Psychometric evaluation of a Patient-Rated Most Troubling Symptom Scale for Depression: findings from a secondary analysis of a clinical trial.

The objective of this study was to assess the reliability and validity of the presence and severity of eight symptoms rated on the Patient-Rated Troubling Symptoms for Depression (PaRTS-D) instrument used in a risperidone augmentation trial. PaRTS-D total score (sum of four most severe symptoms) and global total score (sum of all eight symptoms) were determined weekly. Clinician-rated and patient-rated instruments were completed at selected time points. Statistical tests of reliability and validity were performed. The frequency of symptoms rated as one of the four most troubling were sadness, 73.5%; trouble concentrating, 70.9%; reduced involvement, 61.9%; tense/uptight, 56.0%; reduced sleep, 52.2%; negative thoughts, 42.9%; inability to feel emotion, 26.5%; and reduced appetite, 13.1%. Evidence of two factors (somatic-related and depression-related) was observed in the exploratory factor analysis. Baseline PaRTS-D total score correlated with the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire and the Sheehan Disability Scale. PaRTS-D global total score showed high internal consistency reliability. PaRTS-D total score and global total score distinguished between patients with high and low-Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression Scores and were responsive to Patient Global Improvement Scale changes. The PaRTS-D total score minimal important difference was 4-5 points. In conclusion, PaRTS-D may be useful in symptom presence and severity assessments from the patient's perspective and as an adjunctive to other instruments in major depressive disorder diagnosis and response to treatment.

Patient-rated troubling symptoms of depression instrument results correlate with traditional clinician- and patient-rated measures: a secondary analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The Patient-Rated Troubling Symptoms of Depression (PaRTS-D) instrument assesses the presence and troublesomeness of 8 commonly reported depression-related symptoms from the patient's perspective. A post hoc analysis of a double-blind, randomized risperidone augmentation to antidepressant therapy trial in patients with major depressive disorder explored the relationship between the PaRTS-D instrument and other clinician- and patient-rating scales. METHODS: Patients completed the PaRTS-D; the Patient Global Improvement Scale (PGIS), Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q), and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), while clinicians completed the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17), and the Clinical Global Impressions of Severity (CGI-S) at baseline and at pre-determined study weeks. RESULTS: In the PaRTS-D instrument, the four most frequently reported and troublesome symptoms were sadness (73.5%, severity 6.8), trouble concentrating (70.9%, 7.3), reduced involvement in pleasurable activities (61.9%, 7.3), and being tense or uptight (56.0%, 6.7). The improvement in PaRTS-D total score was significantly greater in risperidone-augmented compared with placebo-augmented patients at week 4 (p=0.034) and week 6 (p=0.007). Pearson correlations between the PaRTS-D scores and the measures of HRSD-17, CGI-S, PGIS, Q-LES-Q, and SDS were significant at both baseline and at week 6 LOCF (p<0.001 for each comparison). LIMITATIONS: Results are from a post hoc analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Significant correlations were observed between the PaRTS-D and other clinician- and patient-rated measures, with PaRTS-D being sensitive to the effects of treatment. These findings suggest that the PaRTS-D instrument is a reliable scale to assess antidepressant activity as experienced by the patients.

Risperidone for treatment-refractory major depressive disorder: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder has high prevalence, morbidity, and mortality. Inadequate results with antidepressants have prompts addition of a nonstandard treatment (augmentation therapy). OBJECTIVE: To assess whether augmentation therapy with risperidone reduces symptoms and increases response to antidepressant therapy and remission of depression in adults. DESIGN: Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial conducted from 19 October 2004 to 17 November 2005. SETTING: 75 primary care and psychiatric centers. PATIENTS: 274 outpatient adults with major depressive disorder that was suboptimally responsive to antidepressant therapy. INTERVENTION: After a 4-week run-in period to ensure insufficient response to standard antidepressants, patients were randomly assigned to receive risperidone, 1 mg/d, or placebo for 6 weeks. After 4 weeks, the dosage of risperidone was increased to 2 mg/d in some cases. MEASUREMENTS: Symptoms were measured by using the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17). Other outcomes were response to therapy, remission of depression, and various clinician- and patient-rated assessments. RESULTS: Of the intention-to-treat population (268 patients), 81% (111 of 137) who received risperidone and 87.8% (115 of 131) who received placebo completed 6 weeks of double-blind treatment. Mean (+/-SE) HRSD-17 scores improved more in the risperidone augmentation group than in the placebo group (13.4 +/- 0.54 vs. 16.2 +/- 0.53; difference, -2.8 +/- 0.72 [95% CI, -4.2 to -1.4]; P <0.001). More risperidone recipients than placebo recipients experienced remission of depression (24.5% [26 of 106] vs. 10.7% [12 of 112]; P = 0.004) and had a response (46.2% [49 of 106] vs. 29.5% [33 of 112]; P = 0.004). Headache (8.8% of risperidone recipients vs. 14.5% of placebo recipients), somnolence (5.1% vs. 1.5%), and dry mouth (5.1% vs. 0.8%) were the most frequently reported adverse events. LIMITATIONS: Patients were receiving many different antidepressants, and the duration of augmentation therapy was limited. CONCLUSION: Risperidone augmentation produced a statistically significant mean reduction in depression symptoms, substantially increased remission and response, and improved other patient- and clinician-rated measures. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00095134.

Validation of the Investigator's Assessment Questionnaire, a new clinical tool for relative assessment of response to antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder.

The success of long-term therapy in schizophrenia is contingent upon real-world effectiveness or improvements in several domains, including efficacy, safety and tolerability. This report describes the Investigator's Assessment Questionnaire (IAQ), a new 10-item instrument designed to assess relative effectiveness (efficacy, safety and tolerability) of antipsychotic medications in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. To measure content validity, 300 psychiatrists rated the importance of the IAQ items. Efficacy (i.e., positive and negative symptoms) was considered most important, but importance scores relative to the mean ranged only from 0.87 to 1.18, suggesting similar importance of the items. Cronbach's coefficient alpha values showed that the items were internally consistent. Factor analyses indicated that all IAQ items belong to a single domain. Data from the US Broad Effectiveness Trial of Aripiprazole were used for construct validation. Total IAQ score correlated significantly with time to treatment discontinuation (r=-0.50), Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) score (r=0.76) and medication preference of patients (r=0.71) or caregivers (r=0.70). A one-unit decrease in IAQ score corresponded to an additional 1.35 days in the study and a decrease in CGI-I of 0.21 units. These results provide initial validation of the IAQ as a tool for evaluating antipsychotic response in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

Aripiprazole, an antipsychotic with a novel mechanism of action, and risperidone vs placebo in patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder.

BACKGROUND: Aripiprazole is a dopamine D2 receptor partial agonist with partial agonist activity at serotonin 5HT1A receptors and antagonist activity at 5HT2A receptors. This multicenter trial examined the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of aripiprazole in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHODS: In this 4-week double-blind study, 404 patients were randomized to 20 mg/d (n = 101) or 30 mg/d (n = 101) of aripiprazole, placebo (n = 103), or 6 mg/d of risperidone (n = 99). Efficacy assessments included Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores and Clinical Global Impression scores. Safety and tolerability evaluations included extrapyramidal symptoms and effects on weight, prolactin, and corrected QT (QTc) interval. RESULTS: Aripiprazole (20 and 30 mg/d) and risperidone (6 mg/d) were significantly better than placebo on all efficacy measures. Separation from placebo occurred at week 1 for PANSS total and positive scores with aripiprazole and risperidone and for PANSS negative scores with aripiprazole. There were no significant differences between aripiprazole and placebo in mean change from baseline in the extrapyramidal symptom rating scales. Mean prolactin levels decreased with aripiprazole but significantly increased 5-fold with risperidone. Mean change in QTc interval did not differ significantly from placebo with any active treatment group. Aripiprazole and risperidone groups showed a similar low incidence of clinically significant weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: Aripiprazole is effective, safe, and well tolerated for the positive and negative symptoms in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. It is the first non-D2 receptor antagonist with clear antipsychotic effects and represents a novel treatment development for psychotic disorders.