Psychological and pharmacological therapies are the recommended first-line treatments for common mental disorders (CMDs) but may not be universally accessible or utilised.

To determine the extent to which primary care patients with CMDs receive treatment and the impact of sociodemographic, work-related and clinical factors on treatment receipt.

National registers were used to identify all Stockholm County residents aged 19–64 years who had received at least one CMD diagnosis (depression, anxiety, stress-related) in primary care between 2014 and 2018. Individuals were followed from the date of their first observed CMD diagnosis until the end of 2019 to determine treatment receipt. Associations between patient factors and treatment group were examined using multinomial logistic regression.

Among 223 271 individuals with CMDs, 30.6% received pharmacotherapy only, 16.5% received psychological therapy only, 43.1% received both and 9.8% had no treatment. The odds of receiving any treatment were lower among males (odds ratio (OR) range = 0.76 to 0.92, 95% CI[minimum, maximum] 0.74 to 0.95), individuals born outside of Sweden (OR range = 0.67 to 0.93, 95% CI[minimum, maximum] 0.65 to 0.99) and those with stress-related disorders only (OR range = 0.21 to 0.51, 95% CI[minimum, maximum] 0.20 to 0.53). Among the patient factors examined, CMD diagnostic group, prior treatment in secondary psychiatric care and age made the largest contributions to the model (R2 difference: 16.05%, 1.72% and 1.61%, respectively).

Although over 90% of primary care patients with CMDs received pharmacological and/or psychological therapy, specific patient groups were less likely to receive treatment.

Symptoms related to chronic stress are prevalent and entail high societal costs, yet there is a lack of international consensus regarding diagnostics and treatment. A new stress-related diagnosis, exhaustion disorder, was introduced into the Swedish version of ICD-10 in 2005. Since then, use of the diagnosis has increased rapidly.

To create the first comprehensive synthesis of research on exhaustion disorder to report on the current state of knowledge. Preregistration: Open Science Framework (osf.io), doi 10.17605/OSF.IO/VFDKW.

A PRISMA-guided scoping review of all empirical studies of exhaustion disorder was conducted. Searches were run in the MEDLINE, PsycInfo and Web of Science databases. Data were systematically charted and thematically categorised based on primary area of investigation.

Eighty-nine included studies were sorted into six themes relating to lived experience of exhaustion disorder (n = 9), symptom presentation and course (n = 13), cognitive functioning (n = 10), biological measures (n = 24), symptom measurement scales (n = 4) and treatment (n = 29). Several studies indicated that individuals with exhaustion disorder experience a range of psychiatric and somatic symptoms beyond fatigue, but robust findings within most thematic categories were scarce. The limited number of studies, lack of replication of findings and methodological limitations (e.g. small samples and scarcity of specified primary outcomes) preclude firm conclusions about the diagnostic construct.

More research is needed to build a solid knowledge base for exhaustion disorder. International collaboration regarding the conceptualisation of chronic stress and fatigue is warranted to accelerate the growth of evidence.

Common mental disorders (CMD) cause large suffering and high societal costs. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) can effectively treat CMD, but access to treatment is insufficient. Guided self-help (GSH) CBT, has shown effects comparable with face-to-face CBT. However, not all patients respond to GSH, and stepping up non-responders to face-to-face CBT, could yield larger response rates. The aim was to test a stepped care model for CMD in primary care by first evaluating the effects of GSH-CBT and secondly, for non-responders, evaluating the additional effect of face-to-face CBT.

Consecutive patients (N = 396) with a principal disorder of depression, anxiety, insomnia, adjustment or exhaustion disorder were included. In Step I, all patients received GSH-CBT. In Step II, non-responders were randomized to face-to-face CBT or continued GSH. The primary outcome was remission status, defined as a score below a pre-established cutoff on a validated disorder-specific scale.

After GSH-CBT in Step I, 40% of patients were in remission. After Step II, 39% of patients following face-to-face CBT were in remission compared with 19% of patients after continued GSH (p = 0.004). Using this stepped care model required less than six therapy sessions per patient and led to an overall remission rate of 63%.

Stepped care can be effective and resource-efficient to treat CMD in primary care, leading to high remission rates with limited therapist resources. Face-to-face CBT speeded up recovery compared with continued GSH. At follow-ups after 6 and 12 months, remission rates were similar in the two groups.