Activity ID
11195Expires
June 20, 2026Format Type
Journal-basedCME Credit
1Fee
$30CME Provider: JAMA
Description of CME Course
Importance Anxiety is commonly seen in primary care and associated with substantial burden.
Objective To review the benefits and harms of screening and treatment for anxiety and the accuracy of instruments to detect anxiety among primary care patients.
Data Sources MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Cochrane library through September 7, 2022; references of existing reviews; ongoing surveillance for relevant literature through November 25, 2022.
Study Selection English-language original studies and systematic reviews of screening or treatment compared with control conditions and test accuracy studies of a priori–selected screening instruments were included. Two investigators independently reviewed abstracts and full-text articles for inclusion. Two investigators independently rated study quality.
Data Extraction and Synthesis One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Meta-analysis results were included from existing systematic reviews where available; meta-analyses were conducted on original research when evidence was sufficient.
Main Outcomes and Measures Anxiety and depression outcomes; global quality of life and functioning; sensitivity and specificity of screening tools.
Results Of the 59 publications included, 40 were original studies (N = 275 489) and 19 were systematic reviews (including ≈483 studies [N≈81 507]). Two screening studies found no benefit for screening for anxiety. Among test accuracy studies, only the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) GAD-2 and GAD-7 screening instruments were evaluated by more than 1 study. Both screening instruments had adequate accuracy for detecting generalized anxiety disorder (eg, across 3 studies the GAD-7 at a cutoff of 10 had a pooled sensitivity of 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69 to 0.94] and specificity of 0.89 [95% CI, 0.83 to 0.94]). Evidence was limited for other instruments and other anxiety disorders. A large body of evidence supported the benefit of treatment for anxiety. For example, psychological interventions were associated with a small pooled standardized mean difference of −0.41 in anxiety symptom severity in primary care patients with anxiety (95% CI, −0.58 to −0.23]; 10 RCTs [n = 2075]; I2 = 40.2%); larger effects were found in general adult populations.
Conclusions and Relevance Evidence was insufficient to draw conclusions about the benefits or harms of anxiety screening programs. However, clear evidence exists that treatment for anxiety is beneficial, and more limited evidence indicates that some anxiety screening instruments have acceptable accuracy to detect generalized anxiety disorder.
Disclaimers
1. This activity is accredited by the American Medical Association.
2. This activity is free to AMA members.
ABMS Member Board Approvals by Type
ABMS Lifelong Learning CME Activity
Allergy and Immunology
Anesthesiology
Colon and Rectal Surgery
Family Medicine
Medical Genetics and Genomics
Nuclear Medicine
Ophthalmology
Pathology
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Plastic Surgery
Preventive Medicine
Psychiatry and Neurology
Radiology
Thoracic Surgery
Urology
Commercial Support?
NoNOTE: If a Member Board has not deemed this activity for MOC approval as an accredited CME activity, this activity may count toward an ABMS Member Board’s general CME requirement. Please refer directly to your Member Board’s MOC Part II Lifelong Learning and Self-Assessment Program Requirements.
Educational Objectives
To identify the key insights or developments described in this article
Keywords
Medical Education, Hypertension
Competencies
Medical Knowledge
CME Credit Type
AMA PRA Category 1 Credit
DOI
10.1001/jama.2023.6369