The actual capacity of community health service institutions in Shanghai for the diagnosis and treatment of depressive disorders has not been systematically evaluated, and there is a lack of empirical research on the urban-suburban differences.

To assess the current capacity of community health service institutions in Shanghai in the screening, diagnosis, treatment and management of depressive disorders, investigate the knowledge mastery and practical difficulties of community general practitioners, focus on analyzing urban-suburban differences, and provide evidence for optimizing the primary mental health service system.

A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted among 244 community health service centers across 16 administrative districts in Shanghai from July to August 2025. A total of 2 222 valid questionnaires were collected from institutional managers and general practitioners (244 and 1 978 questionnaires from institutions and doctors, respectively). The institutional survey mainly covered: screening tools for depressive disorders, relevant laboratory/examination items, drug allocation, psychotherapy, related management, and the establishment of specialized clinics in medical institutions. The survey for community general practitioners mainly focused on: knowledge of diagnosis and treatment of depressive disorders, cognition of screening tools for depressive disorders, cognition of differential diagnosis between depressive disorders and bipolar disorder, cognition of follow-up for depressive disorders, and difficulties in the diagnosis, treatment and management of depressive disorders.

Among the 244 community health service institutions in 16 districts of Shanghai, 80 (32.8%) and 164 (67.2%) subjects were urban and suburban institutions, respectively; among 1 978 general practitioners, 505 (25.5%) and 1 473 (74.5%) subjects were urban and suburban practitioners, respectively. Regarding screening tools for depressive disorders, the allocation rate of Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) in urban institutions was 47.5%, 43.8% and 12.5%, respectively, compared with 44.5%, 38.4% and 7.3% in suburban institutions. In terms of examinations, the availability rate of electroencephalography and echocardiography in urban and suburban community health service centers was 17.5% vs 4.3% and 70.0% vs 51.8%, respectively; the proportion of electroencephalography and echocardiography was higher in urban areas than in suburban areas (P<0.05). In terms of therapeutic drugs, the allocation rate of benzodiazepines and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in urban and suburban community health service centers was 95.0% vs 91.5% and 38.8% vs 33.5%, respectively. In terms of specialized clinics, the availability rates of psychosomatic disease clinics and psychological counseling clinics in urban and suburban community health service centers were 17.5% vs 4.3% and 15.0% vs 28.0%, respectively; the rate of psychosomatic disease clinics was higher in urban areas, while the rate of psychological counseling clinics was lower in urban centers than in suburban centers (P<0.05). The main difficulties in the management of depressive disorders in community health service centers included: limited medical resources, limited dedicated managerial staff and time (95.1%), lack of therapeutic drugs and psychotherapy skills (87.7%), and poor patient compliance with distrust in community medical staff (60.2%). The awareness rate of the diagnostic duration of depressive symptoms (minimum duration of depressive symptoms for diagnostic significance) among urban and suburban general practitioners was 52.3% and 57.6%, respectively, indicating the urban community general practitioners were lower than the suburban community general practitioners (P<0.05). The awareness rates of PHQ-9 and SDS among urban and suburban general practitioners were 64.0% vs 57.8% and 65.9% vs 59.5% respectively, indicating the urban community general practitioners were higher than the suburban community general practitioners (P<0.05). The awareness rates of decreased sleep need, distractibility and inflated self-esteem were 61.2% vs 67.3%, 41.2% vs 49.6% and 57.2% vs 64.3%, respectively, indicating the urban community general practitioners were lower than the suburban community general practitioners (P<0.05). The awareness rate of monthly follow-up was 73.9% in urban areas and 82.1% in suburban areas, indicating that the urban community general practitioners were lower than the suburban community general practitioners (P<0.05). The suburban general practitioners reported the higher rates of difficulties in diagnosis and treatment (including insufficient suicide risk assessment ability, insufficient non-pharmacological treatment ability and insufficient post-treatment efficacy evaluation ability) than the urban general practitioners (P<0.05). In management difficulties, suburban practitioners also reported the higher rates of insufficient health education capacity on depressive disorders, lack of expert guidance in communities, and lack of two-way referral channels with higher-level hospitals (P<0.05).

Community health service institutions in Shanghai, especially those in suburban areas, should strengthen the allocation of screening tools, relevant examinations and medications. It is necessary to improve general practitioners' mastery of depressive disorder knowledge, health education ability and psychotherapy skills. Institutional construction, resource allocation and capacity improvement should be strengthened to promote an integrated management system and enhance the efficiency of primary mental health services.