WHOQOL-BREF as a measure of quality of life in older patients with depression

Objective: To assess the reliability and validity of a brief measure of quality of life recently developed by the World Health Organization, the WHOQOL-BREF, and to examine its association with a variety of clinical and sociodemographic factors in older depressed patients. Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Older depressed patients (N=41) underwent diagnostic assessment using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and were independently assessed on a variety of measures including the WHOQOL-BREF (a 26-item self-report questionnaire generating four domain scores), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D); Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS); Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE); Modified Barthel Index (MBI); Instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), and measures of physical health status and social relationships. Estimates of inter-rater and test-retest reliability, and concurrent validity were made. Results: 39 subjects completed the study. The majority of subjects (94.9%) received a diagnosis of DSM-IV Major Depressive Disorder. Levels of comorbidity were high. Three of the four domains of the WHOQOL-BREF (Physical, Psychological and Environment domains) demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity. However, the Social Relationships domain exhibited poor validity. Quality of life scores were strongly correlated with severity of depression, number of self-reported physical symptoms and self-assessed general health status. There was no relationship between diagnostic comorbidity and quality of life scores. Conclusions: The WHOQOL-BREF was successfully administered to older depressed patients although the concurrent validity of one of its four domains was poor. Quality of life scores were strongly correlated with severity of depression, raising the issue of measurement redundancy.

Outcome research in psychodynamic psychotherapy: Psychological, social and neuropsychological factors

While many studies have demonstrated positive outcomes from psychotherapy when it is practiced in a controlled research environment with carefully selected (or excluded) patient groups and rigid manualised therapy sessions there is a paucity of research regarding effective outcomes from psychotherapy as it is practiced in actual clinical conditions. The aim of this series of studies was to investigate outcomes, using an effectiveness approach, from psychodynamic psychotherapy as it is practiced by private psychiatrists. Three studies were planned. The aim of Study 1 was to provide standardized baseline measures on the following dimensions • Personal Demographic Information (PDI), • Target Symptoms and Disorders (TSD) including a neuropsychological profile • Inter and Intra Personal (IIP) factors, and, • General Functioning and Quality of Life (GFQoL) factors. Study 2 aimed to examine changes in patient characteristics during the course of treatment. Thus, baseline assessments were repeated at sixmonthly intervals to determine if therapy had been effective for individual patients. A third study was planned to assess the extent to which the results of significant outcome predictors could be replicated in different patient samples. Twenty-nine psychiatrists consented to refer patients with 20 patients having completed pre therapy assessments and six and 18-month follow-up questionnaires. The presentation of this research will focus on the interesting research methodology utilized, patient demographic characteristics and on the patient changes occurring over time on the dimensions of Defence Style (DSQ), Quality of Life (WHOQOL- Bref) and the severity of depression (BDI). The patient sample included 10 male and 10 female patients, whose ages ranged from 19 years to 66 years (mean = 43 years). While seven of the patients did not meet SCID-IV criteria for a current DSM-IV Axis 1 disorder, six patients met criteria for a current mood disorder, three for panic disorder, one patient each for PTSD, alcohol abuse and dependence, and 2 patients met current criteria for multiple Axis 1 disorders. The research is ongoing.