Influence of Patient Preference and Primary Care Clinician Proclivity for Watchful Waiting on Receipt of Depression Treatment

Published in: General Hospital Psychiatry, v. 28, no. 5, Sep.-Oct. 2006, p. 379-386

Posted on on January 01, 2006

by Megan Dwight-Johnson, Lisa S. Meredith, Scot Hickey, Kenneth B. Wells

Read More

Access further information on this document at

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVE: The authors examined whether patients' preference for watchful waiting and their primary care clinician's proclivity for watchful waiting were associated with decreased likelihood of receiving depression treatment. METHODS: In a quality improvement intervention for depression in primary care, patients with depressive symptoms were identified through screening in 46 clinics from June 1996 to March 1997. The authors analyzed baseline survey data completed by clinicians and patients using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 1140 patients, 179 (16%) preferred watchful waiting over active treatment. After controlling for covariates, patients with depressive disorders who preferred watchful waiting were less likely to report use of antidepressants (OR=0.86, 95% CI=0.77-0.95). Among patients with depressive symptoms only, those who preferred watchful waiting were less likely to report antidepressant use (OR=0.84, 95% CI=0.76-0.93) or counseling (OR=0.84, 95% CI=0.77-0.95). Patients with less knowledge about depression were less likely to receive depression treatment. Clinician proclivity for watchful waiting was not associated with the likelihood that patients received depression treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Patient preference for watchful waiting is associated with lower rates of some depression treatments, especially among patients with subsyndromal depression. Addressing patient preference for watchful waiting in primary care may include active symptom monitoring and patient education.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.