Literature DB >> 12393314

A critical examination of the sensitivity of unidimensional subscales derived from the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale to antidepressant drug effects.

Richard Entsuah1, Michelle Shaffer, Jun Zhang.   

Abstract

Unidimensional subscales for assessment of major depression may be more sensitive to antidepressant drug effects than the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D). To further examine this possibility, we analyzed pooled data from eight comparable, well-controlled clinical trials of venlafaxine and compared such subscales and the 17-item HAM-D (HAM-D(17)) based on effect size and number of patients required for 80% power. Symptoms of depression were assessed using the HAM-D among intent-to-treat patients (2045) randomly assigned to receive venlafaxine (immediate release, n = 474; extended release, n = 377), one of several selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) (n = 748), or placebo (n = 446) for up to 8 weeks. With SSRIs or venlafaxine vs. placebo, subscales yielded effect sizes (0.328-0.528) 16 to 76% larger than the HAM-D(17) did (0.237 and 0.396, respectively), and required 31 to 64% fewer patients for 80% power. With venlafaxine vs. SSRIs, the subscales showed no advantage over the HAM-D(17); all devices yielded comparable, positive effect sizes (0.183-0.195). Final subscale scores significantly predicted (all P < 0.05) whether patients met criteria for remission (eg, HAM-D(17) score of < or = 7). These findings suggest that unidimensional subscales are more sensitive to antidepressant drug effects than the HAM-D(17) is, but only in active agent/placebo comparisons. Our data further suggest the subscales can predict the presence of remission. Given these findings, prudent use of these subscales may be appropriate, cost-effective, and informative. Copyright 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12393314     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3956(02)00024-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Psychiatr Res        ISSN: 0022-3956            Impact factor:   4.791


  19 in total

1.  Sensitivity to changes during antidepressant treatment: a comparison of unidimensional subscales of the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-C) and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) in patients with mild major, minor or subsyndromal depression.

Authors:  Isabella Helmreich; Stefanie Wagner; Roland Mergl; Antje-Kathrin Allgaier; Martin Hautzinger; Verena Henkel; Ulrich Hegerl; André Tadić
Journal:  Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 5.270

2.  Sertraline for Major Depression During the Year Following Traumatic Brain Injury: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Jesse R Fann; Charles H Bombardier; Nancy Temkin; Peter Esselman; Catherine Warms; Jason Barber; Sureyya Dikmen
Journal:  J Head Trauma Rehabil       Date:  2017 Sep/Oct       Impact factor: 2.710

3.  Dose-response relationship of duloxetine in placebo-controlled clinical trials in patients with major depressive disorder.

Authors:  Per Bech; Daniel K Kajdasz; Vibeke Porsdal
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2006-09-08       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 4.  Fluvoxamine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.

Authors:  Ichiro M Omori; Norio Watanabe; Atsuo Nakagawa; Andrea Cipriani; Corrado Barbui; Hugh McGuire; Rachel Churchill; Toshi A Furukawa
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-03-17

5.  The Inventory Of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-C(28)) is more sensitive to changes in depressive symptomatology than the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD(17)) in patients with mild major, minor or subsyndromal depression.

Authors:  Isabella Helmreich; Stefanie Wagner; Roland Mergl; Antje-Kathrin Allgaier; Martin Hautzinger; Verena Henkel; Ulrich Hegerl; André Tadić
Journal:  Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  2010-12-04       Impact factor: 5.270

6.  Exercise and pharmacotherapy in patients with major depression: one-year follow-up of the SMILE study.

Authors:  Benson M Hoffman; Michael A Babyak; W Edward Craighead; Andrew Sherwood; P Murali Doraiswamy; Michael J Coons; James A Blumenthal
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  2010-12-10       Impact factor: 4.312

7.  Rating depression over brief time intervals with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: standard vs. abbreviated scales.

Authors:  David A Luckenbaugh; Rezvan Ameli; Nancy E Brutsche; Carlos A Zarate
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2014-12-27       Impact factor: 4.791

8.  The symptom-specific efficacy of antidepressant medication vs. cognitive behavioral therapy in the treatment of depression: results from an individual patient data meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lynn Boschloo; Ella Bekhuis; Erica S Weitz; Mirjam Reijnders; Robert J DeRubeis; Sona Dimidjian; David L Dunner; Boadie W Dunlop; Ulrich Hegerl; Steven D Hollon; Robin B Jarrett; Sidney H Kennedy; Jeanne Miranda; David C Mohr; Anne D Simons; Gordon Parker; Frank Petrak; Stephan Herpertz; Lena C Quilty; A John Rush; Zindel V Segal; Jeffrey R Vittengl; Robert A Schoevers; Pim Cuijpers
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 49.548

9.  The Effect of Antidepressants on Depression After Traumatic Brain Injury: A Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Natalie Kreitzer; Rachel Ancona; Cheryl McCullumsmith; Brad G Kurowski; Brandon Foreman; Laura B Ngwenya; Opeolu Adeoye
Journal:  J Head Trauma Rehabil       Date:  2019 May/Jun       Impact factor: 2.710

10.  Psychometric properties of responses by clinicians and older adults to a 6-item Hebrew version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D6).

Authors:  Yaacov G Bachner; Norm O'Rourke; Margalit Goldfracht; Per Bech; Liat Ayalon
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 3.630

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.