BACKGROUND: The Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) is promising to be a standard global rating scale for panic disorder. In order for a clinical scale to be useful, we need a guideline for interpreting its scores and their changes, and for defining clinical change points such as response and remission. METHODS: We used individual patient data from two large randomized controlled trials of panic disorder (total n=568). Study participants were administered the PDSS and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI)--Severity and --Improvement. We applied equipercentile linking technique to draw correspondences between PDSS and CGI-Severity, numeric changes in PDSS and CGI-Improvement, and percent changes in PDSS and CGI-Improvement. RESULTS: The interpretation of the PDSS total score differed according to the presence or absence of agoraphobia. When the patients were not agoraphobic, score ranges 0-1 corresponded with "Normal," 2-5 with "Borderline," 6-9 with "Slightly ill," 10-13 with "Moderately ill," and 14 and above with "Markedly ill." When the patients were agoraphobic, score ranges 3-7 meant "Borderline ill," 8-10 "Slightly ill," 11-15 "Moderately ill," and 16 and above "Markedly ill." The relationship between PDSS change and CGI-Improvement was more linear when measured as percentile change than as numeric changes, and was indistinguishable for those with or without agoraphobia. The decrease by 75-100% was considered "Very much improved," that by 40-74% "Much improved," and that by 10-39% "Minimally improved." CONCLUSION: We propose that "remission" of panic disorder be defined by PDSS scores of five or less and its "response" by 40% or greater reduction.
BACKGROUND: The Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) is promising to be a standard global rating scale for panic disorder. In order for a clinical scale to be useful, we need a guideline for interpreting its scores and their changes, and for defining clinical change points such as response and remission. METHODS: We used individual patient data from two large randomized controlled trials of panic disorder (total n=568). Study participants were administered the PDSS and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI)--Severity and --Improvement. We applied equipercentile linking technique to draw correspondences between PDSS and CGI-Severity, numeric changes in PDSS and CGI-Improvement, and percent changes in PDSS and CGI-Improvement. RESULTS: The interpretation of the PDSS total score differed according to the presence or absence of agoraphobia. When the patients were not agoraphobic, score ranges 0-1 corresponded with "Normal," 2-5 with "Borderline," 6-9 with "Slightly ill," 10-13 with "Moderately ill," and 14 and above with "Markedly ill." When the patients were agoraphobic, score ranges 3-7 meant "Borderline ill," 8-10 "Slightly ill," 11-15 "Moderately ill," and 16 and above "Markedly ill." The relationship between PDSS change and CGI-Improvement was more linear when measured as percentile change than as numeric changes, and was indistinguishable for those with or without agoraphobia. The decrease by 75-100% was considered "Very much improved," that by 40-74% "Much improved," and that by 10-39% "Minimally improved." CONCLUSION: We propose that "remission" of panic disorder be defined by PDSS scores of five or less and its "response" by 40% or greater reduction.
Authors: M K Shear; P Rucci; J Williams; E Frank; V Grochocinski; J Vander Bilt; P Houck; T Wang Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2001 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Cindy J Aaronson; M Katherine Shear; Raymond R Goetz; Laura B Allen; David H Barlow; Kamila S White; Susan Ray; Roy Money; John R Saksa; Scott W Woods; Jack M Gorman Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: W K Goodman; L H Price; S A Rasmussen; C Mazure; R L Fleischmann; C L Hill; G R Heninger; D S Charney Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 1989-11
Authors: Jeffrey R Strawn; Lauren L Vollmer; Katherine M J McMurray; Jeffrey A Mills; Sarah A Mossman; Sara T Varney; Heidi K Schroeder; Renu Sah Journal: Brain Behav Immun Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 7.217
Authors: Jacques P Barber; Barbara Milrod; Robert Gallop; Nili Solomonov; Marie G Rudden; Kevin S McCarthy; Dianne L Chambless Journal: J Couns Psychol Date: 2020-03
Authors: Alden L Gross; Sharon K Inouye; George W Rebok; Jason Brandt; Paul K Crane; Jeanine M Parisi; Doug Tommet; Karen Bandeen-Roche; Michelle C Carlson; Richard N Jones Journal: J Clin Exp Neuropsychol Date: 2012-04-30 Impact factor: 2.475
Authors: John R Keefe; Zeeshan M Huque; Robert J DeRubeis; Jacques P Barber; Barbara L Milrod; Dianne L Chambless Journal: Psychotherapy (Chic) Date: 2019-03-14
Authors: Kristin Silfvernagel; Per Carlbring; Julia Kabo; Sara Edström; Jenny Eriksson; Lisa Månson; Gerhard Andersson Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2012-06-26 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Wouter van Ballegooijen; Heleen Riper; Britt Klein; David Daniel Ebert; Jeannet Kramer; Peter Meulenbeek; Pim Cuijpers Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2013-07-29 Impact factor: 5.428