Patient Choice in Depression: Are We Failing to Implement NICE Guidelines?

IF 1.6 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Patient Experience Pub Date : 2025-04-03 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23743735251325132
Susan McPherson, Claire Wicks, Peter Beresford
{"title":"Patient Choice in Depression: Are We Failing to Implement NICE Guidelines?","authors":"Susan McPherson, Claire Wicks, Peter Beresford","doi":"10.1177/23743735251325132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 2022, the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) introduced \"patient choice\" as a major new principle in the guideline \"Depression in adults: treatment and management.\" In 2024, NICE launched a \"patient decision aid\" to provide practical support for this principle. We explore data on the treatment of depression from the United Kingdom's National Health Service before and after the guideline was published to consider whether patient choice has been enabled by these developments. The types of treatment most commonly delivered prior to the new guideline (Guided Self-Help books, Counseling for Depression, Cognitive Behavior Therapy, and antidepressant prescriptions) are now more common than before. This suggests that the inclusion of patient choice in the guidelines has not yet translated into patients making a wider range of choices. We consider how patient choice came to be prioritized over patient experience in the guideline development process; whether the patient decision aid is likely to support patient choice and shared decision making; and whether there may be underlying ideological barriers which mean a more straightforward emphasis on patient experience would be a more logical route to enhancing patient choice.</p>","PeriodicalId":45073,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Experience","volume":"12 ","pages":"23743735251325132"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11970051/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient Experience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23743735251325132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 2022, the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) introduced "patient choice" as a major new principle in the guideline "Depression in adults: treatment and management." In 2024, NICE launched a "patient decision aid" to provide practical support for this principle. We explore data on the treatment of depression from the United Kingdom's National Health Service before and after the guideline was published to consider whether patient choice has been enabled by these developments. The types of treatment most commonly delivered prior to the new guideline (Guided Self-Help books, Counseling for Depression, Cognitive Behavior Therapy, and antidepressant prescriptions) are now more common than before. This suggests that the inclusion of patient choice in the guidelines has not yet translated into patients making a wider range of choices. We consider how patient choice came to be prioritized over patient experience in the guideline development process; whether the patient decision aid is likely to support patient choice and shared decision making; and whether there may be underlying ideological barriers which mean a more straightforward emphasis on patient experience would be a more logical route to enhancing patient choice.

抑郁症患者的选择:我们是否未能执行 NICE 指南?
2022年,美国国家健康与护理卓越研究所(NICE)在“成人抑郁症:治疗和管理”指南中引入了“患者选择”作为一个主要的新原则。2024年,NICE推出了“患者决策辅助”,为这一原则提供实际支持。我们研究了指南发布前后英国国民健康服务中心的抑郁症治疗数据,以考虑这些发展是否使患者的选择成为可能。在新指南出台之前,最常见的治疗方法(自助指导书籍、抑郁症咨询、认知行为疗法和抗抑郁药物处方)现在比以前更常见。这表明,将患者选择纳入指南尚未转化为患者做出更广泛的选择。我们考虑在指南制定过程中,患者的选择如何优先于患者的体验;患者决策辅助是否可能支持患者的选择和共同决策;是否可能存在潜在的意识形态障碍,这意味着更直接地强调患者体验将是增强患者选择的更合乎逻辑的途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Patient Experience
Journal of Patient Experience HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
178
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信