Literature DB >> 18377706

The clinical relevance of changes in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale using the minimum clinically important difference approach.

Gérard Duru1, Bruno Fantino.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in randomised studies of depression, and to cross-validate the estimated MCID. DESIGN AND METHODS: Placebo-treated patients from three similarly-designed, 8-week, double-blind, randomised depression trials with a stable health status between baseline and Week 1 ('no change' rating on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale) were eligible. To calculate the MCID using the distribution-based approach, the standard deviation was estimated using baseline MADRS data while the reliability parameter was measured as the intraclass correlation coefficient between baseline and Week 1. For cross-validation, patients from an observational study were matched to identify the 'MCID change' (MADRS change from baseline to endpoint score plus the estimated MCID) and 'control' groups. Comparisons of clinical and health-related quality of life measures were performed.
RESULTS: In total, 177 placebo-treated patients were identified. MCID estimates for MADRS ranged from 1.6 to 1.9. A total of 105 matched pairs were identified for the cross-validation analyses. Mean change from baseline in MADRS scores (10.6 +/- 8.5 vs. 12.5 +/- 7.9, p = 0.038) and remission rates (71.6% vs. 57.1%, p < 0.05) significantly differed between the 'MCID change' and 'control' groups at endpoint. Numerically higher response rates and greater improvements in HRQoL scores in the 'MCID change' group were also found.
CONCLUSION: These preliminary findings support the value of the estimated MCID for the MADRS and may aid decision makers in evaluating antidepressant treatment effects and improving long-term patient outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18377706     DOI: 10.1185/030079908x291958

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin        ISSN: 0300-7995            Impact factor:   2.580


  25 in total

1.  Improving study design for antidepressant effectiveness assessment.

Authors:  Florian Naudet; Bruno Millet; Jean Michel Reymann; Bruno Falissard
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2013-08-30       Impact factor: 4.035

2.  Demographic characteristics do not decrease the utility of depressive symptoms assessments: examining the practical impact of item bias in four heterogeneous samples of older adults.

Authors:  Natalia O Dmitrieva; Denise Fyffe; Shubhabrata Mukherjee; Robert Fieo; Laura B Zahodne; Jamie Hamilton; Guy G Potter; Jennifer J Manly; Heather R Romero; Dan Mungas; Laura E Gibbons
Journal:  Int J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2014-04-15       Impact factor: 3.485

3.  Inspiratory muscle training in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Gülşah Barğı; Meral Boşnak Güçlü; Zeynep Arıbaş; Şahika Zeynep Akı; Gülsan Türköz Sucak
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Vortioxetine: a meta-analysis of 12 short-term, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials for the treatment of major depressive disorder.

Authors:  Chi-Un Pae; Sheng-Min Wang; Changsu Han; Soo-Jung Lee; Ashwin A Patkar; Praksh S Masand; Alessandro Serretti
Journal:  J Psychiatry Neurosci       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 6.186

Review 5.  Quetiapine: a review of its use in the management of bipolar depression.

Authors:  Mark Sanford; Gillian M Keating
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 5.749

6.  Implications of long-term conditions for both mental and physical health: comparison of rheumatoid arthritis and schizophrenia.

Authors:  Heidi Lempp; Graham Thornicroft; Morven Leese; Naomi Fearns; Helen Graves; Bernadette Khoshaba; Antonio Lasalvia; David Scott; Michele Tansella
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-05-10       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  S-Adenosylmethionine (SAMe) monotherapy for depression: an 8-week double-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

Authors:  Jerome Sarris; Jenifer Murphy; Con Stough; David Mischoulon; Chad Bousman; Patricia MacDonald; Laura Adams; Sonia Nazareth; Georgina Oliver; Lachlan Cribb; Karen Savage; Ranjit Menon; Suneel Chamoli; Michael Berk; Chee H Ng; Gerard J Byrne
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2019-11-11       Impact factor: 4.530

8.  Minimum clinically important difference in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale with data from the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE).

Authors:  Eric D A Hermes; Daniel Sokoloff; T Scott Stroup; Robert A Rosenheck
Journal:  J Clin Psychiatry       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 4.384

9.  Comparative efficacy of escitalopram in the treatment of major depressive disorder.

Authors:  Mazen K Ali; Raymond W Lam
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 2.570

Review 10.  Omega-3 fatty acids for the treatment of dementia.

Authors:  Marion Burckhardt; Max Herke; Tobias Wustmann; Stefan Watzke; Gero Langer; Astrid Fink
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-04-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.