Sarah K Tighe1, Megan Ritchey2, Barbara Schweizer2, Fernando S Goes2, Dean MacKinnon2, Francis Mondimore2, J Raymond DePaulo2, Francis J McMahon3, Thomas G Schulze4, Peter P Zandi5, James B Potash6. 1. University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, Iowa City, IA, USA. Electronic address: sarah-k-tighe@uiowa.edu. 2. The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. Human Genetics Branch, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. 4. The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Baltimore, MD, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Göttingen, Germany; Institute of Psychiatric Phenomics and Genomics, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany. 5. The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Baltimore, MD, USA; The Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Mental Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. 6. University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The identification of predictors of treatment response holds tremendous potential for the improvement of clinical outcomes in bipolar disorder (BP). The goal of this project is to evaluate the test-retest reliability of a new clinical tool, the Lithium Questionnaire (LQ), for the retrospective assessment of long-term lithium use in research participants with BP. METHODS: Twenty-nine individuals with BP-I (n=27), major depression (n=1), or schizoaffective disorder (n=1) were recruited for participation. The LQ was administered to all participants at two time-points, spaced 17 months apart on average, and used to determine each subject׳s score on the Retrospective Criteria of Long-Term Treatment Response in Research Subjects with Bipolar Disorder Scale, or the Alda Scale. Scores were confirmed through a best-estimate procedure, and test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC]) of the LQ was calculated. RESULTS: The correlation between the total Alda Scale scores at the two time-points was in the moderate range (ICC=0.60). Relevant clinical factors such as age or presence of Axis I psychiatric comorbidity did not influence the reliability. LIMITATIONS: The validity of the LQ was not examined. Inclusion of two participants with non-BP diagnoses may have affected the LQ׳s reliability, but re-analysis of our data after exclusion of these participants did not influence the reliability. The absence of measures of mood and cognition at time of LQ may be a limitation of this work. CONCLUSIONS: The LQ holds promise for the standardization of the retrospective assessment of long-term treatment in BP.
BACKGROUND: The identification of predictors of treatment response holds tremendous potential for the improvement of clinical outcomes in bipolar disorder (BP). The goal of this project is to evaluate the test-retest reliability of a new clinical tool, the Lithium Questionnaire (LQ), for the retrospective assessment of long-term lithium use in research participants with BP. METHODS: Twenty-nine individuals with BP-I (n=27), major depression (n=1), or schizoaffective disorder (n=1) were recruited for participation. The LQ was administered to all participants at two time-points, spaced 17 months apart on average, and used to determine each subject׳s score on the Retrospective Criteria of Long-Term Treatment Response in Research Subjects with Bipolar Disorder Scale, or the Alda Scale. Scores were confirmed through a best-estimate procedure, and test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC]) of the LQ was calculated. RESULTS: The correlation between the total Alda Scale scores at the two time-points was in the moderate range (ICC=0.60). Relevant clinical factors such as age or presence of Axis I psychiatric comorbidity did not influence the reliability. LIMITATIONS: The validity of the LQ was not examined. Inclusion of two participants with non-BP diagnoses may have affected the LQ׳s reliability, but re-analysis of our data after exclusion of these participants did not influence the reliability. The absence of measures of mood and cognition at time of LQ may be a limitation of this work. CONCLUSIONS: The LQ holds promise for the standardization of the retrospective assessment of long-term treatment in BP.
Authors: Ada Man-Choi Ho; Brandon J Coombes; Thanh Thanh L Nguyen; Duan Liu; Susan L McElroy; Balwinder Singh; Malik Nassan; Colin L Colby; Beth R Larrabee; Richard M Weinshilboum; Mark A Frye; Joanna M Biernacka Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 6.903