UNLABELLED: Subjective response to neuroleptics is essential to long term observance of treatment and quality of life of patients. Numerous factors (pharmacological, relational and psychopathological) are responsible of this subjective response. Objectives of this study are: (a) to examine psychometric features of the french version of the Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI-30) [13] and (b) to explore pharmacological, relational and psychopathological factors related to this subjective response. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: 78 subjects were rated (self rated response rate 61% (n = 48)) for (a) subjective response to neuroleptics, (b) compliance, (c) therapeutic alliance, (d) symptoms (e) severity of disorder. RESULTS: Factor analysis yielded 2 main clinically relevant factors, similar to the original version: (I) global subjective response and (II) specific subjective response. Internal consistency is high. Correspondance analysis showed two important dimensions in the treatment of schizophrenic patients: (I) Recovery--aggravation, (II) Therapeutic ambition--positive or negative symptoms. CONCLUSION: French version of DAI-30 seems to have a similar structure and psychometric features as the original version. It shows concordance with the degree of compliance. Pharmacological factors are not the only factors implicated in subjective response, but are still to be identified. Limitations of our study are: (a) nonhomogenous indication for treatment, (b) small rate and degree of non compliance in our sample. Relationships between therapeutic ambition, type of symptoms and treatment outcome should be further studied.
UNLABELLED: Subjective response to neuroleptics is essential to long term observance of treatment and quality of life of patients. Numerous factors (pharmacological, relational and psychopathological) are responsible of this subjective response. Objectives of this study are: (a) to examine psychometric features of the french version of the Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI-30) [13] and (b) to explore pharmacological, relational and psychopathological factors related to this subjective response. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: 78 subjects were rated (self rated response rate 61% (n = 48)) for (a) subjective response to neuroleptics, (b) compliance, (c) therapeutic alliance, (d) symptoms (e) severity of disorder. RESULTS: Factor analysis yielded 2 main clinically relevant factors, similar to the original version: (I) global subjective response and (II) specific subjective response. Internal consistency is high. Correspondance analysis showed two important dimensions in the treatment of schizophrenicpatients: (I) Recovery--aggravation, (II) Therapeutic ambition--positive or negative symptoms. CONCLUSION: French version of DAI-30 seems to have a similar structure and psychometric features as the original version. It shows concordance with the degree of compliance. Pharmacological factors are not the only factors implicated in subjective response, but are still to be identified. Limitations of our study are: (a) nonhomogenous indication for treatment, (b) small rate and degree of non compliance in our sample. Relationships between therapeutic ambition, type of symptoms and treatment outcome should be further studied.