Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

The generalizability of antidepressant efficacy trials to routine psychiatric out-patient practice

  • R. van der Lem (a1), N. J. A. van der Wee (a1) (a2), T. van Veen (a1) and F. G. Zitman (a1)
Abstract
Background

Generalizability of antidepressant efficacy trials (AETs) to daily practice is questioned because of their very stringent patient selection. This study aims to determine eligibility for AETs of out-patients suffering from major depression in a routine out-patient setting and investigates influence of eligibility on treatment outcome.

Method

Data collection (n=1653) was performed through routine outcome monitoring by independent trained research nurses. The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview Plus and the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology, short Dutch version were used for diagnostic assessment and personality pathology screening. The Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) was used for assessment of baseline severity and treatment outcome. Eligibility was assessed by stepwise application of commonly used exclusion criteria. Influence of eligibility on treatment outcome was investigated in a subsample of the 1653 patients who had at least one follow-up assessment (n=626). Eligible and non-eligible patients were compared on proportion of response (50% reduction) and remission on MADRS (MADRS⩽10).

Results

Altogether, 17–25% of the patients were eligible for AETs. The most common reasons for exclusion would be ‘not meeting minimum baseline severity’ and ‘presence of co-morbid Axis I disorder’. Eligible and non-eligible patients did not differ in treatment outcome. Only ‘meeting the minimum baseline severity’ is associated with remission.

Conclusions

The majority of ‘real life’ out-patients are not eligible for AETs. However, the influence of eligibility on treatment outcome seems to be small. This suggests that stringent patient selection by eligibility criteria is not the major reason for lack of generalizability of AETs. Exclusion of less severely depressed patients from the analyses resulted in better treatment outcome. Milder depression is highly prevalent in daily practice and more research into treatment effectiveness in milder depression is warranted.

Copyright
Corresponding author
*Address for correspondence: Drs. R. van der Lem, LUMC, Department of Psychiatry, Albinusdreef 2, PO box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands. (Email: r.van_der_lem@lumc.nl)
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

M Asberg , SA Montgomery , C Perris , D Schalling , G Sedvall (1978). A comprehensive psychopathological rating scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica (Suppl.), 5–27.

E de Beurs , T Rinne , D van Kampen , R Verheul , H Andrea (2009). Reliability and validity of the Dutch Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Short Form (DAPP-SF), a shortened version of the DAPP-Basic Questionnaire. Journal of Personality Disorders 23, 308326.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Psychological Medicine
  • ISSN: 0033-2917
  • EISSN: 1469-8978
  • URL: /core/journals/psychological-medicine
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary Materials

Lem supplementary material
Appendix.doc

 Word (111 KB)
111 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 3
Total number of PDF views: 16 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 63 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 29th May 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.