This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

Gold, incentives and meh

NICE may have inadvertently boosted antidepressant prescriptions in under 18s

NICE guidelines may have inadvertently boosted prescribing rates of antidepressants in under 18s, say researchers. 

Analysis of GP practice data from 2000 to 2010, showed that prescribing of SSRIs in children and adolescents sharply declined following warnings over their safety issued in 2003 after years of steady increase.

Researchers had expected this decline to continue following NICE guidelines in 2005 that re-emphasised caution in prescribing for young people and promoted the use of psychosocial intervention in the first instance.

But the analysis showed the use of SSRIs began to rise once more and the increase was only seen in the three specific types – fluoxetine, citalopram, and sertraline, which were all named in the 2005 NICE guidance. 

Writing in BMJ Open, the researchers said that doctors may have interpreted their inclusion in the guidelines as ‘approval’ for their widespread use, leading to the upward trend in prescriptions.

However, NICE has said this was not its intention and stressed current guidance states that antidepressant medication should not be offered to a child or young person, except in combination with concurrent psychological therapy. 

Warnings over the use of antidepressants in patients under the age of 18 were first raised by regulators in 2003 after reports of the risk of self-harm and suicide.

A review from the Committee on Safety of Medicines later that year advised against use of all SSRIs in children and adolescents with the exception of fluoxetine.

NICE 2005 guidance reiterated that psychosocial intervention should be the first port of call, with fluoxetine reserved for moderate to severe depression that did not respond to other treatment.

The recommendations said that in the case of fluoxetine ‘non-response or poor tolerability’, sertraline or citalopram could be considered.

It is not the first time figures have highlighted growing use of antidepressants in young patients.

Study leader Dr Paul Tiffin from the University of York said they had not expected to see a rise after 2005 because the NICE guidance ‘seemed to have been written to discourage antidepressant prescribing per se in under 18s’.

‘Although the guidelines gave cautions and caveats to their use, practitioners may have interpreted these recommendations as approval and validation for their widespread use,’ he concluded.

Dr Tiffin added: ‘I don’t think NICE could have presented their guidance differently - however, our findings stress the importance of conducting research to assess for any unintended consequences of such guidelines having been issued.’

A NICE spokesperson said: 'Current NICE guidance, published this year, states that antidepressant medication should not be offered to a child or young person with moderate to severe depression except in combination with concurrent psychological therapy.

'When exercising their judgement, health professionals are expected to take our guidance fully into account, alongside the individual needs, preferences and values of their patients.

'Prior to this update our 2005 guidance recommended that, following a multidisciplinary review, fluoxetine should only be offered for young people (12-18 years) and children (aged 5-11) with moderate to severe depression if psychological therapy had been attempted first.'

Professor Azeem Majeed, head of primary care and public health at Imperial College London, said while the findings were interesting it was important to note that prescribing rates had remained at a very low level.

He also pointed out that for GPs to refer patients for psychosocial support CAMHS needed to have capacity.

‘Most GPs would generally only prescribe antidepressants in this age group after receiving specialist advice,’ he said.

‘I think there is a strong argument that this prescribing and the monitoring of patients should be the responsibility of CAMHS teams.

‘I know many GPs would be very happy with this approach but it does require CAHMS teams to be adequately funded and staffed, and to be willing to take on this responsibility.’

 

Readers' comments (12)

  • I certainly have felt obliged to prescribe it in under 16'2 due to the very long waiting list for CAMHS

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    Age 16-18 with mental illnesses is the group of ‘lost child’ as far as our local CAMHs is concerned.
    Suspected ASD and teenager-to-adult ADHD in this group is virtually no man’s land. Something is not right in the ‘system’

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Can anyone name a psychotropic drug that is not addictive after a year or so regular use?
    Antidepressants are addictive and the risk/benefit skews leftward with longterm use.
    Massive win for Pharma as ever

    BTW NICE is toxic state-ist toxic legacy of Tony Blair, never forget

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Always entertaining with NICE trying to work out which lobby group or vested interest is behind the guidance.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @Holy Smoke Batman
    Indeed you are right. Haven't seen the Tories wishing to cancel it in the last 9 years though. But then Thatcher did say Blair was her finest legacy.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • People develop habits. One can be addicted to anything. Gambling, xbox, food, sugar. TV, running etc. It also pays to be ill in the UK. No surprises to see the rise in these.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Holy smoke batman. Can I again ask how much specific training you have had in psychiatry and use of psychotropic medication? What you are saying is nonsense.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • David Banner

    GPs have been press-ganged into prescribing fluoxetine to under 18s due to the non-existence of CAMHS appointments.
    The patients and their parents don’t just conveniently disappear, they keep on attending demanding you do something for the depressed patient.
    Waiting out their 18th birthday doesn’t always work, so in the end we have to reluctantly crack open the SSRIs, and even with all out dire warnings of increased suicidal risk they keep coming back for more.
    So once again we are the whipping boys for a failing and unfit for purpose CAMHS. Cheers, NICE.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • CAMHS? that's where you find unicorns isn't it? Again, please tell us where to send these poor kids where they will actually get support and timely help and we will happily oblige. Fact is there are next to no services out there.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • DrRubbishBin

    The NHS basically doesn't provide psycho-social treatments to the young. All you get is advice sign posting some half arsed walk in mental health hub and/or a leaflet. I try my very hardest to avoid SSRIs in the under 20s but it doesn't surprise me prescription rates are increasing. These people don't magically disappear just because the NHS doesn't fund services for them. Some go private, others feel paying for health care is some kind of societal sin even though they could afford it, most couldn't anyway and a great heap of people think talking therapy is too much like hard work or are terrified of the idea. Psychiatric issues take up time - GPs don't have any. What they do have is a prescription pad and no way of passing people on to someone else if the service isn't there. These people just come back again and again. GPs don't get to choose who or why folk come to see them

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say