Elizabeth A Newnham1, Kate E Harwood, Andrew C Page. 1. School of Psychology, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia. newnhe01@student.uwa.edu.au
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Mental Health subscales of the Medical Outcomes Short Form Questionnaire (SF-36; [Ware, J.E., Snow, K.K., Kosinski, M., Gandek, B., 1993. SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center]) are increasingly being used to evaluate treatment outcomes, but data to assess the clinical significance of changes are absent. The present study applied Jacobson and Truax's [Jacobson, N.S., Truax, P. 1991. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 59, 12-19] criteria for clinical significance to the mental health items of the SF-36. METHOD: Admission and discharge data were collated from 1830 consecutive inpatients at a psychiatric hospital, using the SF-36, the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale, the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire and the clinician-rated Health of the Nation Outcome Scale. RESULTS: Appropriate improvement cut-off scores for the mental health subscales of the SF-36 are reported, and significant differences were found between outcome groups according to clinically significant improvement. LIMITATIONS: CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE as a means of assessing outcome should be used with caution in inpatient settings, as further improvement is often expected upon discharge from the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing clinically significant improvement is an effective means of measuring treatment outcome in terms of quality of life and symptom improvement in psychiatric care.
BACKGROUND: The Mental Health subscales of the Medical Outcomes Short Form Questionnaire (SF-36; [Ware, J.E., Snow, K.K., Kosinski, M., Gandek, B., 1993. SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center]) are increasingly being used to evaluate treatment outcomes, but data to assess the clinical significance of changes are absent. The present study applied Jacobson and Truax's [Jacobson, N.S., Truax, P. 1991. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 59, 12-19] criteria for clinical significance to the mental health items of the SF-36. METHOD: Admission and discharge data were collated from 1830 consecutive inpatients at a psychiatric hospital, using the SF-36, the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale, the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire and the clinician-rated Health of the Nation Outcome Scale. RESULTS: Appropriate improvement cut-off scores for the mental health subscales of the SF-36 are reported, and significant differences were found between outcome groups according to clinically significant improvement. LIMITATIONS: CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE as a means of assessing outcome should be used with caution in inpatient settings, as further improvement is often expected upon discharge from the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing clinically significant improvement is an effective means of measuring treatment outcome in terms of quality of life and symptom improvement in psychiatric care.
Authors: Emily E Bernstein; Dustin J Rabideau; Margaret E Gigler; Andrew A Nierenberg; Thilo Deckersbach; Louisa G Sylvia Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2015-09-30 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Kathleen T Hickey; Angelo B Biviano; Hasan Garan; Robert R Sciacca; Teresa Riga; Kate Warren; Ashton P Frulla; Nicole R Hauser; Daniel Y Wang; William Whang Journal: J Atr Fibrillation Date: 2017-02-28
Authors: Nina Marijn van Leeuwen; Marc Maurits; Sophie Liem; Jacopo Ciaffi; Nina Ajmone Marsan; Maarten Ninaber; Cornelia Allaart; Henrike Gillet van Dongen; Robbert Goekoop; Tom Huizinga; Rachel Knevel; Jeska De Vries-Bouwstra Journal: RMD Open Date: 2021-05
Authors: Jenni Hislop; Temitope E Adewuyi; Luke D Vale; Kirsten Harrild; Cynthia Fraser; Tara Gurung; Douglas G Altman; Andrew H Briggs; Peter Fayers; Craig R Ramsay; John D Norrie; Ian M Harvey; Brian Buckley; Jonathan A Cook Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2014-05-13 Impact factor: 11.069