Objective:

To analyze the concordance between psychiatrist that do not use and those who use the Psychopharmacological Reasoning Algorithm to choose the treatment for 3 clinical cases of depression and medical surgical diseases.

Methodology:

Three case vignettes of anonymous real depressed patients with medical surgical diseases were presents to both groups. Group A made the selection of the antidepressant using their personal criteria; group B made the selection applying the Psychopharmacological Reasoning Algorithm.

Results:

There was no concordance on the drug among the 22 psychiatrists in the group that only applied the clinical criterion (kappa = -0.0154, p = 0.3851), whereas concordance was statistically significant in the group of 24 psychiatrists who applied the Psychopharmacological Reasoning Algorithm (kappa = 0.016, p <0.01). The concordance between groups A and B was 25% in the case 1, 16.67% in the case 2 and 20.83% in the case 3. The biggest majority of the psychiatrist that used the PPRA considers it useful (87.50%), applicable (83.33%) and with the possibility of impact the clinical practice (91.67%).

Conclusion:

The Psychopharmacological Reasoning Algorithm increased the concordance in the selection of antidepressants made by Costa Rican psychiatrists in 3 clinical vignettes of depressed patients with a medical surgical disease, when compared to personal criteria. The concordance in the selection of the antidepressants in the 3 cases between both groups is low. The Psychopharmacological Reasoning Algorithm is a tool considered useful, applicable and with a possible impact in clinical practice.