Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care

Bruce Arroll (Lead / Corresponding author), C. Raina Elley, Tana Fishman, Felicity A. Goodyear-Smith, Tim Kenealy, Grant Blashki, Ngaire Kerse, Stephen MacGillivray

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    184 Citations (Scopus)
    788 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Background Concern has been expressed about the relevance of secondary care studies to primary care patients specifically about the effectiveness of antidepressant medication. There is a need to review the evidence of only those studies that have been conducted comparing antidepressant efficacy with placebo in primary care-based samples. Objectives To determine the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in patients (under the age of 65 years) with depression in primary care. Search strategy All searches were conducted in September 2007. The Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDAN) Controlled Trials Register was searched, together with a supplementary search of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL and PSYNDEX. Abstracts of all possible studies for inclusion were assessed independently by two reviewers. Further trials were sought through searching the reference lists of studies initially identified and by scrutinising other relevant review papers. Selected authors and experts were also contacted. Selection criteria Studies were selected if they were randomised controlled trials of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus placebo in adults. Older patients (over 65 years) were excluded. Patients had to be recruited from a primary care setting. For continuous outcomes the Hamilton Depression scale of the Montgomery Asberg Scale was requred. Data collection and analysis Data were extracted using data extraction forms by two reviewers independently, with disagreements resolved by discussion. A similar process was used for the validity assessment. Pooling of results was done using Review Manager 5. The primary outcome was depression reduction, based on a dichotomous measure of clinical response, using relative risk (RR), and on a continuous measure of depression symptoms, using the mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Main results There were fourteen studies (16 comparisons) with extractable data included in the review, of which ten studies examined TCAs, two examined SSRIs and two included both classes, all compared with placebo. The number of participants in the intervention groups was 1364 and in the placebo groups 919. Nearly all studies were of short duration, typically 6-8 weeks. Pooled estimates of efficacy data showed an RR of 1.24, 95% CI 1.11-1.38 in favour of TCAs against placebo. For SSRIs this was 1.28, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.43.. The numbers needed to treat (NNT) for TCAs ranged from 7 to 16 {median NNT 9} patient expected event rate ranged from 63% to 26% respectively) and for SSRIs from 7 to 8 {median NNT 7} (patient expected event rate ranged from 48% to 42% respectively) . The numbers needed to harm (NNH for withdrawal due to side effects) ranged from 4 to 30 for TCAs (excluding three studies with no harmful events leading to withdrawal) and 20 to 90 for SSRIs. Authors' conclusions Both TCAs and SSRIs are effective for depression treated in primary care.
    This review is published as a Cochrane Review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 3. Cochrane Reviews are regularly updated as new evidence emerges and in response to comments and criticisms, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews should be consulted for the most recent version of the Review.

    Original languageEnglish
    Article numberCD007954
    JournalCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
    Volume2009
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2009

    Fingerprint

    Tricyclic Antidepressive Agents
    Serotonin Uptake Inhibitors
    Antidepressive Agents
    Primary Health Care
    Placebos
    Depression
    Numbers Needed To Treat
    Confidence Intervals
    Databases
    Secondary Care
    Anxiety Disorders
    MEDLINE
    Patient Selection
    Randomized Controlled Trials

    Keywords

      Cite this

      Arroll, B., Elley, C. R., Fishman, T., Goodyear-Smith, F. A., Kenealy, T., Blashki, G., ... MacGillivray, S. (2009). Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2009(3), [CD007954]. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007954
      Arroll, Bruce ; Elley, C. Raina ; Fishman, Tana ; Goodyear-Smith, Felicity A. ; Kenealy, Tim ; Blashki, Grant ; Kerse, Ngaire ; MacGillivray, Stephen. / Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care. In: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2009 ; Vol. 2009, No. 3.
      @article{85b92403d4744e5ab60665f7e0f86575,
      title = "Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care",
      abstract = "Background Concern has been expressed about the relevance of secondary care studies to primary care patients specifically about the effectiveness of antidepressant medication. There is a need to review the evidence of only those studies that have been conducted comparing antidepressant efficacy with placebo in primary care-based samples. Objectives To determine the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in patients (under the age of 65 years) with depression in primary care. Search strategy All searches were conducted in September 2007. The Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDAN) Controlled Trials Register was searched, together with a supplementary search of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL and PSYNDEX. Abstracts of all possible studies for inclusion were assessed independently by two reviewers. Further trials were sought through searching the reference lists of studies initially identified and by scrutinising other relevant review papers. Selected authors and experts were also contacted. Selection criteria Studies were selected if they were randomised controlled trials of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus placebo in adults. Older patients (over 65 years) were excluded. Patients had to be recruited from a primary care setting. For continuous outcomes the Hamilton Depression scale of the Montgomery Asberg Scale was requred. Data collection and analysis Data were extracted using data extraction forms by two reviewers independently, with disagreements resolved by discussion. A similar process was used for the validity assessment. Pooling of results was done using Review Manager 5. The primary outcome was depression reduction, based on a dichotomous measure of clinical response, using relative risk (RR), and on a continuous measure of depression symptoms, using the mean difference (MD), with 95{\%} confidence intervals (CI). Main results There were fourteen studies (16 comparisons) with extractable data included in the review, of which ten studies examined TCAs, two examined SSRIs and two included both classes, all compared with placebo. The number of participants in the intervention groups was 1364 and in the placebo groups 919. Nearly all studies were of short duration, typically 6-8 weeks. Pooled estimates of efficacy data showed an RR of 1.24, 95{\%} CI 1.11-1.38 in favour of TCAs against placebo. For SSRIs this was 1.28, 95{\%} CI 1.15 to 1.43.. The numbers needed to treat (NNT) for TCAs ranged from 7 to 16 {median NNT 9} patient expected event rate ranged from 63{\%} to 26{\%} respectively) and for SSRIs from 7 to 8 {median NNT 7} (patient expected event rate ranged from 48{\%} to 42{\%} respectively) . The numbers needed to harm (NNH for withdrawal due to side effects) ranged from 4 to 30 for TCAs (excluding three studies with no harmful events leading to withdrawal) and 20 to 90 for SSRIs. Authors' conclusions Both TCAs and SSRIs are effective for depression treated in primary care. This review is published as a Cochrane Review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 3. Cochrane Reviews are regularly updated as new evidence emerges and in response to comments and criticisms, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews should be consulted for the most recent version of the Review.",
      author = "Bruce Arroll and Elley, {C. Raina} and Tana Fishman and Goodyear-Smith, {Felicity A.} and Tim Kenealy and Grant Blashki and Ngaire Kerse and Stephen MacGillivray",
      note = "dc.publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. dc.description.sponsorship: Office of Scottish Scientist, UK",
      year = "2009",
      doi = "10.1002/14651858.CD007954",
      language = "English",
      volume = "2009",
      journal = "Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews",
      issn = "1469-493X",
      publisher = "John Wiley & Sons Inc.",
      number = "3",

      }

      Arroll, B, Elley, CR, Fishman, T, Goodyear-Smith, FA, Kenealy, T, Blashki, G, Kerse, N & MacGillivray, S 2009, 'Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care' Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, vol. 2009, no. 3, CD007954. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007954

      Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care. / Arroll, Bruce (Lead / Corresponding author); Elley, C. Raina; Fishman, Tana; Goodyear-Smith, Felicity A.; Kenealy, Tim; Blashki, Grant; Kerse, Ngaire; MacGillivray, Stephen.

      In: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Vol. 2009, No. 3, CD007954, 2009.

      Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

      TY - JOUR

      T1 - Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care

      AU - Arroll, Bruce

      AU - Elley, C. Raina

      AU - Fishman, Tana

      AU - Goodyear-Smith, Felicity A.

      AU - Kenealy, Tim

      AU - Blashki, Grant

      AU - Kerse, Ngaire

      AU - MacGillivray, Stephen

      N1 - dc.publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. dc.description.sponsorship: Office of Scottish Scientist, UK

      PY - 2009

      Y1 - 2009

      N2 - Background Concern has been expressed about the relevance of secondary care studies to primary care patients specifically about the effectiveness of antidepressant medication. There is a need to review the evidence of only those studies that have been conducted comparing antidepressant efficacy with placebo in primary care-based samples. Objectives To determine the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in patients (under the age of 65 years) with depression in primary care. Search strategy All searches were conducted in September 2007. The Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDAN) Controlled Trials Register was searched, together with a supplementary search of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL and PSYNDEX. Abstracts of all possible studies for inclusion were assessed independently by two reviewers. Further trials were sought through searching the reference lists of studies initially identified and by scrutinising other relevant review papers. Selected authors and experts were also contacted. Selection criteria Studies were selected if they were randomised controlled trials of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus placebo in adults. Older patients (over 65 years) were excluded. Patients had to be recruited from a primary care setting. For continuous outcomes the Hamilton Depression scale of the Montgomery Asberg Scale was requred. Data collection and analysis Data were extracted using data extraction forms by two reviewers independently, with disagreements resolved by discussion. A similar process was used for the validity assessment. Pooling of results was done using Review Manager 5. The primary outcome was depression reduction, based on a dichotomous measure of clinical response, using relative risk (RR), and on a continuous measure of depression symptoms, using the mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Main results There were fourteen studies (16 comparisons) with extractable data included in the review, of which ten studies examined TCAs, two examined SSRIs and two included both classes, all compared with placebo. The number of participants in the intervention groups was 1364 and in the placebo groups 919. Nearly all studies were of short duration, typically 6-8 weeks. Pooled estimates of efficacy data showed an RR of 1.24, 95% CI 1.11-1.38 in favour of TCAs against placebo. For SSRIs this was 1.28, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.43.. The numbers needed to treat (NNT) for TCAs ranged from 7 to 16 {median NNT 9} patient expected event rate ranged from 63% to 26% respectively) and for SSRIs from 7 to 8 {median NNT 7} (patient expected event rate ranged from 48% to 42% respectively) . The numbers needed to harm (NNH for withdrawal due to side effects) ranged from 4 to 30 for TCAs (excluding three studies with no harmful events leading to withdrawal) and 20 to 90 for SSRIs. Authors' conclusions Both TCAs and SSRIs are effective for depression treated in primary care. This review is published as a Cochrane Review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 3. Cochrane Reviews are regularly updated as new evidence emerges and in response to comments and criticisms, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews should be consulted for the most recent version of the Review.

      AB - Background Concern has been expressed about the relevance of secondary care studies to primary care patients specifically about the effectiveness of antidepressant medication. There is a need to review the evidence of only those studies that have been conducted comparing antidepressant efficacy with placebo in primary care-based samples. Objectives To determine the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in patients (under the age of 65 years) with depression in primary care. Search strategy All searches were conducted in September 2007. The Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDAN) Controlled Trials Register was searched, together with a supplementary search of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL and PSYNDEX. Abstracts of all possible studies for inclusion were assessed independently by two reviewers. Further trials were sought through searching the reference lists of studies initially identified and by scrutinising other relevant review papers. Selected authors and experts were also contacted. Selection criteria Studies were selected if they were randomised controlled trials of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus placebo in adults. Older patients (over 65 years) were excluded. Patients had to be recruited from a primary care setting. For continuous outcomes the Hamilton Depression scale of the Montgomery Asberg Scale was requred. Data collection and analysis Data were extracted using data extraction forms by two reviewers independently, with disagreements resolved by discussion. A similar process was used for the validity assessment. Pooling of results was done using Review Manager 5. The primary outcome was depression reduction, based on a dichotomous measure of clinical response, using relative risk (RR), and on a continuous measure of depression symptoms, using the mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Main results There were fourteen studies (16 comparisons) with extractable data included in the review, of which ten studies examined TCAs, two examined SSRIs and two included both classes, all compared with placebo. The number of participants in the intervention groups was 1364 and in the placebo groups 919. Nearly all studies were of short duration, typically 6-8 weeks. Pooled estimates of efficacy data showed an RR of 1.24, 95% CI 1.11-1.38 in favour of TCAs against placebo. For SSRIs this was 1.28, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.43.. The numbers needed to treat (NNT) for TCAs ranged from 7 to 16 {median NNT 9} patient expected event rate ranged from 63% to 26% respectively) and for SSRIs from 7 to 8 {median NNT 7} (patient expected event rate ranged from 48% to 42% respectively) . The numbers needed to harm (NNH for withdrawal due to side effects) ranged from 4 to 30 for TCAs (excluding three studies with no harmful events leading to withdrawal) and 20 to 90 for SSRIs. Authors' conclusions Both TCAs and SSRIs are effective for depression treated in primary care. This review is published as a Cochrane Review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 3. Cochrane Reviews are regularly updated as new evidence emerges and in response to comments and criticisms, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews should be consulted for the most recent version of the Review.

      UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70049091006&partnerID=8YFLogxK

      U2 - 10.1002/14651858.CD007954

      DO - 10.1002/14651858.CD007954

      M3 - Article

      VL - 2009

      JO - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

      JF - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

      SN - 1469-493X

      IS - 3

      M1 - CD007954

      ER -

      Arroll B, Elley CR, Fishman T, Goodyear-Smith FA, Kenealy T, Blashki G et al. Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2009;2009(3). CD007954. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007954