to evaluate the efficacy of antidepressants differ from treatment for depression in routine clinical practice. The rigorous inclusion exclusion criteria used to select subjects for participation in efficacy studies potentially limit the generalizability of these trials' results. It is unknown how much impact these criteria have on the representativeness of subjects in efficacy trials. This study estimated the proportion of depressed patients treated in routine clinical practice who would meet standard inclusion exclusion criteria for an efficacy trial. METHOD: A total of 803 individuals, aged 16-65 years, who were seen at intake at an outpatient practice underwent a thorough diagnostic evaluation, including the administration of semistructured diagnostic interviews; 346 patients had current major depression. Common inclusion exclusion criteria used in efficacy studies of antidepressants were applied to the depressed patients to determine how many would have qualified for an efficacy trial. RESULTS: Approximately one-sixth of the 346 depressed patients would have been excluded from an efficacy trial because they had a bipolar or psychotic subtype of depression. The presence of a comorbid anxiety or substance use disorder, insufficient severity of depressive symptoms, or current suicidal ideation would have excluded 86.0% (N=252) of the remaining 293 outpatients with nonpsychotic unipolar major depressive disorder from an antidepressant efficacy trial. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects treated in antidepressant trials represent a minority of patients treated for major depression in routine clinical practice. These results show that antidepressant efficacy trials tend to evaluate a subset of depressed individuals with a specific clinical profile.
ISSN:0002-953X
1535-7228
DOI:10.1176/appi.ajp.159.3.469