The clinical global impression scale and the influence of patient or staff perspective on outcome

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Since its first publication, the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) has become one of the most widely used assessment instruments in psychiatry. Although some conflicting data has been presented, studies investigating the CGI's validity have only rarely been conducted so far. It is unclear whether the improvement index CGI-I or a difference score of the severity index CGI-S_difis more valid in depicting clinical change. The current study examined the validity of these two measures and investigated whether therapists' CGI ratings correspond to the view the patients themselves have on their condition.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Thirty-one inpatients of a German psychotherapeutic hospital suffering from a major depressive disorder (age M = 45.3, SD = 17.2; 58.1% women) participated. Patients filled in the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). CGI-S and CGI-I were rated from three perspectives: the treating therapist (THER), the team of therapists involved in the patient's treatment (TEAM), and the patient (PAT). BDI and CGI-S were filled in at admission and discharge, CGI-I at discharge only. Data was analysed using effect sizes, Spearman's <it>ρ </it>and intra-class correlations (ICC).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Effect sizes between CGI-I and CGI-S _difratings were large for all three perspectives with substantially higher change scores on CGI-I than on CGI-S _dif. BDI_difcorrelated moderately with PAT ratings, but did not correlate significantly with TEAM or THER ratings. Congruence between CGI-ratings from the three perspectives was low for CGI-S _dif(ICC = .37; Confidence Interval [CI] .15 to .59; <it>F</it>_30,60= 2.77, <it>p </it>< .001; mean <it>ρ </it>= 0.36) and moderate for CGI-I (ICC = .65 (CI .47 to .80; <it>F</it>_30,60= 6.61, <it>p </it>< .001; mean <it>ρ </it>= 0.59).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Results do not suggest a definite recommendation for whether CGI-I or CGI-S _difshould be used since no strong evidence for the validity of neither of them could be found. As congruence between CGI ratings from patients' and staff's perspective was not convincing it cannot be assumed that CGI THER or TEAM ratings fully represent the view of the patient on the severity of his impairment. Thus, we advocate for the incorporation of multiple self- and clinician-reported scales into the design of clinical trials in addition to CGI in order to gain further insight into CGI's relation to the patients' perspective.</p

Depression and anxiety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: prevalence rates based on a comparison of the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) and the hospital, Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>While it is recognised that depression is prevalent in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), recent studies have also highlighted significant levels of anxiety in RA patients. This study compared two commonly used scales, the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), in relation to their measurement range and cut points to consider the relative prevalence of both constructs, and if prevalence rates may be due to scale-specific case definition.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients meeting the criteria for RA were recruited in Leeds, UK and Sydney, Australia and asked to complete a survey that included both scales. The data was analysed using the Rasch measurement model.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 169 RA patients were assessed, with a repeat subsample, resulting in 323 cases for analysis. Both scales met Rasch model expectations. Using the 'possible+probable' cut point from the HADS, 58.3% had neither anxiety nor depression; 13.5% had anxiety only; 6.4% depression only and 21.8% had both 'possible+probable' anxiety and depression. Cut points for depression were comparable across the two scales while a lower cut point for anxiety in the DASS was required to equate prevalence.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study provides further support for high prevalence of depression and anxiety in RA. It also shows that while these two scales provide a good indication of possible depression and anxiety, the estimates of prevalence so derived could vary, particularly for anxiety. These findings are discussed in terms of comparisons across studies and selection of scales for clinical use.</p

General distress and symptoms of anxiety and depression: A factor analysis in two cohorts of dialysis patients

Objective: Depression and anxiety often coexist in patients with end -stage -kidney disease. Recently, studies showed that a composite ?general distress score ? which combines depression and anxiety symptoms provides a good fit in dialysis and oncology patients. We aim to investigate if the three most frequently used self -report questionnaires to measure depression and anxiety in dialysis patients are sufficiently unidimensional to warrant the use of such a general distress score in two cohorts of dialysis patients. Methods: This study includes two prospective observational cohorts of dialysis patients (total n = 749) which measured depression and anxiety using Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Confirmatory factor analyses was used to investigate both a strictly unidimensional model and a multidimensional bifactor model that includes a general distress, depression and anxiety factor. The comparative fit index (CFI) and The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) were used as model fit indices. Results: Factor analysis did not show a good fit for a strictly unidimensional general distress factor for both the BDI/BAI and HADS (CFI 0.690 and 0.699, RMSEA 0.079 and 0.125 respectively). The multidimensional model performed better with a moderate fit for the BDI/BAI and HADS (CFI 0.873 and 0.839, RMSEA 0.052 and 0.102). Conclusions: This data shows that the BDI/BAI and HADS are insufficiently unidimensional to warrant the use of a general distress score in dialysis patients without also investigating anxiety and depression separately. Future research is needed whether the use of a general distress score might be beneficial to identify patients in need of additional (psychological) support.Clinical epidemiolog

Short-Form 12 or Short-Form 36 to measure quality-of-life changes in dialysis patients?

Clinical epidemiolog

The Stability of Type D Personality in Dialysis Patients

Type D personality has been identified as an independent risk factor for survival in cardiovascular disease (CVD) patients. As CVD is present in about 50% of dialysis patients, it is of clinical interest to assess the prevalence of type D personality, the association with depressive and anxiety symptoms, and stability of type D personality in dialysis patients. Data was used from two consecutive measurements of the DIVERS study, a prospective cohort study among chronic dialysis patients in the Netherlands. Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and the Type D Scale-14 (DS14) were used to assess depressive and anxiety symptoms and type D personality, respectively. The association of type D personality was assessed with analysis of variance F test. Stability of type D personality, depressive, and anxiety symptoms were determined by calculating Cohen's κ, and by determining the positive agreement. In total, 349 patients were included of which 249 patients had two measurement points. The prevalence of type D personality was 21% and type D personality was associated with depressive and anxiety symptoms (P < 0.01). Over a 6-month period, Cohen's κ was 0.52, 0.56, and 0.61 for type D personality, depressive, and anxiety symptoms, respectively. Sixty-one, 73, and 73% had a stable type-D personality, depressive, and anxiety symptoms, respectively. The presence of type D personality varies over time in dialysis patients. Therefore, type D personality is possibly more a state instead of a trait phenomeno

Differences in the association of inflammation and tryptophan with depressive symptoms between white and non-white chronic dialysis patients

Objective: Possibly, different biochemical parameters are involved in the development of depressive symptoms in white and non-white dialysis patients. We examined whether the association between inflammation and depressive symptoms and between tryptophan and depressive symptoms differs between white and non-white dialysis patients and whether the association between inflammation and depressive symptoms is mediated by tryptophan degradation along the kynurenine pathway in both groups. Method: Depressive symptoms were measured with the BDI-II. HsCRP, IL-1 beta, IL-6, IL-10, and TNF alpha and tryptophan and its degradation products kynurenine and 3-hydroxykynurenine were measured in 270 white and 220 non-white patients. Results: The presence of depressive symptoms was significantly higher in non-white patients (51%) than in white patients (37%) (P <0.01). Among white patients, HsCRP was significantly associated with depressive symptoms (beta = 0.6 (95% CI: 0.1-1.2)). Among non-white patients, significant associations with depressive symptoms were found for both HsCRP (beta = 1.0 (95% CI: 0.1-2.0)) and IL-6 (beta = 2.6 (95% CI: 0.8-4.4)). Tryptophan levels were only significantly associated with depressive symptoms in non-white patients (beta = -0.3 (95% CI: -0.4--0.1)). Tryptophan degradation along the kynurenine pathway did not mediate the association between inflammatory markers and depressive symptoms in either group. Conclusion: Our results indicate that for white and non-white dialysis patients different biochemical parameters are associated with depressive symptoms

The role of tryptophan degradation in the association between inflammatory markers and depressive symptoms in chronic dialysis patients

Background: Among chronic dialysis patients, associations have been found between inflammatory markers and depressive symptoms. In this population, no studies have examined the mechanism linking the association between inflammatory markers and depressive symptoms. We examined whether the association between inflammatory markers and depressive symptoms is mediated by tryptophan (TRP) degradation along the kynurenine (KYN) pathway. Methods: The data are part of an observational, prospective cohort study in five urban dialysis centres in The Netherlands. Depressive symptoms were determined with the Beck Depression Inventory. Peripheral blood was collected before dialysis to measure inflammatory markers [high sensitivity C-reactive protein (HsCRP), interleukin (IL)-1 beta, IL-6, IL-10 and tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha)], TRP, KYN and 3-hydroxykynurenine. The KYN/TRP ratio was used as a measure of TRP degradation. The association between inflammatory markers and depressive symptoms was determined using linear regression analysis and adjusted for the KYN/TRP ratio. Results: In total, 490 chronic dialysis patients were included. HsCRP [beta= 3.8; confidence interval (CI): 1.0-6.6], IL-6 (beta= 9.1; CI: 4.0-14.1) and TNF-alpha (beta= 1.3; CI: 0.9-1.7) were associated with the KYN/TRP ratio. We found significant associations between HsCRP (beta= 0.8; CI: 0.3-1.3) and IL-6 (beta= 1.2; CI: 0.3-2.2) levels and depressive symptoms. However, this association was not attenuated after adjustment for the KYN/TRP ratio. Also, no significant associations were found between the KYN/TRP ratio and depressive symptoms. Conclusion: The association between inflammatory markers and depressive symptoms in chronic dialysis patients was not mediated by TRP degradation along the KYN pathway

Longitudinal Associations Between Inflammation and Depressive Symptoms in Chronic Dialysis Patients

Objective: Patients undergoing chronic dialysis often display sustained elevations of inflammation markers and also have a high prevalence of depressive symptoms. Although multiple studies demonstrated cross-sectional associations between inflammation markers and depressive symptoms in this patient group, longitudinal associations have not been examined. We therefore investigated whether longitudinal associations exist between inflammation markers and depressive symptoms in chronic dialysis patients. Methods: Data of three consecutive measurements of an observational, prospective cohort study among chronic dialysis patients were used. At baseline, 6-month, and 12-month follow-up, patients completed the Beck Depression Inventory, and inflammation markers (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein [HsCRP], interleukin (IL)-1 beta, IL-6, IL-10, and tumor necrosis factor a) were measured. We examined cross-sectional associations between inflammation markers and depressive symptoms using linear regression models. The longitudinal association between inflammation and depressive symptoms was assessed using a linear mixed model analyses. Results: A total of 513 patients were included. Cross-sectional associations were found between HsCRP and depressive symptoms at baseline (beta = 0.9, confidence interval [CI] = 0.4-1.4) and 6-month follow-up (beta = 1.1, CI = 0.3-2.0), and between IL-1 beta and depressive symptoms at 6-month follow-up (beta = 1.3, CI = 0.8-1.8) and 12-month follow-up (beta = 1.2, CI = 0.4-1.9). Inflammation makers (HsCRP, IL-6, IL-1 beta, IL-10, and tumor necrosis factor a) at baseline were not associated with depressive symptoms at follow-up and vice versa. Conclusions: We confirmed the presence of cross-sectional associations between inflammation markers and depressive symptoms in chronic dialysis patients, but with our longitudinal data, we found no longitudinal associations. This supports an associative instead of a causal relationship between inflammation and depressive symptoms