ABSTRACT
Background General Practitioners (GPs) play a key role in referring adolescents with depression and/or anxiety to mental health specialists and services, but their capacity to do so may be compromised by service wait times. There is no standardised reporting of wait times for mental health specialists and services in Australia, and it is unclear how GPs manage the care of adolescents when the choice of treatment is not available.
Aim To explore GPs’ self-reported referral practices to mental health specialists and services for adolescent depression and/or anxiety in Australia, as well as their perceived knowledge, acceptability, and impacts of the wait times for these.
Design, Setting and Methods A cross-sectional online survey of 192 GPs in Australia who self-identified as treating adolescents (12 to 17 years old) with depression and/or anxiety.
Results GPs most frequently referred adolescents with depression and/or anxiety to psychologists. The mean estimated wait time for psychologists was 57.26 days (SD: 47.91, Mdn: 45.0, range: 5-365), which was four times their perceived acceptable wait time (M: 14.66 days, SD: 8.70). Almost all GPs (81.8%) had increased their level of care due to long waits but reported limited training in adolescent mental health and limited knowledge of appropriate self-management strategies for the wait time.
Conclusion GPs in Australia lack information on the wait times for adolescent mental health specialists and services, despite frequent referrals. Greater knowledge of wait times, training in wait time strategies, and self-directed digital interventions may help to enhance the quality of primary care provided to adolescents.
STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS
This is the first study to examine GPs’ knowledge of wait times for mental health specialists and services for adolescents with depression and anxiety in Australia.
GPs were found to have little knowledge of the anticipated wait times of mental health specialists and services, despite frequent referrals.
This study may not adequately represent the diversity of GPs across Australia or capture the full spectrum of challenges or treatment practices used by GPs due to the sample size and self-report nature.
Future research should aim to replicate these findings using objective data and explore whether there are GP or patient profiles that may be at greater risk of negative effects during the wait time.
Additionally, qualitative methods, such as semi-structured interviews, may provide a richer scope of understanding of the impact of wait times on GPs and their rationale for treatment selection.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research was supported by a generous donation from the Buxton Family Foundation, Australian Unity, the Frontiers Technology Clinical Academic Group Industry Connection Seed Funding Scheme, and the UNSW Medicine, Neuroscience, Mental Health and Addiction Theme and SPHERE Clinical Academic Group Collaborative Research Funding. BOD is supported by an NHMRC MRFF Investigator Fellowship (MRF1197249). AEW is supported by an NHMRC Investigator Fellowship (2017521). This work is supported by a NHMRC MRFF Million Minds Grant (MRF2035416).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of New South Wales gave ethical approval for this work (HC220107).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos