Andrew D Carlo1, Gary Chan1, Robert F Arao1, Melinda A Vredevoogd1, John C Fortney1, Diane M Powers1, Joan E Russo1, Jürgen Unützer1. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Carlo, Arao, Vredevoogd, Fortney, Powers, Russo, Unützer); Department of Biostatistics, and Department of Health Services, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle (Chan); U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Health Services Research and Development, Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value-Driven Care, Seattle (Fortney).
Abstract
Objective: The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) is commonly used to assess depression symptoms, but its associated treatment success criteria (i.e., metrics) are inconsistently defined. The authors aimed to analyze the impact of metric choice on outcomes and discuss implications for clinical practice and research. Methods: Analyses included three overlapping and nonexclusive time cohorts of adult patients with depression treated in 33 organizations between 2008 and 2018. Average depression improvement rates were calculated according to eight metrics. Organization-level rank orders defined by these metrics were calculated and correlated. Results: The 12-month cohort had higher rates of metrics indicating treatment success than did the 3- and 6-month cohorts; the degree of improvement varied by metric, although all organization-level rank orders were highly correlated. Conclusions: Different PHQ-9 treatment metrics are associated with disparate improvement rates. Organization-level rankings defined by different metrics are highly correlated. Consistency of metric use may be more important than specific metric choice.
Objective: The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) is commonly used to assess depression symptoms, but its associated treatment success criteria (i.e., metrics) are inconsistently defined. The authors aimed to analyze the impact of metric choice on outcomes and discuss implications for clinical practice and research. Methods: Analyses included three overlapping and nonexclusive time cohorts of adult patients with depression treated in 33 organizations between 2008 and 2018. Average depression improvement rates were calculated according to eight metrics. Organization-level rank orders defined by these metrics were calculated and correlated. Results: The 12-month cohort had higher rates of metrics indicating treatment success than did the 3- and 6-month cohorts; the degree of improvement varied by metric, although all organization-level rank orders were highly correlated. Conclusions: Different PHQ-9 treatment metrics are associated with disparate improvement rates. Organization-level rankings defined by different metrics are highly correlated. Consistency of metric use may be more important than specific metric choice.
Entities:
Keywords:
Behavioral Health Integration; Depression; Health Services; Measurement-based care; Scales/outcome and clinical measurement
Authors: Michael Schoenbaum; Jürgen Unützer; Daniel McCaffrey; Naihua Duan; Cathy Sherbourne; Kenneth B Wells Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Paul E Greenberg; Andree-Anne Fournier; Tammy Sisitsky; Crystal T Pike; Ronald C Kessler Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: David J Katzelnick; Farifteh Firoozmand Duffy; Henry Chung; Darrel A Regier; Donald S Rae; Madhukar H Trivedi Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 3.084