Literature DB >> 34295161

Clinically Significant Changes in the 17- and 6-Item Hamilton Rating Scales for Depression: A STAR*D Report.

Augustus John Rush1,2,3, Charles South4, Shailesh Jain1, Raafae Agha1, Mingxu Zhang1, Shristi Shrestha1, Zershana Khan1, Mudasar Hassan1, Madhukar H Trivedi5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop clinically meaningful improvement thresholds in both the 17-item and the 6-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) total scores in depressed outpatients.
METHODS: The post-hoc analysis included all adult outpatients with non-psychotic major depressive disorder in the STAR*D trial who entered and exited the first treatment step (up to 14 weeks of citalopram) with a complete set of study measures at baseline and exit and at least one post-baseline measure. Within-patient change and linear regression anchor-based analyses were conducted to define meaningful and substantial changes in the HRSD17 and HRSD6 using three patient-reported outcomes [Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS), Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction-Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF); Mini-Q-LES-Q] obtained at baseline and exit from the first treatment step in STAR*D.
RESULTS: Linear regression analyses identified a meaningful change threshold for the HRSD17 as 3.9 [3.7-4.1] [lower, upper 95% CI] and a substantial change as 7.8 [7.4-8.3] with the WSAS. Analogous thresholds based on the Q-LES-Q-SF were 5.8 [5.5-6.1] and 11.6 [11.0-12.2], respectively, and 4.9 [4.7-5.2] and 9.9 [9.3-10.4] for the Mini-QLES-Q, respectively. For the HRSD6, linear regression analyses with the WSAS identified a meaningful change as 2.2 [2.1-2.4], while a substantial change was 4.5 [4.2-4.7]. Analogous figures based on the Q-LES-Q-SF were 3.2 [3.0-3.4] and 6.4 [6.1-6.8]. Similarly, based on the Mini-QLESQ, results were 2.8 [2.6-2.9] and 5.6 [5.3-5.9]. For both the HRSD17 and the HRSD6, within-patient analyses produced less precise estimates of the same change thresholds with substantial overlap between groups. Based on the WSAS, a clinically meaningful change in the HRSD17 total score was 9.6 (SD = 6.5), while a substantial change was 15.0 (SD = 6.7). Analogous change thresholds based on the Q-LESQ-SF were 12.9 (SD = 6.2) and 16.8 (SD = 6.4), respectively. For the Mini-Q-LES-Q, thresholds were 10.9 (SD = 6.5) and 16.1 (SD = 6.2).
CONCLUSION: A 4-6 point change in the HRSD17 is clinically meaningful; a 7-12 point change is clinically substantial. For the HRSD6, analogous estimates were 2-3 and 4-7 point changes, respectively.
© 2021 Rush et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  depression ratings; meaningful change; patient-reported outcomes

Year:  2021        PMID: 34295161      PMCID: PMC8290193          DOI: 10.2147/NDT.S305331

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat        ISSN: 1176-6328            Impact factor:   2.570


  49 in total

1.  Measurement-Based Care Versus Standard Care for Major Depression: A Randomized Controlled Trial With Blind Raters.

Authors:  Tong Guo; Yu-Tao Xiang; Le Xiao; Chang-Qing Hu; Helen F K Chiu; Gabor S Ungvari; Christoph U Correll; Kelly Y C Lai; Lei Feng; Ying Geng; Yuan Feng; Gang Wang
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 18.112

2.  Evaluation of outcomes with citalopram for depression using measurement-based care in STAR*D: implications for clinical practice.

Authors:  Madhukar H Trivedi; A John Rush; Stephen R Wisniewski; Andrew A Nierenberg; Diane Warden; Louise Ritz; Grayson Norquist; Robert H Howland; Barry Lebowitz; Patrick J McGrath; Kathy Shores-Wilson; Melanie M Biggs; G K Balasubramani; Maurizio Fava
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 18.112

Review 3.  Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods.

Authors:  Anne G Copay; Brian R Subach; Steven D Glassman; David W Polly; Thomas C Schuler
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2007-04-02       Impact factor: 4.166

Review 4.  A point of minimal important difference (MID): a critique of terminology and methods.

Authors:  Madeleine T King
Journal:  Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 2.217

5.  An examination of the sensitivity of the six-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression in a sample of patients suffering from major depressive disorder.

Authors:  C L Hooper; D Bakish
Journal:  J Psychiatry Neurosci       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 6.186

6.  Maximizing the adequacy of medication treatment in controlled trials and clinical practice: STAR(*)D measurement-based care.

Authors:  Madhukar H Trivedi; A John Rush; Bradley N Gaynes; Jonathan W Stewart; Stephen R Wisniewski; Diane Warden; Louise Ritz; James F Luther; Diane Stegman; Joanne Deveaugh-Geiss; Robert Howland
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2007-04-04       Impact factor: 7.853

7.  Acute and longer-term outcomes in depressed outpatients requiring one or several treatment steps: a STAR*D report.

Authors:  A John Rush; Madhukar H Trivedi; Stephen R Wisniewski; Andrew A Nierenberg; Jonathan W Stewart; Diane Warden; George Niederehe; Michael E Thase; Philip W Lavori; Barry D Lebowitz; Patrick J McGrath; Jerrold F Rosenbaum; Harold A Sackeim; David J Kupfer; James Luther; Maurizio Fava
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 18.112

8.  The 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS), clinician rating (QIDS-C), and self-report (QIDS-SR): a psychometric evaluation in patients with chronic major depression.

Authors:  A John Rush; Madhukar H Trivedi; Hicham M Ibrahim; Thomas J Carmody; Bruce Arnow; Daniel N Klein; John C Markowitz; Philip T Ninan; Susan Kornstein; Rachel Manber; Michael E Thase; James H Kocsis; Martin B Keller
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2003-09-01       Impact factor: 13.382

9.  The Bech-Rafaelsen Mania Scale and the Hamilton Depression Scale.

Authors:  P Bech; T G Bolwig; P Kramp; O J Rafaelsen
Journal:  Acta Psychiatr Scand       Date:  1979-04       Impact factor: 6.392

10.  Bupropion-SR, sertraline, or venlafaxine-XR after failure of SSRIs for depression.

Authors:  A John Rush; Madhukar H Trivedi; Stephen R Wisniewski; Jonathan W Stewart; Andrew A Nierenberg; Michael E Thase; Louise Ritz; Melanie M Biggs; Diane Warden; James F Luther; Kathy Shores-Wilson; George Niederehe; Maurizio Fava
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2006-03-23       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  3 in total

1.  The Ketogenic Diet for Refractory Mental Illness: A Retrospective Analysis of 31 Inpatients.

Authors:  Albert Danan; Eric C Westman; Laura R Saslow; Georgia Ede
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 5.435

2.  Four-Week Mentalizing Imagery Therapy for Family Dementia Caregivers: A Randomized Controlled Trial with Neural Circuit Changes.

Authors:  Felipe A Jain; Sergey V Chernyak; Lisa D Nickerson; Stefana Morgan; Rhiana Schafer; David Mischoulon; Richard Bernard-Negron; Maren Nyer; Cristina Cusin; Liliana Ramirez Gomez; Albert Yeung
Journal:  Psychother Psychosom       Date:  2022-03-14       Impact factor: 25.617

3.  A Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Trial of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for the Treatment of Persistent Postural-Perceptual Dizziness (PPPD).

Authors:  Jooyeon Jamie Im; Seunghee Na; Sanghoon Kang; Hyeonseok Jeong; Eek-Sung Lee; Tae-Kyeong Lee; Woo-Young Ahn; Yong-An Chung; In-Uk Song
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2022-04-14       Impact factor: 4.086

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.