Logo
 

Abertay Research Collections >
Social & Health Sciences >
Social & Health Sciences Collection >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10373/239

View Statistics
Title: Efficacy and tolerability of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors compared with tricyclic antidepressants in depression treated in primary care: systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors: MacGillivray, Steve
Arroll, Bruce
Hatcher, Simon
Ogston, Simon
Reid, Ian
Sullivan, Frank
Williams, Brian
Crombie, Iain
Affiliation: University of Abertay Dundee. School of Social and Health Sciences
Keywords: Serotonin
Depression
Antidepressants
Issue Date: 10-May-2003
Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
Type: Journal Article
Refereed: peer-reviewed
Rights: Published version (c)BMJ Publishing Group, available from 10.1136/bmj.326.7397.1014
Citation: MacGillivray, S., et al. 2003. Efficacy and tolerability of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors compared with tricyclic antidepressants in depression treated in primary care: systematic review and meta-analysis. British Medical Journal. 326(7397): pp.1014-1019. [Online] Available from: DOI: 10.1136/bmj.326.7397.1014
Abstract: Objective: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of tricyclic antidepressants with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in depression in primary care. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources: Register of the Cochrane Collaboration's depression, anxiety, and neurosis group. Reference lists of initial studies and other relevant review papers. Selected authors and experts. Selection of studies: Studies had to meet minimum requirements on: adequacy of sample size, adequate allocation concealment, clear description of treatment, representative source of subjects, use of diagnostic criteria or clear specification of inclusion criteria, details regarding number and reasons for withdrawal by group, and outcome measures described clearly or use of validated instruments. Main outcome measures: Standardised mean difference of final mean depression scores and relative risk of response when using the clinical global impression score. Relative risk of withdrawing from treatment at any time, and the number withdrawing due to side effects. Results: 11 studies (2951 participants) compared a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with a tricyclic antidepressant. Efficacy between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclics did not differ significantly (standardised weighted mean difference, fixed effects 0.07, 95% confidence interval 0.02 to 0.15; z=1.59, P<0.11). Significantly more patients receiving a tricyclic withdrew from treatment (relative risk 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 0.90; z=3.37, P<0.0007) and withdrew specifically because of side effects (0.73, 0.60 to 0.88; z=3.24, P<0.001). Most studies included were small and supported by commercial funding. Many studies were of low methodological quality or did not present adequate data for analysis, or both, and were of short duration, typically six to eight weeks. Conclusion: The evidence on the relative efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants in primary care is sparse and of variable quality. The study setting is likely to be an important factor in assessing the efficacy and tolerability of treatment with antidepressant drugs.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10373/239
ISSN: 0959-8138
Appears in Collections:Social & Health Sciences Collection

Files in This Item:

There are no files associated with this item.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 

Valid XHTML 1.0! DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2010  Duraspace - Feedback