Psychiatry Investig.  2017 Sep;14(5):568-576. 10.4306/pi.2017.14.5.568.

Clinical Validation of the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-6, and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-5: Results from the Clinical Research Center for Depression Study

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Psychiatry, Inje University College of Medicine and Haeundae Paik Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea.
  • 2Department of Counseling Psychology, Honam University College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Gwangju, Republic of Korea.
  • 3Department of Psychiatry, Chonnam National University School of Medicine, Gwangju, Republic of Korea.
  • 4Department of Psychiatry, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
  • 5Department of Psychiatry, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
  • 6Department of Psychiatry, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Republic of Korea.
  • 7Department of Preventive Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
  • 8Department of Psychiatry, Hanyang University, Guri Hospital, Guri, Republic of Korea. hypyc@hanyang.ac.kr

Abstract


OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to validate the psychotic depression assessment scale (PDAS), which includes the six-item melancholia subscale from the Hamilton depression rating scale (HAMD-6) and the five-item psychosis subscale from the brief psychiatric rating scale (BPRS-5). Data from the Clinical Research Center for Depression (CRESCEND) study, which is a 52-week naturalistic trial, were analyzed.
METHODS
Fifty-two patients with psychotic depression from the CRESCEND study met our inclusion criteria. The patients underwent the following psychometric assessments: the PDAS, including HAMD-6 and BPRS-5, the clinical global impression scales, the HAMD, the positive symptom subscale, and the negative symptom subscale. Assessments were performed at the baseline and then at weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52. Spearman correlation analyses were used to assess the clinical validity and responsiveness of the PDAS.
RESULTS
The clinical validity and responsiveness of the PDAS, including HAMD-6 and BPRS-5, were acceptable, with the exception of the clinical responsiveness of the PDAS for positive symptoms and the clinical responsiveness of BPRS-5 for negative symptoms.
CONCLUSION
The clinical relevance of the PDAS has been confirmed and this clinical validation will enhance its clinical utility and availability.

Keyword

Psychotic depression; Psychotic depression assessment scale; 6-item melancholia subscale; 5-item psychosis subscale; Clinical validation
Full Text Links
  • PI
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2021 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr