Making clinicians lives easier: guidance on use of the QIDS self-report in place of the MADRS

Emerging Outlook on Personalized Neuromodulation for Depression: Insights from Tractography-Based Targeting

BACKGROUND

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has shown individual promise in treating treatment resistant depression (TRD), but larger-scale trials have been less successful. Here, we create the largest meta-analysis with individual patient data (IPD) to date to explore if the use of tractography enhances the efficacy of DBS for TRD.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed 1823 articles, selecting 32 that contributed data from 366 patients. We stratified the IPD based on stimulation target and use of tractography. Utilizing two-way type III Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), Welch Two Sample t-tests, and mixed-effects linear regression models, we evaluated changes in depression severity 9-15 months post-surgery (1-Y) and at last follow-up (LFU) (4 weeks - 8 years) as assessed by depression scales.

RESULTS

Tractography was used for medial forebrain bundle (MFB, n=17/32), subcallosal cingulate (SCC, n=39/241), and ventral capsule/ventral striatum (VC/VS, n=3/41) targets; and not used for bed nucleus of stria terminalis (n=11), lateral habenula (n=10), and inferior thalamic peduncle (n=1). Across all patients, tractography significantly improved mean depression scores at 1-Y (p<0.001) and LFU (p=0.009). Within the target cohorts, tractography improved depression scores at 1-Y for both MFB and SCC, though significance was only met at the alpha = 0.1 level (SCC: β=15.8%, p=0.09; MFB: β=52.4%, p=0.10). Within the tractography cohort, MFB with tractography patients showed greater improvement than those with SCC with tractography (72.42±7.17% versus 54.78±4.08%) at 1-Y (p=0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings underscore the promise of tractography in DBS for TRD as a methodology for personalization of therapy, supporting its inclusion in future trials.

Treatment-resistant depression patients with baseline suicidal ideation required more treatments to achieve therapeutic response with ketamine/esketamine

BACKGROUND

There is an urgent need to identify interventions to reduce suicidality. We investigated the antisuicidal effects of intravenous (IV) ketamine and intranasal (IN) esketamine among patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in a historical cohort study.

METHODS

The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology self-report (QIDS-SR) question 12 was used to measure suicidal ideation (SI). Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate associations between the number of treatments to response and baseline SI (yes, Q12 > 0 versus no, Q12 = 0), adjusting for covariates and modified baseline QIDS-SR score. We evaluated associations between the number of treatments to a 50 % reduction in SI score between IV and IN treatment.

RESULTS

Fifty-two adults (62.5 % female, median age 49.1 years) received IV ketamine (71 %, n = 37) or IN esketamine (29 %, n = 15). Eighty-one percent of patients reported SI at baseline. Among those with baseline SI, 60 % had improved SI scores while 38 % did not change, and among those with no SI, 80 % did not change. After adjusting for covariates, the hazard ratios (HR) of response were significantly lower among those with baseline SI (HR = 0.36, 95 % CI, 0.14-0.92, p = 0.03). The number of treatments to achieve a 50 % reduction in SI score did not depend on group (IN esketamine vs. IV ketamine HR = 0.74 [95 % CI, 0.27-2.05]; p = 0.57).

LIMITATIONS

Small sample size and lack of a placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that patients with baseline suicidal ideation require more treatments to achieve a response with ketamine or esketamine. The antisuicidal response seemed similar between IV ketamine and IN esketamine.

The rapid antidepressant effectiveness of repeated dose of intravenous ketamine and intranasal esketamine: A post-hoc analysis of pooled real-world data

INTRODUCTION

Intravenous ketamine (KET-IV) and intranasal esketamine (ESK-NS) are effective in the acute treatment of Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD). Studies comparing KET-IV and ESK-NS concerning their action, safety, and tolerability are currently lacking.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We combined patients' data from two unipolar TRD cohorts that received KET-IV (n = 171) at the Canadian Rapid Treatment Center of Excellence in Toronto, Canada, or ESK-NS (n = 140) at several TRD clinics in Italy. The Quick Inventory for Depression Symptomatology-Self-Report-16/QIDS-SR16 in the KET-IV group and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale/MADRS in the ESK-NS group measured depressive symptoms at baseline (T0) and after the acute treatment phase (T1) (i.e., four infusions of KET-IV and eight administrations of ESK-NS). As different scales were used, the primary outcome was to compare the improvement in depression severity in the two cohorts by measuring effect sizes, response and remission rates. Finally, we compare side effects and discontinuation rates.

RESULTS

At T1, KET-IV and ESK-NS significantly reduced depressive symptoms (respectively: QIDS-SR16 mean reduction = 5.65, p < 0.001; MADRS mean reduction = 11.41, p = 0.025). KET-IV showed larger effect sizes compared to ESK-NS (1.666 vs. 1.244). KET-IV had higher response rates (36 % vs. 25 %; p = 0.042) but not superior remission rates (13 % vs. 12 %; p = 0.845) than ESK-NS at T1. Despite more reported side effects, KET-IV did not cause more discontinuations for adverse events (4.6 % vs. 2.12 %; p = 0.228) than ESK-NS.

CONCLUSION

KET-IV showed a higher short-term antidepressant effect, whereas ESK-NS exhibited lower side effects. Both were generally well tolerated. Future head-to-head studies should consider the long-term efficacy of these treatments.

Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale factors in treatment-resistant depression at onset of treatment: Derivation, replication, and change over time during treatment with esketamine

OBJECTIVE

Derive and confirm factor structure of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and evaluate how the factors evident at baseline change over 4 weeks of esketamine treatment.

METHODS

Two similarly-designed, short-term TRANSFORM trials randomized adults to esketamine or matching placebo nasal spray, each with a newly-initiated oral antidepressant, for 4 weeks (TRANSFORM-1: N = 342 patients; TRANSFORM-2: N = 223 patients). The factor structure of MADRS item scores at baseline was determined by exploratory factor analysis in TRANSFORM-2 and corroborated by confirmatory factor analysis in TRANSFORM-1. Change in MADRS factor scores from baseline (day 1) to the end of the 28-day double-blind treatment phase of TRANSFORM-2 was analyzed using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM).

RESULTS

Three factors were identified based on analysis of MADRS items: Factor 1 labeled affective and anhedonic symptoms (apparent sadness, reported sadness, lassitude, inability to feel), Factor 2 labeled anxiety and vegetative symptoms (inner tension, reduced sleep, reduced appetite, concentration difficulties), and Factor 3 labeled hopelessness (pessimistic thoughts, suicidal thoughts). The three-factor structure observed in TRANSFORM-2 was verified in TRANSFORM-1. Treatment benefit at 24 h with esketamine versus placebo was observed on all 3 factors and continued throughout the 4-week double-blind treatment period.

CONCLUSIONS

A three-factor structure for MADRS appears to generalize to TRD. All three factors improved over 4 weeks of treatment with esketamine nasal spray.

Validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology and Self-Report (QIDS-SR16) for the Brazilian population

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QID-SR16), a self-report instrument based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV) criteria that assesses the severity of depression symptoms, in the Brazilian population.

METHODS

Participants were 4,400 Brazilians over the age of 15 years recruited for an online survey assessing depressive symptoms during the early phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Brazil. The internal consistency, construct validity, and convergent and discriminant validity of the QIDS-SR16 were evaluated.

RESULTS

The model tested was considered an adequate fit to the data (comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.947, Tucker-Lewis index [TLI] = 0.927, and root-mean-square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.051) and its internal consistency was good, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.71 and an average item correlation of 0.23. The correlations between the total QIDS-SR16 score and the total scores of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) instruments (r = 0.67, p < 0.001), the Posttraumatic Symptoms Checklist (PCL-5) (r = 0.61, p < 0.001), and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) (r = 0.60, p < 0.001) indicate good concurrent and convergent validity.

CONCLUSION

The QIDS-SR16 has robust psychometric properties in terms of its internal consistency, construct validity, and convergent and discriminant validity. The Portuguese version of the QIDS-SR16 is an adequate instrument for assessment of depressive symptoms in the context of an online survey.

Executive functions and memory in bipolar disorders I and II: new insights from meta-analytic results

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of executive functions (EF) and episodic memory in bipolar disorder (BD).

METHODS

A literature search was conducted on three electronic databases. Results were combined using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 126 studies (6424 patients with BDI, 702 with BDII, and 8276 controls) were included. BDI was associated with moderate to large impairments across all cognitive functions and BDII with small-to-medium impairments. Small significant differences were identified between BDI and BDII on all cognitive functions except inhibition. The Trail Making Test (TMT) (g = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.67-0.80), Hayling Test (g = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.34-0.81), Digit Span Total (g = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.57-1.01), and Category Fluency (g = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.45-0.72) tasks were most sensitive to cognitive impairment in BDI. The TMT (g = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.50-0.80) and Category Fluency (g = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.37-0.75) were also sensitive to cognitive alterations in patients with BDII.

CONCLUSION

BD type I was associated with more severe and widespread impairments than BDII, which showed smaller impairments on all functions except inhibition, where impairments were larger. Education and (hypo)manic symptoms should be further investigated in future studies due to their possible influence on the neuropsychological profile of BD. The instruments identified in this review should be considered for inclusion in cognitive assessment batteries in BD.

Validity and Responsiveness of the Work Functioning Impairment Scale in Workers With Depression

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the convergent validity and responsiveness of the work functioning impairment scale (WFun) in patients with depression, a major disease causing presenteeism.

METHODS

Baseline testing was performed using WFun, the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS), 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in 37 outpatients with major depression or bipolar disorder who were working. The QIDS and WFun scores were measured several times for responsiveness evaluation.

RESULTS

Regression analyses showed significant positive correlations between baseline WFun and HAM-D and MADRS scores. Changes in WFun and QIDS scores were positively correlated for QIDS scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that WFun is convergently valid and responsive for determining the clinical severity of depression in workers treated as psychiatric outpatients.

Disagreement and factors between symptom on self-report and clinician rating of major depressive disorder: A report of a national survey in China

BACKGROUND

Measurement-based care (MBC) is a popular strategy of clinical management for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). The consistency of self-report and clinical measurements is of importance, but whether individual symptom severity is in agreement for both self-report and clinician rating in MDD has not been comprehensively tested. This study aimed to test whether individual symptom severity of MDD was in agreement between self-report and clinician rating, and to explore factors affecting the agreement.

METHODS

In the National Survey on Symptomatology of Depression (NSSD) of China, 3275 patients with a major depressive episode were evaluated by both self-report and a clinician-rated version of 62 questions.

RESULTS

On average, 59% of all patients reached absolute agreement with their research clinicians. Among all questions, 73% returned with moderate positive strength of correlation, followed by 27% with low positive correlation. In 77% of the total questions, there was a tendency to rate higher in the self-report version compared with the clinician-rated version. After classifying the symptoms by six major domains, it was found that patients and clinicians showed more consistent answers in history and somatic questions (81% and 65% reached agreement), and that there were more differences in mood, energy, and anxiety questions (up to 56% in full agreement). "Outpatient", "high financial status", "poor working condition", and "high education level" were found to be significant positive predictors for patients rating higher than clinicians or patients and clinicians reaching agreement as opposed to clinicians rating higher than patients.

LIMITATIONS

The cross-sectional nature of our study undermines the interpretation of the results across the MDD treatment course.

CONCLUSIONS

It is sufficient to use the self-report version of a questionnaire to screen, monitor, and detect remission for MDD symptoms. Complete assessment of depression severity should take both clinician-rated scales and self-reported measures into consideration. Factors other than source of admission, financial status, working condition, and education level should be further investigated for the discrepancy between self-report and clinician rating.

Toward a very brief quality of life enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire

OBJECTIVE

To develop and evaluate a new brief self-report measure of satisfaction/quality of life in depressed outpatients.

METHODS

Using the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire Short-Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) self-report from Step-1 (n = 2181) of the STAR*D trial, items were selected based on their magnitude of change with treatment and correlation with 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-SR₁₆). Psychometric analyses were conducted. Replication of scale performance was assessed with STAR*D Step-2 data (n = 250).

RESULTS

The 7 items selected ("Mini-Q-LES-Q") rated satisfaction with work, household activities, social and family relations, leisure time activities, daily function and sense of well-being in the past week. This uni-dimensional scale captured 83-94% variance in Q-LES-Q-SF and had acceptable Item Response and Classical Test Theory characteristics. Baseline to exit percent changes in the Mini-Q-LES-Q and the QIDS-SR₁₆ were significantly, modestly related (r = -0.552) (Step-1) and replicated (r = -0.562) (Step-2). The Mini-Q-LES-Q detected the expected improvement in satisfaction/quality of life in acute treatment, yet also identified residual deficits expected in many at acute-phase exit.

LIMITATIONS

Population norms are yet undefined. Concurrent validity with detailed, well-validated scales that assess the seven Quality of Life domains incorporated in the Mini-Q-LES-Q remains unestablished. Sensitivity to symptom changes induced by psychotherapy or somatic therapies or sensitive to the effects of therapies aimed at enhancing quality of life enjoyment and function is unknown.

CONCLUSION

The 7-item Mini-Q-LES-Q self-report measure satisfaction/quality of life has acceptable psychometric properties, reflects change with depressive symptom reduction, and detects residual deficits in this key clinical outcome.

A randomized controlled double-blind clinical trial comparing versus placebo the effect of an edible algal extract (Ulva Lactuca) on the component of depression in healthy volunteers with anhedonia

BACKGROUND

The effects of the seaweed extract were evaluated on the animal model equivalent of depression compared with a control group treated with the carrier (spring water) and a reference group treated with Imipramine and showed significative effect. This clinical trial was intended to confirm in humans the potential efficacy identified in animals. The primary objective was to compare against a placebo the effect of Ulva L.L extract in healthy volunteers whose anhedonia was characterized by a component of depression.

METHODS

Single-centre double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial on parallel arms of two groups of 45 subjects. The study could include men or women aged 18 to 65 years with anhedonia characterized by a Snaith Hamilton Pleasure Scale score (SHAPS) of ≥5 and feeling low morale for at least four weeks characterized by a component of depression evaluated on the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self Report (QIDS-SR). Evaluation criteria: QIDS-SR; Patient Global Improvement Impression (PGII) and Clinical Global Improvement Impression (CGII).

RESULTS

86 subjects were included in the trial: 42 in the placebo group and 44 Ulva group. At D84, QIDS-SR significantly decreased more in the Ulva.L.L. group than in the placebo group (p: 0.0389). This difference is essentially linked to an improvement of the sleep disorders (p: 0.0219), of the psychomotor consequences (p: 0.002) and of the nutrition behaviour (p: 0.0694). 90.1% have the feeling of being improved in the Ulva group vs 72.5% in the placebo group (p: 0.0114) and in parallel 90.9% of the practitioners have the feeling that the subject has improved vs 70.8% (p: 0.0214).

CONCLUSION

This double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial shows that daily intake for three months of a water-soluble extract of Ulva L.L. continues to significantly improve the component of depression of subjects presenting anhedonia compared with a placebo.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial retrospectively registred on ClinicalTrial.gov under ID: NCT03545399 Date: 05/22/2018.

The psychometric properties of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR) and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) in depressed inpatients in China

This study examined the psychometric properties of the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR) and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). The study sample comprised 297 depressed inpatients. The severity of depressive symptoms was assessed with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, the QIDS-SR and the PHQ-9 in all subjects at baseline and a random sample of 50 subjects two weeks later. The internal consistency, convergent validity, factor structure and sensitivity to change of these scales were assessed. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) of the PHQ-9 and QIDS-SR were 0.88 and 0.83, respectively at baseline and 0.91 and 0.87, respectively at exit. Item to total score correlations were higher for the PHQ-9 than those for the QIDS-SR at baseline and exit. Three domains at baseline and two at study exit of the QIDS-SR had a correlation less than 0.65; while only two items at baseline and no item at exit were less than 0.65 for the PHQ-9. Both the PHQ-9 and the QIDS-SR showed uni-dimensional measurement properties at baseline; the two instruments were less sensitive than the HAMD to detect changes of depressive symptoms suggesting low convergent validity. The QIDS-SR and the PHQ-9 have similar and acceptable psychometric properties in most domains as tested in depressed inpatients.

Psychometric properties of the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Effective management of depression is predicated upon reliable assessment. The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS) is a depression severity scale with both self-rated (QIDS-SR16) and clinician-rated (QIDS-C16) versions. Although widely used in research, the psychometric properties of the QIDS16 have not been systematically reviewed. We performed a systematic review of studies of the psychometric properties (factor structure, internal consistency, convergent validity, discriminant validity, test-retest reliability and responsiveness to change) of the QIDS-SR16 or QIDS-C16. Six databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CinAHL, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Findings were summarised, bias assessed and correlations with reference standards were pooled. 37 studies (17,118 participants) were included in the review. Both versions of the QIDS16 were unidimensional. Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.69 to 0.89 for the QIDS-SR16 and 0.65 to 0.87 for the QIDS-C16. The QIDS-SR16 correlated moderately to highly with several depression severity scales. Seven studies were pooled where QIDS-SR16 was correlated with the HRSD-17 (r = 0.76, CI 0.69, 0.81) in patients diagnosed with depression. Four studies examined convergent validity with the QIDS-C16. Four studies examined discriminant validity, for the QIDS-SR16 alone. Eighteen studies had at least one author who was a co-author of the original QIDS16 study. Most studies were conducted in the USA (n = 26). The QIDS-SR16 and the QIDS-C16 are unidimensional rating scales with acceptable internal consistency. To justify the use of the QIDS16 scale in clinical practice, more research is needed on convergent and discriminant validity, and in populations outside the USA.

The Spanish version of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR16): a psychometric analysis in a clinical sample

BACKGROUND

Psychometrically robust and easy-to-administer scales for depressive symptoms are necessary for research and clinical assessment. This is a psychometric study of the Spanish version of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR16) in a clinical sample.

METHOD

One-hundred and seventy-three patients (65% women) with a psychiatric disorder including depressive symptoms were recruited. Such symptoms were assessed by means of the QIDS-SR16 and two interviewer-rated instruments: the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS17) and the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scale. Self-rated measures of health-related quality of life, subjective happiness and perceived social support were also obtained. Dimensionality, internal consistency, construct validity, criterion validity, and responsiveness to change of the QIDS-SR16 were examined.

RESULTS

Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses replicated the original one-factor structure. The Spanish version of the QIDS-SR16 showed good to excellent internal consistency (α=0.88), convergent validity [HDRS17 (r=0.77), CGI-S (r=0.78)], and divergent validity [EuroQol-5D Visual Analogue Scale (r=-0.78), Subjective Happiness Scale (r=-0.72)]. The QIDS-SR16 was excellent in discriminating clinically significant from non-significant depressive symptomatology (area under ROC curve=0.93). It also showed a high sensitivity to treatment-related changes: patients with greater clinical improvement showed a greater decrease in QIDS-SR16 scores (p<0.001).

LIMITATIONS

The study was conducted in a single center, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The Spanish version of the QIDS-SR16 retains the soundness of metric characteristics of the original version which makes the scale an invaluable instrument to assess depressive symptoms.

Guidance on the conversion of the Chinese versions of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (C-QIDS-SR) and the Montgomery-Asberg Scale (C-MADRS) in Chinese patients with major depression

BACKGROUND

The 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR) is a newly introduced screening tool, while the Montgomery-Asberg Scale (MADRS) is commonly used in research and clinical practice in China. Converting the total scores between the two instruments could facilitate the comparison of different studies.

METHODS

This study included 1164 patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). The diagnosis was established using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). The severity of depressive symptoms was assessed with the Chinese versions of MADRS (C-MADRS) and QIDS-SR (C-QIDS-SR) at baseline and 6 weeks later (exit point). Total scores of both scales were converted using Item Response Theory (IRT) analysis.

RESULTS

At baseline, the C-MADRS and C-QIDS-SR were not unifactorial, therefore the conversion between them could not be performed. At exit, the C-MADRS and C-QIDS-SR were unifactorial, meeting the unidimensionality assumption of the IRT approach. Depression severity thresholds for the QIDS-SR are suggested as 6-10 for mild, 11-15 for moderate, 16-20 for severe, 21+ for very severe depression and ≤ 5 for remission (www.ids-qids.org). Based on the results of this study, the corresponding C-MADRS thresholds are 9-17 for mild, 18-24 for moderate, 25-33 for severe, 34+ for very severe depression and ≤ 7 or 8 (7.5) for remission.

CONCLUSIONS

The conversion of C-QIDS-SR and C-MADRS total scores would help researchers understand findings across different studies using these scales.

Comparisons across depression assessment instruments in adolescence and young adulthood: an item response theory study using two linking methods

Item response theory (IRT) methods allow for comparing the utility of instruments based on the range and precision of severity assessed by each instrument. As adolescents and young adults can display rapid increases in depressive symptoms, there is a crucial need to sensitively assess mild elevations of symptoms (as an index of initial risk) and moderate-severe symptoms (as an indicator of treatment disposition). We compare the information assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) to the newly developed Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System - Depression measure (PROMIS-Depression), and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D) scale. The present work is based on data from two fully independent samples of community adolescents and young adults. One sample completed the BDI and CES-D (n = 1,482) and the second sample (n = 673) completed the PROMIS-Depression measure and the CES-D. Using two different IRT-based linking methods, (1) equating based on common items and (2) concurrent calibration methods, analyses revealed that the PROMIS-Depression measure assessed information over the widest range of depressive severity with greatest measurement precision relative to the other instruments. This was true for both the 28-item and 8-item versions of the PROMIS-Depression measure. Findings suggest that the PROMIS-Depression measure assessed depression severity with greatest precision and over the widest severity range of the assessed instruments. However, future work is necessary to demonstrate that the PROMIS-Depression measure has reliable associations with external criteria and is sensitive to treatment response.

The structure of the Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale over the course of treatment for depression

The Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) is a widely used clinician-rated measure of depressive severity. Empirical support for the factor structure of the MADRS is mixed; further, the comparison of MADRS scores within and between patients requires the demonstration of consistent instrument properties. The objective of the current investigation was to evaluate MADRS factor structure as well as MADRS factorial invariance across time and gender. The MADRS was administered to 821 depressed outpatients participating in a large-scale effectiveness study of combined pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy for depression. Treatment outcome did not differ across treatment groups. Factor structure and invariance was evaluated via confirmatory factor analysis. A four-factor model consisting of Sadness, Negative Thoughts, Detachment and Neurovegetative symptoms demonstrated a good fit to the data. This four-factor structure was invariant across time and gender. A hierarchical model, in which these four factors served as indicators of a general depression factor, was also supported. A limitation of the current study is the lack of comprehensive characterization of patient clinical features; results need to be replicated in more severely depressed or treatment refractory patients. Overall, evidence supported the use of the MADRS total score as well as subscales focused on affective, cognitive, social and somatic aspects of depression in male and female outpatients.

Psychometric properties of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-SR) in UK primary care

It is widely believed that severity of depressive disorder should guide treatment selection and many guidelines emphasise this factor. The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QID-SR16) is a self-complete measure of depression severity which includes all DSM-IV criterion symptoms for major depressive disorder. The object of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of the QIDS-SR16 in a primary care sample. Adult primary care patients completed the QIDS-SR16 and were assessed by a psychiatrist (blind to QIDS-SR16) with the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (GRID-HAMD). Internal consistency, homogeneity and convergent and discriminant validity of the QIDS-SR16 were assessed. Severity cut-off scores for QIDS-SR16 were assessed for convergence with HRSD-17 cut-offs. Published methods for converting scores to HRSD-17 were also assessed. Two hundred and eighty-six patients participated: mean age = 49.5 (s.d. = 13.8), 68% female, mean HRSD-17 = 12.6 (s.d. = 7.6). The QIDS-SR16 exhibited acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.86), a robust factor structure indicating one underlying dimension and correlated highly with the HRSD-17 (r = 0.79) but differed significantly in how it categorised the severity of depression relative to the HRSD-17 (Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test p < 0.001). Using published methods to convert QIDS-SR16 scores to HRSD-17 scores did not result in alignment of severity categorisation. In conclusion, psychometric properties of the QIDS-SR16 were found to be strong in terms of internal consistency, factor structure and convergent and discriminant validity. Using conventional scoring and conversion methods the scale was found not to concur with the HRSD-17 in categorising the severity of depressive symptoms.

Is prior course of illness relevant to acute or longer-term outcomes in depressed out-patients? A STAR*D report

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is commonly chronic and/or recurrent. We aimed to determine whether a chronic and/or recurrent course of MDD is associated with acute and longer-term MDD treatment outcomes.

METHOD

This cohort study recruited out-patients aged 18-75 years with non-psychotic MDD from 18 primary and 23 psychiatric care clinics across the USA. Participants were grouped as: chronic (index episode >2 years) and recurrent (n = 398); chronic non-recurrent (n=257); non-chronic recurrent (n=1614); and non-chronic non-recurrent (n = 387). Acute treatment was up to 14 weeks of citalopram (≤ 60 mg/day) with up to 12 months of follow-up treatment. The primary outcomes for this report were remission [16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self-Rated (QIDS-SR(16)) ≤ 5] or response (≥ 50% reduction from baseline in QIDS-SR(16)) and time to first relapse [first QIDS-SR16 by Interactive Voice Response (IVR) ≥ 11].

RESULTS

Most participants (85%) had a chronic and/or recurrent course; 15% had both. Chronic index episode was associated with greater sociodemographic disadvantage. Recurrent course was associated with earlier age of onset and greater family histories of depression and substance abuse. Remission rates were lowest and slowest for those with chronic index episodes. For participants in remission entering follow-up, relapse was most likely for the chronic and recurrent group, and least likely for the non-chronic, non-recurrent group. For participants not in remission when entering follow-up, prior course was unrelated to relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrent MDD is the norm for out-patients, of whom 15% also have a chronic index episode. Chronic and recurrent course of MDD may be useful in predicting acute and long-term MDD treatment outcomes.

Major depressive disorder: gender differences in symptoms, life quality, and sexual function

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the gender differences of symptoms, life quality, functional impairment, and sexual function of patients with moderately severe major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHOD

One hundred forty-six outpatients with MDD were enrolled into this study with specific selection criteria (male, 57; female, 89; mean ± SD age, 38.30 ± 11.69 years). All the patients self-rated the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology--Self-Report (QIDS-SR16) and the Integral Inventory for Depression (IID) for the assessment of symptoms assessment as well as the EuroQol life quality scale (EQ5D) was for the subjective life quality, the Sheehan disability scale was for the functional impairments, and the Arizona Sexual Experience Scale was for sexual function evaluation. All data were analyzed to estimate correlation and gender difference.

RESULTS

Female patients had higher scores of the QIDS-SR16, IID, and Arizona Sexual Experience scales. Significant gender differences of sadness, sleep, appetite, calmness, painful symptoms, and sexual functioning were observed. The female-specific sexual dysfunctions included lower sexual drive, lower sexual arousal, lower horny feelings, lower orgasms, and lower satisfaction of orgasm. The MDD episodes were related to the EuroQol life quality scale and the SDS. Interepisode years were associated with the IID. The Sheehan disability scale was correlated with QIDS-SR16 with statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with MDD showed a correlation between symptoms and functional impairment. Female patients might be more sexually impaired, more vegetative, more depressed, and experiencing more sadness and physical pain.

The use of referenced-EEG (rEEG) in assisting medication selection for the treatment of depression

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of rEEG(®)-guided pharmacotherapy for the treatment of depression in those circumstances where rEEG and STAR*D provided different recommendations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a randomized, single-blind, parallel group, 12 center, US study of rEEG-guided pharmacotherapy vs. the most effective treatment regimens reported in the NIH sponsored STAR*D study. Relatively treatment-resistant subjects ≥18 years who failed one or more antidepressants were required to have a QIDS-16-SR score ≥13 and a MADRS score ≥26 at baseline. All subjects underwent a washout of all current medications (with some protocol-specified exceptions) for at least five half-lives before receiving a QEEG and rEEG report. Subjects randomized to rEEG were assigned a regimen based on the rEEG report. Control subjects who had failed only SSRI's in their current episode were randomized to receive venlafaxine XR. Control subjects who had failed antidepressants from ≥2 classes of antidepressants were randomized to receive a regimen from Steps 2-4 of the STAR*D study. Treatment lasted 12 weeks. The primary outcome measures were change from baseline for self-rated QIDS-SR16 and Q-LES-Q-SF.

RESULTS

A total of 114 subjects were randomized and 89 subjects were evaluable. rEEG-guided pharmacotherapy exhibited significantly greater improvement for both primary endpoints, QIDS-SR16 (-6.8 vs. -4.5, p<0.0002) and Q-LES-Q-SF (18.0 vs. 8.9, p<0.0002) compared to control, respectively, as well as statistical superiority in 9 out of 12 secondary endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

These results warrant additional studies to determine the role of rEEG-guided psychopharmacology in the treatment of depression. If these results were confirmed, rEEG-guided pharmacotherapy would represent an easy, relatively inexpensive, predictive, objective office procedure that builds upon clinical judgment to guide antidepressant medication choice.

Diagnostic utility of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-C16 and QIDS-SR16) in the elderly

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate psychometric properties and comparability ability of the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) vs. the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-rated (QIDS-C(16)) and Self-report (QIDS-SR(16)) scales to detect a current major depressive episode in the elderly.

METHOD

Community and clinic subjects (age >or=60 years) were administered the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) for DSM-IV and three depression scales randomly. Statistics included classical test and Samejima item response theories, factor analyzes, and receiver operating characteristic methods.

RESULTS

In 229 elderly patients (mean age = 73 years, 39% male, 54% current depression), all three scales were unidimensional and with nearly equal Cronbach alpha reliability (0.85-0.89). Each scale discriminated persons with major depression from the non-depressed, but the QIDS-C(16) was slightly more accurate.

CONCLUSION

All three tests are valid for detecting geriatric major depression with the QIDS-C(16) being slightly better. Self-rated QIDS-SR(16) is recommended as a screening tool as it is least expensive and least time consuming.

The value of item response theory in clinical assessment: a review

Item response theory (IRT) and related latent variable models represent modern psychometric theory, the successor to classical test theory in psychological assessment. Although IRT has become prevalent in the measurement of ability and achievement, its contributions to clinical domains have been less extensive. Applications of IRT to clinical assessment are reviewed to appraise its current and potential value. Benefits of IRT include comprehensive analyses and reduction of measurement error, creation of computer adaptive tests, meaningful scaling of latent variables, objective calibration and equating, evaluation of test and item bias, greater accuracy in the assessment of change due to therapeutic intervention, and evaluation of model and person fit. The theory may soon reinvent the manner in which tests are selected, developed, and scored. Although challenges remain to the widespread implementation of IRT, its application to clinical assessment holds great promise. Recommendations for research, test development, and clinical practice are provided.

A Comparison of the QIDS-C16, QIDS-SR16, and the MADRS in an Adult Outpatient Clinical Sample

BACKGROUND

This study compared the 16-item Clinician and Self-Report versions of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-C16 and QIDS-SR16) and the 10-item Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in adult outpatients. The comparison was based on psychometric features and their performance in identifying those in a major depressive episode as defined by the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition.

METHODS

Of 278 consecutive outpatients, 181 were depressed. Classical test theory, factor analysis, and item response theory were used to evaluate the psychometric features and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses.

RESULTS

All three measures were unidimensional. All had acceptable reliability (coefficient a=.87 for MADRS10, .82 for QIDS-C16, and .80 for QIDS-SR16). Test information function was higher for the MADRS (ie, it was most sensitive to individual differences in levels of depression). The MADRS and QIDS-C16 slightly but consistently outperformed the QIDS-SR16 in differentiating between depressed versus nondepressed patients.

CONCLUSION

All three measures have satisfactory psychometric properties and are valid screening tools for a major depressive episode.

A pooled MADRS/IDS cross-correlation analysis: clinician and patient self-report assessment of improvement in core depressive symptoms with adjunctive aripiprazole

BACKGROUND

These analyses aimed to examine the pattern of improvement in depression symptoms with adjunctive aripiprazole.

METHODS

Data were pooled (724 subjects: n = 356 placebo, n = 368 aripiprazole) from 2 double-blind, 6-week aripiprazole studies. Pearson correlation coefficients (r) were calculated between changes on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) line items and selected Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS) line items using last observation carried forward. The magnitude of change was expressed as a between-group effect size (ES).

RESULTS

At end point, adjunctive aripiprazole demonstrated significant improvement versus antidepressant therapy alone in 8 of the 10 MADRS items (MADRS total score Cohen effect size = 0.37) and 12 of the 30 IDS items (IDS total score Cohen ES = 0.18). Analysis of correlation data identified 5 MADRS items assessing mood, lassitude, inability to feel, self-worth, and suicidal thoughts that correlated with similar IDS items; these showed a similar pattern of rapid, sustained response to adjunctive aripiprazole and a similar ES. Other symptoms associated with depression (tension associated with feeling anxious, irritability, and lack of concentration) did not show statistically significant changes on either scale at end point. The IDS identified an additional 3 important depression-related symptoms (diminished libido, view of self, and interpersonal sensitivity) that showed significant rapid and sustained improvement with adjunctive aripiprazole.

CONCLUSIONS

This cross-correlation analysis confirmed that improvement in core depressive symptoms with adjunctive aripiprazole was identified by both clinicians and patients. Clinically, these changes were maintained during the study. Theoretically, these findings lead to important questions regarding neurochemical changes produced by aripiprazole when used in combination with antidepressants.

Screening for major depression in private practice

BACKGROUND

Several studies have compared the 16-item self-report version of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-SR16) with other depression scales, but none has used a sample of patients from a single, large, private psychiatric practice. This study compared ratings from 175 outpatients on the QIDS-SR16, the 17-item Carroll Depression Rating Scale (CDRS-SR17, a self-report modification of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression), and the thirteen depression items from the Symptom Check List-90 (SCL-D13). The Mini version of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (MiniSCID) served as a "gold standard" for assessing depression.

METHODS

Basic item and scale statistics were obtained using classical test theory. Dimensionalities were obtained using factor analysis. Test information functions obtained from the Samejima item response theory model provided additional reliability-like results. This model was also used to compare patients classified as depressed versus nondepressed on the basis of the MiniSCID. Additional validity information was assessed comparing: (a) ANOVA effect sizes, (b) receiver operating characteristic curves, (c) univariate logistic regression, (d) the MANOVA, and (e) multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

The QIDS-SR16 was found to be related most strongly to the MiniSCID diagnoses. The SCL-D13, however, was the most reliable of the three scales (alpha=0.91). It was the most sensitive to differences in depression for all but the most depressed patients, for whom the CDRS-SR17 was the most sensitive. The QIDS-SR16 was the most valid based on four different analyses (effect size/ANOVA, univariate logistic regression/ROC analysis, MANOVA, and multivariate logistic regression), although only slightly more so. The QIDS-SR16 was found to be unidimensional; its items cover only the nine diagnostic symptom domains used to characterize a DSM-IV-TR major depressive episode.

CONCLUSIONS

All three measures performed satisfactorily, but there are clearly defined advantages to using the QIDS-SR16, as, by its very design, it assesses the core symptoms of depression and does not require a clinician.

The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-report: a psychometric evaluation in patients with asthma and major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

Despite the high co-occurrence between depression and asthma, few studies have addressed methods assessing the severity of depressive symptoms among patients with asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-report (QIDS-SR16), a 16-item measure of depressive symptom severity, in patients with asthma.

METHODS

The psychometric properties of the QIDS-SR16 were compared at treatment exit with those of the 30-item self-report Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-SR30) and the 17-item clinician-rated Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD17) in 73 outpatients with asthma who were treated with citalopram or placebo for nonpsychotic major depressive disorder. Correlations between the depression rating scales and the Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire were calculated.

RESULTS

Internal consistency at exit was strong for the QIDS-SR16 (Cronbach alpha values are .87 for the QIDS-SR16, .95 for the IDS-SR30, and .87 for the HRSD17). The QIDS-SR16 and HRSD17 total scores were highly correlated (r = 0.85), as were the QIDS-SR16 and IDS-SR30 total scores (r = 0.97). All QIDS-SR16 item total score correlations were significant (P < .001). The QIDS-SR16, IDS-SR30, and HRSD17 showed comparable sensitivity to symptom change, indicating high concurrent validity for all 3 scales. The total QIDS-SR16 baseline to exit change score demonstrated a significant negative correlation (r = -0.49, P < .001) with the Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire. Thus, greater depressive symptom severity was associated with lower asthma-related quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

The QIDS-SR16 showed good reliability and impressive construct validity. Strong psychometric properties of this brief self-report format and its sensitivity to treatment change suggest that the QIDS-SR16 is a valuable clinical tool.

Introduction of vagus nerve stimulation into a maintenance electroconvulsive therapy regimen: a case study and cost analysis

OBJECTIVE

This case report describes the outcome of a patient implanted with the vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) device while receiving maintenance electroconvulsive treatment (M-ECT) and compares the costs of treatment options for treatment-resistant depression.

METHODS

The patient, a male, aged 47 years with bipolar I disorder, treatment-resistant depression, and a 13-year history of depressions, was receiving M-ECT at 2-week intervals as well as antidepressant medications when he was implanted with the VNS device. His depression was assessed with the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale. The cost analysis of treatment modalities placed M-ECT at $800 to $1000 per treatment and VNS at approximately $3900 annually (surgery, device, and office visits, approximately $31,300, was prorated over 8 years).

RESULTS

Antidepressants and other medications were used in combination and were gradually changed while the patient was receiving electroconvulsive therapy. The patient improved with VNS and was able to discontinue M-ECT. His Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale scores had fluctuated between 2 and 56, but, after VNS, the scores decreased to a level consistent with remission and have remained at those levels. The patient reported feeling as well as he had felt at any time he could remember, began an exercise program, and lost 30 lbs. During the 10 months before implantation, 14 electroconvulsive therapy treatments cost $11,200 to $14,000. For 10 months after implantation, 7 M-ECT treatments ($5600-$7000) plus prorated VNS ($3250) equaled $8850 to $10,250, $2350 to $3750 less than before implantation.

CONCLUSIONS

This patient improved with VNS and was able to discontinue M-ECT. Introducing VNS effected a cost savings over M-ECT.

Item Response Analysis of the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology

BACKGROUND: Both the clinician (IDS-C(30)) and self-report (IDS-SR(30)) versions of the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology have acceptable psychiatric properties and have been used in various clinical studies. These two scales, however, have not been compared using item response theory (IRT) methods to determine whether the standard scoring methods are optimal. METHODS: Data were derived from 428 adult public sector outpatients with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder. The IDS-C(30) and IDS-SR(30) were compared using Samejima's graded response model. RESULTS: A model was constructed jointly fitting the IDS-C(30) and IDS-SR(30). An improvement in scale performance was obtained by grouping selected items into domains (specifically sleep, psychomotor, and appetite/weight domains) analogous to the standard scoring of the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology. CONCLUSIONS: For the IDS-C(30) and IDS-SR(30), standard scoring (ie, computing total score using all individual items) provides simplicity, comparability to published data, and a basis for clinical decision making. The revised scoring method, however, improves the utility of both scales when comparing groups as it provides explicit tests of item parameters.