ObjectiveIn 2016, the SUicide PRevention Action NETwork (SUPRANET) was launched. The SUPRANET intervention aims at better implementing the suicide prevention guideline. An implementation study was developed to evaluate the impact of SUPRANET over time on three outcomes: 1) suicides, 2) registration of suicide attempts, and 3) professionals’ knowledge and adherence to the guideline.MethodsThis study included 13 institutions, and used an uncontrolled longitudinal prospective design, collecting biannual data on a 2-level structure (institutional and team level). Suicides and suicide attempts were extracted from data systems. Professionals’ knowledge and adherence were measured using a self-report questionnaire. A three-step interrupted time series analysis (ITSA) was performed for the first two outcomes. Step 1 assessed whether institutions executed the SUPRANET intervention as intended. Step 2 examined if institutions complied with the four guideline recommendations. Based on steps 1 and 2, institutions were classified as below or above average and after that, included as moderators in step 3 to examine the effect of SUPRANET over time compared to the baseline. The third outcome was analyzed with a longitudinal multilevel regression analysis, and tested for moderation.ResultsAfter institutions were labeled based on their efforts and investments made (below average vs above average), we found no statistically significant difference in suicides (standardized mortality ratio) between the two groups relative to the baseline. Institutions labeled as above average did register significantly more suicide attempts directly after the start of the intervention (78.8 per 100,000 patients, p<0.001, 95%CI=(51.3 per 100,000, 106.4 per 100,000)), and as the study progressed, they continued to report a significantly greater improvement in the number of registered attempts compared with institutions assigned as below average (8.7 per 100,000 patients per half year, p=0.004, 95%CI=(3.3 per 100,000, 14.1 per 100,000)). Professionals working at institutions that invested more in the SUPRANET activities adhered significantly better to the guideline over time (b=1.39, 95%CI=(0.12,2.65), p=0.032).ConclusionInstitutions labeled as above average registered significantly more suicide attempts and also better adhered to the guideline compared with institutions that had performed less well. Although no convincing intervention effect on suicides was found within the study period, we do think that this network is potentially able to reduce suicides. Continuous investments and fully implementing as many guideline recommendations as possible are essential to achieve the biggest drop in suicides.

In 2017, the European Alliance against Depression (EAAD) programme was introduced in the Netherlands through the creation of six local Suicide Prevention Action Networks (SUPRANET Community). This programme consists of interventions on four levels: (1) a public awareness campaign, (2) training local gatekeepers, (3) targeting high-risk persons in the community and (4) training of primary care professionals. This study aims to gain insight into the effectiveness of the SUPRANET programme on attitudinal changes in the general public by studying the exposure–response relationship. A repeated cross-sectional design, using general population surveys to measure key variables over time. The surveys were conducted in the six intervention regions (N = 2586) and in the Netherlands as a whole as a control region (N = 4187) and include questions on socio-demographic variables, brand awareness of the Dutch helpline, perceived taboo on suicide, attitudes towards depression and help-seeking. To examine the exposure–response relationship, regions were differentiated into 3 groups: low, medium and high exposure of the SUPRANET programme. The results revealed that respondents in the intervention regions considered professional help to be more valuable and were more likely to be familiar with the Dutch helpline than respondents in the control region. In the exposure–response analyses, the grading of effects was too small to reach statistical significance. Our study provides the first evidence for the effectiveness of the SUPRANET Community programme on creating attitudinal change in the general public.

Abstract Background In the Netherlands, 1829 persons (11.6/100.000) ended their life by suicide in 2018. Two out of three suicides concern men, most of them in the age group of 50-55. Suicide amongst youth is rising, especially amongst youngsters between 10-25. Around 40 persons a day, predominantly young and female, are treated in Dutch hospitals after having attempted suicide. Only 40% of those who die by suicide have been in touch with healthcare professionals. These figures made the Dutch government to put in place a national strategy for suicide prevention. Methods This strategy follows the WHO's guidance and covers a range of measures in public health as well as in the health care sector. Its implementation is coordinated by “113 Suicide prevention”, the national centre of expertise on suicide prevention in the Netherlands. Results A broad package of measures is being implemented simultaneously, targeting the entire population as well as specific vulnerable groups, such as youngsters, persons with LGBT related issues and persons with mental health needs. We initiated several collective preventive measures, such as media guidelines for safe reporting, a public awareness campaign against stigma, reduction of access to deadly means or places; selective prevention initiatives, e.g. training over 3400 of gatekeepers to detect and address suicidal thoughts with desperate persons; and indicated suicide prevention strategies including screening, treatment and follow up of patients with suicidal behaviour in general practice or mental health hospitals. In this presentation the different components of the Dutch strategy for suicide prevention will be described more in detail, and experiences and first results of the different components will be addressed. Conclusions The relevance of the Dutch national strategy is related to the broad package of measures implemented simultaneously in many domains of society, but closely monitoring and evaluating the effect stays challenging.

Background: In 2017, the European Alliance against Depression (EAAD) was introduced in The Netherlands through the creation of six Suicide Prevention Action Networks (SUPRANET Community). The intervention was launched with a national suicide prevention awareness campaign. This campaign aims to encourage the general public to talk about suicide. This study aimed to gain insight into the effectiveness of the campaign in achieving attitudinal change in the general public, as stigmas related to mental health disorders and -services are an important reason for insufficient help-seeking. Methods: A repeated cross-section design, using general population surveys (N = 6,773) to measure key variables over time. The survey includes questions on socio-demographic variables, campaign visibility, brand awareness of the Dutch helpline, perceived taboo on suicide, attitudes towards depression and help-seeking. Results: The public awareness campaign was predominantly visible among the younger generation. Respondents who indicated having seen the public awareness campaign showed more openness towards seeking professional help and were considerably more likely to be familiar with the Dutch helpline than those who reported not having seen the campaign. Campaign awareness also seemed to relate to a higher perceived taboo on suicide and a lower estimation of the value of professional help. Limitations: Due to the nature of the intervention, we used a quasi-experimental design. Self-report can lead to desirability bias, especially when measuring attitudes and stigmas. Conclusions: Our results strengthen the idea that awareness campaigns can make a contribution to informing the general public about mental health services and improving help-seeking behaviour.

ObjectivesIn the Netherlands, there was a sharp increase in the number of suicides among 10- to 19-year-olds in 2017. A multi-method psychological autopsy study (PA) was conducted to assess feasibility, identify related factors, and study the interplay of these factors to inform suicide prevention strategies.MethodsCoroners identified youth suicides in 2017 in their records and then general practitioners (GPs) contacted the parents of these youths. Over a period of 7 months, 66 qualitative interviews were held with the parents, peers, and teachers, providing information on precipitating factors and five topics involving 35 cases (17 boys and 18 girls, mean age 17 years). Furthermore, 43 parents and care professionals filled in questionnaires to examine risk and care-related factors. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were performed.ResultsAlthough registration problems faced by coroners and resistance to contacting bereaved families by GPs hampered the recruitment, most parents highly appreciated being interviewed. Several adverse childhood experiences played a role at an individual level, such as (cyber) bullying, parental divorce, sexual abuse, as well as complex mental disorders, and previous suicide attempts. Two specific patterns stood out: (1) girls characterized by insecurity and a perfectionist attitude, who developed psychopathology and dropped out of school, and (2) boys with a developmental disorder, such as autism, who were transferred to special needs education and therefore felt rejected. In addition, adolescents with complex problems had difficulty finding appropriate formal care. Regarding potential new trends, contagion effects of social media use in a clinical setting and internet use for searching lethal methods were found.ConclusionThis first national PA study showed that, as expected, a variety of mostly complex clusters of problems played a role in youth suicides. An infrastructure is needed to continuously monitor, evaluate, and support families after each youth suicide and thereby improve prevention strategies.

In health systems with strongly developed primary care, such as in the Netherlands, effectively engaging primary care professionals (PCPs) in suicide prevention is a key strategy. As part of the national Suicide Prevention Action Network (SUPRANET), a program was offered to PCPs in six regions in the Netherlands in 2017-2018 to more effectively engage them in suicide prevention. This implementation study aimed to evaluate to what extent SUPRANET was helpful in supporting PCPs to apply suicide prevention practices. From March to May 2018, 21 semi-structured interviews have been carried out with PCPs and other non-clinical professionals from SUPRANET regions in the Netherlands. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using the grounded theory approach. Data was structured using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, which enabled identifying facilitating and challenging factors for PCPs to carry out suicide prevention practices. An important challenge included difficulties in assessing suicide risk (intervention characteristics) due to PCPs' self-perceived incompetence, burdensomeness of suicide and limited time and heavy workload of PCPs. Another important limitation was collaboration with mental health care (outer setting), whereas mental health nurses (inner setting) and SUPRANET (implementation process) were facilitating factors for applying suicide prevention practices. With regard to SUPRANET, especially the training was positively evaluated by PCPs. PCPs expressed a strong need for improving collaboration with specialized mental health care, which was not provided by SUPRANET. Educating PCPs on suicide prevention seems beneficial, but is not sufficient to improve care for suicidal patients. Effective suicide prevention also requires improved liaison between mental health services and primary care, and should therefore be the focus of future suicide prevention strategies aimed at primary care.

IntroductionImprovement of the quality and safety of care is associated with lower suicide rates among mental healthcare patients. In The Netherlands, about 40% of all people that die by suicide is in specialist mental healthcare. Unfortunately, the degree of implementation of suicide prevention policies and best practices within Dutch mental healthcare services is variable. Sharing and comparing outcome and performance data in confidential networks of professionals working in different organisations can be effective in reducing practice variability within and across organisations and improving quality of care.Methods and analysisUsing formats of professional networks to improve surgical care (Dutch Initiative for Clinical Auditing) and somatic intensive care (National Intensive Care Evaluation), 113 Suicide Prevention has taken the lead in the formation of a Suicide Prevention Action Network (SUPRANET Care), with at present 13 large Dutch specialist mental health institutions. Data on suicide, suicide attempts and their determinants as well as consumer care policies and practices are collected biannually, after consensus rounds in which key professionals define what data are relevant to collect, how it is operationalised, retrieved and will be analysed. To evaluate the impact of SUPRANET Care, standardised suicide rates will be calculated adjusted for confounding factors. Second, the extent to which suicide attempts are being registered will be analysed with the suicide attempt data. Finally, professionals’ knowledge, attitude and adherence to suicide prevention guidelines will be measured with an extended version of the Professionals In Training to STOP suicide survey.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects, The Netherlands. This study does not fall under the scope of the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) or the General Data Protection Regulation as stated by the Dutch Data Protection Authority because data are collected on an aggregated level.

Background: Although psychotherapy is an effective treatment for depression, a large number of patients still do not receive care according to the protocols that are used in clinical trials. Instead, patients often receive a modified version of the original intervention. It is not clear how and when treatment protocols are used or modified in the Dutch specialized mental health care and whether these changes lead to suboptimal adherence to treatment protocols. Methods: In the context of an ongoing multicenter trial that investigates whether twice-weekly sessions of protocolized interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression lead to better treatment outcomes compared to once-weekly sessions, two focus groups using semi-structured interviews were organized. Aims were to increase insight in the adherence to and modifications of CBT and IPT protocols in the Dutch specialized mental health care for depression. Participants were fifteen therapists from seven mental health locations part of five mental health organizations. Verbatim transcripts were coded and analyzed using qualitative software. Results: Three themes emerged: modification as the common practice, professional and patient factors influencing the adherence to protocols and organizational boundaries and flexibility. Treatment modification appeared to happen on a frequent basis, even in the context of a trial. Definitions of treatment modifications were multiple and varied from using intuition to flexible use of the same protocol. Therapist training and supervision, the years of work experience and individual characteristics of the therapist and the patient were mentioned to influence the adherence to protocols. Modifications of the therapists depended very much on the culture within the mental health locations, who differed in terms of the flexibility offered to therapists to choose and modify treatment protocols. Conclusions: Not all treatment modifications were in line with existing evidence or guidelines. Regular supervision, team meetings and a shared vision were identified as crucial factors to increase adherence to treatment protocols, whereas additional organizational factors, among which a change of mindset, may facilitate adequate implementation.

In The Netherlands, on average 40% of all suicides concern patients treated by mental healthcare institutions (MHIs). Recent evidence indicates that implemented guideline recommendations significantly reduce the odds for patients to die by suicide. Implementation of the multidisciplinary guideline for diagnosis and treatment of suicidal behaviors is a main objective of the Dutch National Suicide Prevention Strategy. To this end, 24 MHIs that collectively reported 73% of patient suicides in 2015 received an educational outreach intervention offered by the national center of expertise. Aim: To investigate changes in levels of implementation of guideline recommendations; and to assess the degree of variation on suicide prevention policies and practices between MHIs. Methods: Implementation study with a prospective cohort design studying change over time on all domains of a Suicide Prevention Monitor, a guideline-based instrument assessing suicide prevention policies and practices within MHIs. Data were collected in six-month intervals between 2015 and 2017. Results: MHIs improved significantly on four out of ten domains: the development of an organizational suicide prevention policy; monitoring and trend-analysis of suicides numbers; evaluations after suicide; and clinician training. No improvement was measured on the domains pertaining to multi-annual training policies; collaborative care with external partners; recording and evaluation of suicide attempts; routine assessment of suicidality in all patients; safety planning and involving next of kin and carers. Furthermore, marked practice variation between MHIs was found which did not decrease over time. Conclusion: This study shows significant improvement in the implementation of four out of ten guideline-based suicide prevention policies in 24 specialist mental healthcare institutions in The Netherlands. The implementation level of suicide prevention policies and practices still appears to vary significantly between MHIs in The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND:Shared Decision Making (SDM) is a way to empower patients when decisions are made about treatment. In order to be effective agents in this process, patients need access to information of good quality. Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM) may provide such information and therefore may be a key element in SDM. This trial tests the effectiveness of SDM using ROM, primarily aiming to diminish decisional conflict of the patient while making decisions about treatment. The degree of decisional conflict, the primary outcome of this study, encompasses personal certainty about choosing an appropriate treatment, information about options, clarification of patient values, support from others and patients experience of an effective decision making process. Secondary outcomes of the study focus on the working alliance between patient and clinician, adherence to treatment, and clinical outcome and quality of life.METHODS/DESIGN:This article presents the study protocol of a multi-centre two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT). The research is conducted in Dutch specialised mental health care teams participating in the ROM Quality Improvement Collaborative (QIC), which aims to implement ROM in daily clinical practice. In the intervention teams, ROM is used as a source of information during the SDM process between the patient and clinician. Control teams receive no specific SDM or ROM instructions and apply decision making as usual. Randomisation is conducted at the level of the participating teams within the mental health organisations. A total of 12 teams from 4 organisations and 364 patients participate in the study. Prior to data collection, the intervention teams are trained to use ROM during the SDM process. Data collection will be at baseline, and at 3 and 6 months after inclusion of the patient. Control teams will implement the SDM and ROM model after completion of the study.DISCUSSION:This study will provide useful information about the effectiveness of ROM within a SDM framework. Furthermore, with practical guidelines this study may contribute to the implementation of SDM using ROM in mental health care. Reporting of the results is expected from December 2016 onwards.TRIAL REGISTRATION:Dutch trial register: TC5262. Trial registration date: 24th of June 2015.

The European Alliance against Depression (EAAD) program is to be introduced in The Netherlands from 2017 onwards. This program to combat suicide consists of interventions on four levels: (1) increasing the awareness of suicide by local media campaigns; (2) training local gatekeepers, such as teachers or police officers; (3) targeting high-risk persons in the community; and (4) training and support of professionals in primary care settings. The implementation starts in seven Dutch pilot regions. Each region is designated as a Suicide Prevention Action NETwork (SUPRANET). This paper describes the SUPRANET program components and the evaluation of its feasibility and impact. The findings will be used to facilitate the national implementation of EAAD in The Netherlands and to add new findings to the existing literature on EAAD.

Background Although the importance and advantages of measurement-based care in mental healthcare are well established, implementation in daily practice is complex and far from optimal. Aims To accelerate the implementation of outcome measurement in routine clinical practice, a government-sponsored National Quality Improvement Collaborative was initiated in Dutch-specialised mental healthcare. Method To investigate the effects of this initiative, we combined a matched-pair parallel group design (21 teams) with a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) (6 teams). At the beginning and end, the primary outcome ‘actual use and perceived clinical utility of outcome measurement’ was assessed. Results In both designs, intervention teams demonstrated a significant higher level of implementation of outcome measurement than control teams. Overall effects were large (parallel group d=0.99; RCT d=1.25). Conclusions The National Collaborative successfully improved the use of outcome measurement in routine clinical practice.

BACKGROUND:Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and interpersonal therapy (IPT) are among the most well established therapies for the treatment of depression. However, some major questions remain unanswered. First, it is unknown what session frequency results in the most optimal (cost) effectiveness in psychotherapy. Second, the debate as to what mechanisms underlie the effect of psychotherapy has not yet been resolved. Enhancing knowledge about the optimal session frequency and mechanisms of change seems crucial in order to optimize the (cost) effectiveness of psychotherapy for depression. This study aims to compare treatment outcome of twice-weekly versus once-weekly sessions of CBT and IPT. We expect twice-weekly sessions to be more effective and lead to more rapid recovery of depressive symptoms in comparison to once-weekly sessions. Both therapy-specific and non-specific process measures will be included to unravel the mechanisms of change in psychotherapy for depression. Besides the use of self-reports and behavioral observations, this study will also examine underlying biological processes by collecting blood samples.METHOD:In a multicenter randomized trial, two hundred depressed patients will be recruited from Dutch specialized mental healthcare centers and randomized into one of the following groups, all receiving a maximum of 20 sessions in different frequencies: a) twice-weekly sessions at the start of CBT, b) twice-weekly sessions at the start of IPT, c) once-weekly sessions at the start of CBT, d) once-weekly sessions at the start of IPT. Primary outcome measures are depression severity, cost-effectiveness and quality of life. Process measures include therapeutic alliance, recall, therapy-specific skills, motivation and compliance. Assessments will take place during baseline, monthly during treatment and follow-up at month 9, 12 and 24. In addition, at 12 and 24 months, the frequency of depressive episodes in the previous year will be assessed. Blood samples will be taken pre- and post-treatment. The study has been ethically approved and registered.DISCUSSION:Finding that twice-weekly sessions are more effective or lead to more rapid recovery of depressive symptoms could lead to treatment adaptations that have the potential to reduce the personal and societal burden of depression. In addition, insight into the mechanisms of change and physiological processes in psychotherapy will enable us to optimize treatments and may help to understand human functioning beyond the context of treatment.TRIAL REGISTRATION:The study has been registered on October 21th, 2014 at the Netherlands Trial Register, part of the Dutch Cochrane Centre ( NTR4856 ).

Background: A guideline for patients with anxiety disorders is available in primary care. Providing care according guidelines can be improved. Our goal was to describe the results of a quality improvement method known as an Anxiety Breakthrough Collaborative, aimed at improving the uptake of the anxiety disorders guideline in primary care. Methods: A stepped care model was implemented in an uncontrolled prospective implementation study. The study involved eight multidisciplinary primary care teams, consisting of 59 healthcare professionals. Implementation was measured by means of a set of process indicators. In addition, qualitative data were collected. Results: Screening patients who met high-risk criteria with the anxiety subscale of the Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire was new for all teams. General practitioners succeeded in diagnosing the complexity of the anxiety disorder in 179 patients (98%). The proportion of patients with a non-complex disorder that received self-help or brief therapy increased from 44% to 67%. Against expectations, the proportion of patients with a complex anxiety disorder that received cognitive behavioral therapy and/or an antidepressant decreased slightly from 24% to 18%. Monitoring anxiety symptoms was rare. Collaboration between professionals improved in all teams. Conclusions: This study indicates that t he Anxiety Disorders Breakthrough Collaborative may improve adherence to the anxiety disorders guideline. To sustain improvement, long-term collaboratives, financial support, and computerized decision support systems tailored to the work setting, including simple tools for monitoring patients, may be helpful. More insight and knowledge is required about which improvement strategies really contribute to the improvement of the quality of anxiety care. More robust study designs, including process evaluations, should be used to determine the impact of such strategies.

Franx G, Huyser J, Koetsenruijter J, Van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, Verhaak PFM, Grol RPTM, et al. Minder antidepressivavoorschriften na richtlijntoepassing. Huisarts Wet 2015;58(7):350-2.

A range of integration models for providing effective care to individuals with comorbid general medical and behavioral health conditions have been described and tested in varied settings internationally for several subsets of this population. This column examines models in three countries selected to showcase implementation in a variety of health systems: the national health system in England, nationally regulated individual insurance market in the Netherlands, and a mixture of employer-sponsored and government-funded health insurance plans in Japan. The authors describe a set of key practices for and challenges to the successful implementation of these models.

BACKGROUND:Internationally, guidelines for depression recommend a stepped care approach, implying that antidepressant medication should not be offered as a first step treatment to patients with sub-threshold or mild depression. In the Netherlands, antidepressant prescribing rates in general practice as a first treatment step are considered to be high. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of guideline recommendations on antidepressant prescribing.METHODS:A quasi-experimental study with a non-equivalent naturalistic control group and three years follow-up was performed in the general practice setting in the Netherlands. General Practitioners (GPs) participated in a national Quality Improvement Collaborative (QIC), focusing on the implementation of a guideline based model for a stepped care approach to depression. The model consisted of self-help and psychological treatment options for patients with milder symptoms as an alternative to antidepressants in general practice. Changes in antidepressant prescription rates of GPs were documented for a three-year period and compared to those in a control group of GPs, selected from an ongoing national registration network.RESULTS:A decrease of 23.3% (49.4%-26.1%) in antidepressant prescription rates for newly diagnosed patients with depressive symptoms was found within the intervention group, whereas no difference occurred in the reference group (50.3%-52.6%). The decrease over time was significant, compared to the usual care group (OR 0.44, 95% CI: 0.21-0.92).CONCLUSIONS:An implementation program using stepped care principles for the allocation of depression interventions resulted in reduced antidepressant prescription rates in general practice. GPs can change prescribing behaviour within the context of a QIC.

Background: Internationally, guidelines for depression recommend a stepped care approach, implying that antidepressant medication should not be offered as a first step treatment to patients with sub-threshold or mild depression. In the Netherlands, antidepressant prescribing rates in general practice as a first treatment step are considered to be high. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of guideline recommendations on antidepressant prescribing. Methods: A quasi-experimental study with a non-equivalent naturalistic control group and three years follow-up was performed in the general practice setting in the Netherlands. General Practitioners (GPs) participated in a national Quality Improvement Collaborative (QIC), focusing on the implementation of a guideline based model for a stepped care approach to depression. The model consisted of self-help and psychological treatment options for patients with milder symptoms as an alternative to antidepressants in general practice. Changes in antidepressant prescription rates of GPs were documented for a three-year period and compared to those in a control group of GPs, selected from an ongoing national registration network. Results: A decrease of 23.3% (49.4%-26.1%) in antidepressant prescription rates for newly diagnosed patients with depressive symptoms was found within the intervention group, whereas no difference occurred in the reference group (50.3%-52.6%). The decrease over time was significant, compared to the usual care group (OR 0.44, 95% CI: 0.21-0.92). Conclusions: An implementation program using stepped care principles for the allocation of depression interventions resulted in reduced antidepressant prescription rates in general practice. GPs can change prescribing behaviour within the context of a QIC.

BACKGROUND:Depression is a common mental disorder with a high burden of disease which is mainly treated in primary care. It is unclear to what extent stepped care principles are applied in routine primary care. The first aim of this explorative study was to examine the gap between routine primary depression care and optimal care, as formulated in the depression guidelines. The second aim was to explore the facilitators and barriers that affect the provision of optimal care.METHODS:Optimal care was operationalised by indicators covering the entire continuum of depression care: from prevention to chronic depression. Routine care was investigated by interviewing general practitioners (GPs) individually and together with other mental health care providers about the depression care they delivered collaboratively. Qualitative analysis of transcripts was performed using thematic coding. Additionally, the GPs completed a self-report questionnaire.RESULTS:Six GPs and 22 other (mostly primary) mental health care providers participated. The GPs and their primary care colleagues embraced a general stepped care approach. They offered psycho-education and counselling to mildly depressed patients. When the treatment effects were not satisfactory or patients were more severely depressed, the GPs offered, or referred to, psychotherapy or pharmacotherapy. Patients with a complex and severe depressive disorder were directly referred to specialised mental health care. However, GPs relied on their clinical judgment and rarely used instruments to assess and monitor the severity of depressive symptoms. Structured, evidence based interventions such as self-management and e-health were rarely offered to patients with depressive symptoms. Specific psychological interventions for relapse prevention or for chronically depressed patients were not available. A wide range of influencing factors for the provision of optimal depression care were put forward. Close collaboration with other mental health care professionals was considered an important factor for improvement by nearly all GPs.CONCLUSIONS:The management of depression in primary care seems in line with stepped care principles, although it can be improved by applying more elements of a stepped care approach. Collaboration between GPs and mental health care providers in primary care and secondary care should be enhanced.