Rush A John, Trivedi Madhukar H, Carmody Thomas J, Ibrahim Hisham M, Markowitz John C, Keitner Gabor I, Kornstein Susan G, Arnow Bruce, Klein Daniel N, Manber Rachel, Dunner David L, Gelenberg Alan J, Kocsis James H, Nemeroff Charles B, Fawcett Jan, Thase Michael E, Russell James M, Jody Darlene N, Borian Frances E, Keller Martin B
Department of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390-9086, USA.
Neuropsychopharmacology. 2005 Feb;30(2):405-16. doi: 10.1038/sj.npp.1300614.
This study evaluated and compared the performance of three self-report measures: (1) 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (IDS-SR30); (2) 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR16); and (3) Patient Global Impression-Improvement (PGI-I) in assessing clinical outcomes in depressed patients during a 12-week, acute phase, randomized, controlled trial comparing nefazodone, cognitive-behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy (CBASP), and the combination in the treatment of chronic depression. The IDS-SR30, QIDS-SR16, PGI-I, and the 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS24) ratings were collected at baseline and at weeks 1-4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. Response was defined a priori as a > or =50% reduction in baseline total score for the IDS-SR30 or for the QIDS-SR16 or as a PGI-I score of 1 or 2 at exit. Overall response rates (LOCF) to nefazodone were 41% (IDS-SR30), 45% (QIDS-SR16), 53% (PCI-I), and 47% (HDRS17). For CBASP, response rates were 41% (IDS-SR30), 45% (QIDS-SR16), 48% (PGI-I), and 46% (HDRS17). For the combination, response rates were 68% (IDS-SR30 and QIDS-SR16), 73% (PGI-I), and 76% (HDRS17). Similarly, remission rates were comparable for nefazodone (IDS-SR30=32%, QIDS-SR16=28%, PGI-I=22%, HDRS17=30%), for CBASP (IDS-SR30=32%, QIDS-SR16=30%, PGI-I=21%, HDRS17=32%), and for the combination (IDS-SR30=52%, QIDS-SR16=50%, PGI-I=25%, HDRS17=49%). Both the IDS-SR30 and QIDS-SR16 closely mirrored and confirmed findings based on the HDRS24. These findings raise the possibility that these two self-reports could provide cost- and time-efficient substitutes for clinician ratings in treatment trials of outpatients with nonpsychotic MDD without cognitive impairment. Global patient ratings such as the PGI-I, as opposed to specific item-based ratings, provide less valid findings.
(1)30项抑郁症状自评量表(IDS-SR30);(2)16项快速抑郁症状自评量表(QIDS-SR16);以及(3)患者总体印象改善量表(PGI-I),这些量表用于在一项为期12周的急性期随机对照试验中评估抑郁症患者的临床结局,该试验比较了奈法唑酮、认知行为分析系统心理治疗(CBASP)以及两者联合用于治疗慢性抑郁症的效果。在基线以及第1 - 4周、6周、8周、10周和12周时收集IDS-SR30、QIDS-SR16、PGI-I以及24项汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HDRS24)的评分。预先定义的缓解标准为:IDS-SR30或QIDS-SR16的基线总分降低≥50%,或在治疗结束时PGI-I评分为1或2。奈法唑酮的总体缓解率(末次观察结转)为:41%(IDS-SR30)、45%(QIDS-SR16)、53%(PGI-I)和47%(HDRS17)。对于CBASP,缓解率分别为:41%(IDS-SR30)、45%(QIDS-SR16)、48%(PGI-I)和46%(HDRS17)。对于联合治疗,缓解率分别为:68%(IDS-SR30和QIDS-SR成)、73%(PGI-I)和76%(HDRS17)。同样,奈法唑酮的缓解率为(IDS-SR30 = 32%,QIDS-SR16 = 28%,PGI-I = 22%,HDRS17 = 30%),CBASP的缓解率为(IDS-SR30 = 32%,QIDS-SR16 = 30%,PGI-I = 21%,HDRS17 = 32%),联合治疗的缓解率为(IDS-SR30 = 52%,QIDS-SR16 = 50%,PGI-I = 25%,HDRS17 = 49%)。IDS-SR30和QIDS-SR16都紧密反映并证实了基于HDRS24的研究结果。这些发现增加了一种可能性,即对于无认知障碍的非精神病性重度抑郁症门诊患者的治疗试验,这两种自我报告量表可以为临床医生评分提供经济且省时的替代方法。与基于特定条目的评分不同,像PGI-I这样的患者总体评分提供的有效结果较少。