4.2 Article

Empirically Defining Treatment Response and Remission in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Using the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised

Journal

BEHAVIOR THERAPY
Volume 54, Issue 1, Pages 43-50

Publisher

ELSEVIER INC

Keywords

obsessive-compulsive disorder; Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised; signal detection analysis; treatment response; remission

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated cutoffs for treatment response and remission in OCD using the self-rated Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised (OCI-R). The results showed that OCI-R is a simple and time-efficient way to determine treatment response and remission in OCD.
In clinical trials of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), clinical outcomes are generally measured using lengthy clinician-administered interviews. However, in routine clinical practice, many clinicians lack the time to administer such instruments. This study evaluated cutoffs for treatment response and remission in OCD using the self-rated Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised (OCI-R). Data from 349 patients in three clinical trials of cognitive behavioral therapy for OCD were pooled for analysis. The OCI-R was compared to gold-standard criteria for response and remission based on the clinician administered Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale and the Clinical Global Impression Scale. The results showed that a >= 40% reduction on the OCI-R was the optimal cutoff for treatment response, with a sensitivity of 0.72 and a specificity of 0.79. For remission status, the optimal cutoff was <= 8 points on the OCI-R, with a sensitivity of 0.57 and specificity of 0.83. Results from additional analyses using the 12-item version of the OCI were similar. These cutoffs provide a simple and time-efficient way to help determine treatment response and remission in OCD when the administration of clinician-administered instruments is unfeasible.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available