Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Steve MacGillivray a Department of Epidemiology and Public Health,
Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, University of Dundee, Dundee DD1
9SY, b Department of Psychiatry,
Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, c Tayside Centre for
General Practice, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, d Department of General
Practice, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of
Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1, New Zealand, e Division of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medical and Health
Sciences, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92010
Correspondence
to: S MacGillivray
Objective:
To compare the efficacy and tolerability
of tricyclic antidepressants with selective serotonin reuptake
inhibitors in depression in primary care.
What is already known on this topic
Previous meta-analyses are conflicting regarding the relative
tolerability between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and
tricyclics, but do suggest a small but significant difference in favour
of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors Such meta-analyses show notable heterogeneity What this study adds
Study setting seems to be important and should be considered before
licences are given to specific antidepressants Although there are limited high quality data, available evidence shows
that the most commonly prescribed classes of antidepressants in primary
care (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclics) are
equally effective in the short term for primary care patients, but the
literature has many gaps
s.a.macgillivray{at}dundee.ac.uk
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.
Previous meta-analyses have included comparatively large numbers of
secondary care based studies that indicate no significant differences
in efficacy between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and
tricyclics
Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are better tolerated than
tricyclics by primary care patients and may be better tolerated by
primary care patients than secondary care patients
Read all Rapid Responses