Remission in schizophrenia - What are we measuring? Comparing the consensus remission criteria to a CGI-based definition of remission and to remission in major depression.


Journal

Schizophrenia research
ISSN: 1573-2509
Titre abrégé: Schizophr Res
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8804207

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
07 2019
Historique:
received: 12 05 2018
revised: 03 03 2019
accepted: 26 04 2019
pubmed: 30 5 2019
medline: 29 8 2020
entrez: 30 5 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Despite being recommended for use in clinical trials, the consensus remission criteria were found to leave patients with persisting symptoms, relevant areas of functional impairment and a decreased sense of wellbeing. Therefore, to evaluate the appropriateness of the schizophrenia consensus criteria, a definition of remission based on the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) was developed and remitter subgroups were compared. 239 patients with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder were evaluated regarding their remission status after inpatient treatment. Remission in schizophrenia was defined according to the symptom-severity component of the consensus criteria by Andreasen et al. and a CGI based definition was calculated using sensitivity and specificity using receiver operating curves (asymptomatic remitter). Both remitter groups (schizophrenia consensus versus asymptomatic remitters) were compared regarding different clinical variables at discharge as well as the likelihood to relapse within a 1-year follow-up period. Both schizophrenia remitter subgroups were compared to remitters in major depression as a reference value. Following the consensus criteria, 63% of the schizophrenia patients were in remission compared to only 18% following the asymptomatic criterion. The schizophrenia consensus remitters were less likely to be concurrent treatment responders (p < 0.0001), had a significantly greater illness severity (p < 0.0001) and less functioning (p = 0.0358) as well as a significantly greater risk to relapse (p = 0.0174) compared to the schizophrenia asymptomatic remitters as well as the depressed remitters. It should be critically re-evaluated if the currently proposed consensus criteria are adequate to measure what is traditionally understood to be remission.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Despite being recommended for use in clinical trials, the consensus remission criteria were found to leave patients with persisting symptoms, relevant areas of functional impairment and a decreased sense of wellbeing. Therefore, to evaluate the appropriateness of the schizophrenia consensus criteria, a definition of remission based on the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) was developed and remitter subgroups were compared.
METHODS
239 patients with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder were evaluated regarding their remission status after inpatient treatment. Remission in schizophrenia was defined according to the symptom-severity component of the consensus criteria by Andreasen et al. and a CGI based definition was calculated using sensitivity and specificity using receiver operating curves (asymptomatic remitter). Both remitter groups (schizophrenia consensus versus asymptomatic remitters) were compared regarding different clinical variables at discharge as well as the likelihood to relapse within a 1-year follow-up period. Both schizophrenia remitter subgroups were compared to remitters in major depression as a reference value.
RESULTS
Following the consensus criteria, 63% of the schizophrenia patients were in remission compared to only 18% following the asymptomatic criterion. The schizophrenia consensus remitters were less likely to be concurrent treatment responders (p < 0.0001), had a significantly greater illness severity (p < 0.0001) and less functioning (p = 0.0358) as well as a significantly greater risk to relapse (p = 0.0174) compared to the schizophrenia asymptomatic remitters as well as the depressed remitters.
CONCLUSION
It should be critically re-evaluated if the currently proposed consensus criteria are adequate to measure what is traditionally understood to be remission.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31138482
pii: S0920-9964(19)30155-0
doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2019.04.022
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article Multicenter Study Observational Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

185-192

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Rebecca Schennach (R)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany; Schön Clinic Roseneck, Germany. Electronic address: RSchennach@schoen-kliniken.de.

Michael Obermeier (M)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.

Ilja Spellmann (I)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany; Department of Special Psychiatry, Social Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Klinikum Stuttgart, Germany.

Florian Seemüller (F)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.

Richard Musil (R)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.

Markus Jäger (M)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany; Department of Psychiatry, Psychosomatic and Psychotherapy, Bezirkskrankenhaus Kempten, Germany.

Max Schmauss (M)

Psychiatric Clinic, District Hospital Augsburg, Germany.

Gerd Laux (G)

Psychiatric Clinic, Inn-Salzach Hospital Wasserburg/Inn, Germany.

Herbert Pfeiffer (H)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Munich East, kbo-Isar-Amper-Klinikum Haar, Germany.

Dieter Naber (D)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Hamburg, Germany.

Lutz G Schmidt (LG)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Mainz, Germany.

Wolfgang Gaebel (W)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University Dusseldorf, Germany.

Joachim Klosterkötter (J)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Cologne, Germany.

Isabella Heuser (I)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Charite Berlin, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Germany.

Michael Bauer (M)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.

Mazda Adli (M)

Fliedner Klinik Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Joachim Zeiler (J)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Auguste-Viktoria-Krankenhaus Berlin, Germany.

Wolfram Bender (W)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Munich East, kbo-Isar-Amper-Klinikum Haar, Germany.

Klaus-Thomas Kronmüller (KT)

LWL-Klinikum Gütersloh, Gütersloh, Germany.

Marcus Ising (M)

Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry, Munich, Germany.

Peter Brieger (P)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Munich East, kbo-Isar-Amper-Klinikum Haar, Germany.

Wolfgang Maier (W)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Bonn, Germany.

Matthias R Lemke (MR)

Department of Psychiatry, Alsterdorf Hospital, Hamburg, Germany.

Eckart Rüther (E)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Göttingen, Germany.

Stefan Klingberg (S)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Tübingen, Germany.

Markus Gastpar (M)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Essen, Germany.

Hans-Jürgen Möller (HJ)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.

Michael Riedel (M)

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany; Psychiatric Clinic Rodewisch, Rodewisch, Germany.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH