Korean Medication Algorithm for Depressive Disorder 2017: Comparisons with Other Guidelines
Hee Ryung Wang 1, Won-Myong Bahk 1*, Jeong Seok Seo 2, Young Sup Woo 1, Young-Min Park 3, Jong-Hyun Jeong 4, Won Kim 5, Se-Hoon Shim 6, Jung Goo Lee 7, Duk-In Jon 8, Kyung Joon Min 9
1Department of Psychiatry, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea, 2Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Konkuk University, Chungju, Korea, 3Department of Psychiatry, Ilsan Paik Hospital, College of Medicine, Inje University, Goyang, Korea, 4Department of Psychiatry, St. Vincent’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Suwon, Korea, 5Department of Psychiatry, Seoul Paik Hospital, School of Medicine, Inje University, Seoul, Korea/Stress Research Institute, Inje University, Seoul, Korea, 6Department of Psychiatry, Soonchunhyang University Cheonan Hospital, Soonchunhyang University, Cheonan, Korea, 7Department of Psychiatry, Haeundae Paik Hospital, College of Medicine, Inje University and Paik Institute for Clinical Research, Department of Health Science and Technology, Graduate School of Inje University, Busan, Korea, 8Department of Psychiatry, Sacred Heart Hospital, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Anyang, Korea, 9Department of Psychiatry, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea
Received: November 28, 2016; Revised: December 5, 2016; Accepted: December 5, 2016; Published online: December 5, 2016.
© The Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology. All rights reserved.

In this review, we compared recommendations from the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Depressive Disorder 2017 (KMAP-DD 2017) to other global treatment guidelines for depression. Six global treatment guidelines were reviewed; among the six, 4 were evidence-based guidelines, 1 was an expert consensus-based guideline, and 1 was an amalgamation of both evidence and expert consensus-based recommendations. The recommendations in the KMAP-DD 2017 were generally similar to those in other global treatment guidelines, although there were some differences between the guidelines. The KMAP-DD 2017 appeared to reflect current changes in the psychopharmacology of depression quite well, like other recently published evidence-based guidelines. As an expert consensus-based guideline, the KMAP-DD 2017 had some limitations. However, considering there are situations in which clinical evidence cannot be drawn from planned clinical trials, the KMAP-DD 2017 may be helpful for Korean psychiatrists making decisions in the clinical settings by complementing previously published evidence-based guidelines.
Keywords: depressive disorder, expert consensus, guideline, KMAP-DD 2017, treatment