4.6 Article

Concordance between clinician and patient ratings as predictors of response, remission, and recurrence in major depressive disorder

Journal

JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH
Volume 45, Issue 1, Pages 96-103

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2010.04.032

Keywords

Depression; Psychiatric status rating scales; Reliability and validity; Outcome assessment; Treatment outcome; Anxiety

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institute of Mental Health
  2. Cyberonics
  3. Takeda
  4. Wyeth
  5. GlaxoSmithKline
  6. Novartis
  7. Ono Pharmaceuticals
  8. Northstar
  9. Sanofi Aventis
  10. Medtronics
  11. Departments of Health and Human Services
  12. Pfizer
  13. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  14. Eli Lilly Company
  15. Forest Laboratories
  16. Sepracor
  17. Boehringer-Ingelheim
  18. Sanofi-Synthelabo
  19. AstraZeneca
  20. Guilford Press
  21. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
  22. Corcept Therapeutics
  23. Meade Johnson
  24. National Alliance for Research in Schizophrenia and Depression, the National Institute of Mental Health
  25. NIDA
  26. Pharmacia Upjohn
  27. Solvay
  28. Targacept
  29. Pfizer Research
  30. NATIONAL CENTER FOR ADVANCING TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCES [UL1TR000454] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  31. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [U01MH061590, K23MH086690] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We conducted a secondary analysis of data from the Prevention of Recurrent Episodes of Depression With Venlafaxine Extended Release (ER) for Two Years (PREVENT) trial to evaluate whether discrepancies between clinician and patient ratings of depression severity were predictive of response, remission, and recurrence during treatment for a depressive episode. Patients who self-rated depression severity in concordance with the clinician (concordant patients) were defined as having a standardized patient-rated Inventory of Depressive Symptoms-Self Report (IDS-SR30) score minus standardized clinician-rated Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-17) score <1 SD from mean. Non-concordant patients (underrating patients [-1 SD], overrating patients [+1 SD]) were identified. Cohorts were compared for remission and response on the HAM-D-17, Clinician Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S), and IDS-SR30 during acute and continuation therapy and time to recurrence during maintenance therapy. During acute treatment female patients were more likely to overrate their depression severity compared to the clinician; older age predicted overrating during continuation treatment. Overrating patients had a slower onset of response on the HAM-D-17 during acute treatment (P = 0.004). There were no differences between cohorts for remission or response on the HAM-D-17 or CGI-S. Overrating patients at week 10 had lower remission and response rates on the IDS-SR30 during continuation therapy (32% and 50%, respectively; P <= 0.001) compared with underrating patients (76%, 77%) or concordant patients (64%, 78%). Patient concordance at the end of continuation therapy did not predict recurrence during maintenance therapy, indicating that patient rating scales may be useful in tracking recurrence during maintenance therapy. Poor agreement between patient- and clinician-ratings of depression severity is primarily a state phenomenon, although it is trait-like for some patients. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available