Ching-Hua Lin1, Caroline Park2, Roger S McIntyre3. 1. Kaohsiung Municipal Kai-Syuan Psychiatric Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 2. Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Mood Disorders Psychopharmacology Unit, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. 3. Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Brain and Cognition Discovery Foundation (BCDF), Toronto, Canada; Mood Disorders Psychopharmacology Unit, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. Electronic address: Roger.McIntyre@uhn.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Compared to the 17-Item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-17), the 7-Item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-7) would be more practical for use in busy clinical settings. Herein, we aim to evaluate (1) whether the HAMD-7 is a reliable and valid measure that is sensitive to changes in depressive symptoms, and (2) whether early improvement of depressive symptoms, as measured by the HAMD-7, is capable of predicting response and remission in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) during acute treatment with fluoxetine or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of two clinical trials in MDD. Internal consistency, validity, and sensitivity-to-change of the HAMD-17 and HAMD-7 were compared during acute treatment and at 3-month follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic analyses were used to evaluate the discriminative capacity of the HAMD-17 and HAMD-7. RESULTS: The HAMD-7 is a reliable and valid measure that is sensitive to changes in depressive symptoms. Early improvement, as measured by either the HAMD-17 or HAMD-7, was capable of predicting response and remission to acute treatment with fluoxetine or ECT with good discriminative capacity. LIMITATIONS: This is a post-hoc analysis of two open-label clinical trials with limited sample sizes. All patients were Taiwanese, which limits the generalizability of our results. CONCLUSIONS: HAMD-7 is a clinically useful measure that is capable of detecting early improvement of depressive symptoms. The HAMD-7 may have the potential to inform clinical assessment as part of measurement-based care.
BACKGROUND: Compared to the 17-Item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-17), the 7-Item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-7) would be more practical for use in busy clinical settings. Herein, we aim to evaluate (1) whether the HAMD-7 is a reliable and valid measure that is sensitive to changes in depressive symptoms, and (2) whether early improvement of depressive symptoms, as measured by the HAMD-7, is capable of predicting response and remission in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) during acute treatment with fluoxetine or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of two clinical trials in MDD. Internal consistency, validity, and sensitivity-to-change of the HAMD-17 and HAMD-7 were compared during acute treatment and at 3-month follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic analyses were used to evaluate the discriminative capacity of the HAMD-17 and HAMD-7. RESULTS: The HAMD-7 is a reliable and valid measure that is sensitive to changes in depressive symptoms. Early improvement, as measured by either the HAMD-17 or HAMD-7, was capable of predicting response and remission to acute treatment with fluoxetine or ECT with good discriminative capacity. LIMITATIONS: This is a post-hoc analysis of two open-label clinical trials with limited sample sizes. All patients were Taiwanese, which limits the generalizability of our results. CONCLUSIONS: HAMD-7 is a clinically useful measure that is capable of detecting early improvement of depressive symptoms. The HAMD-7 may have the potential to inform clinical assessment as part of measurement-based care.
Authors: Nele Van de Velde; Mitchel Kappen; Ernst H W Koster; Kristof Hoorelbeke; Hannelore Tandt; Pieter Verslype; Chris Baeken; Rudi De Raedt; Gilbert Lemmens; Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2020-09-16 Impact factor: 3.630