The validity and internal structure of the bipolar depression rating scale (BDRS): data from a clinical trial of N-acetylcysteine as adjunctive therapy in bipolar disorder

Background: The phenomenology of unipolar and bipolar disorders differ in a number of ways, such as the presence of mixed states and atypical features. Conventional depression rating instruments are designed to capture the characteristics of unipolar depression and have limitations in capturing the breadth of bipolar disorder.

Method: The Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (BDRS) was administered together with the Montgomery Asberg Rating Scale (MADRS) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) in a double-blind randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial of N-acetyl cysteine for bipolar disorder (N = 75).

Results: A factor analysis showed a two-factor solution: depression and mixed symptom clusters. The BDRS has strong internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.917), the depression cluster showed robust correlation with the MADRS (r = 0.865) and the mixed subscale correlated with the YMRS (r = 0.750).

Conclusion: The BDRS has good internal validity and inter-rater reliability and is sensitive to change in the context of a clinical trial.

Olanzapine / fluoxetine combination for treatment resistant depression : efficacy and clinical utility

Antidepressant monotherapy is a first-line treatment for depression; however, not all sufferers will adequately respond to treatment. When treating a patient with treatment-resistant depression, the clinician needs to consider all factors which may contribute to an inadequate response to an antidepressant. These include accuracy of diagnosis and medication adherence, as well as the patient’s personality, lifestyle, life events and social circumstances. If it is determined that treatment resistance is due to failure of efficacy of antidepressant monotherapy, then an augmentation strategy using an atypical antipsychotic may be considered. Treatment using olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC) is one of many options. Four randomized, acute-phase trials have suggested OFC is useful for reducing Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale scores after inadequate response to antidepressant monotherapy. OFC has been useful at doses of olanzapine/fluoxetine 6/25, 6/50, 12/25 and 12/50 mg/day, with 1/5 mg/day suggested to be an ineffective dose. Treatment with OFC has been associated with some side effects, including weight gain and the metabolic syndrome, somnolence, dry mouth, increased appetite and headache. Treatment decisions therefore need to be made to balance the risks and benefits.

Combination pharmacotherapy in unipolar depression

It is estimated that between 60 and 80% of those with major depressive disorder do not achieve full symptomatic remission from first-line antidepressant monotherapy. Residual depressive symptoms substantially impair quality of life and add to the risk of recurrence. It is now clear that depression would benefit from more vigorous treatment, in order to ameliorate its disease burden. While there are established algorithms in situations of treatment resistance, the use of combination pharmacotherapy in unipolar depression is a relatively under-investigated area of treatment and may be an effective and tolerable strategy that maximizes the available resources. This paper reviews the current evidence for combination pharmacotherapy in unipolar depression and discusses its clinical applications.

The validity of the 21-item version of the depression anxiety stress scales as a routine outcome measure

Objective: This study aimed to test the validity of the 21-item Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21) as a routine clinical outcome measure in the private in-patient setting. We hypothesized that it would be a suitable routine outcome instrument in this setting.

Method: All in-patients treated at a private psychiatric hospital over a period of 24 months were included in the study. Data were collected on demographics, service utilization, diagnosis and a set of four routine measures both at admission and discharge. These measures consisted of the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scales, Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS), the Mental Health Questionnaire (MHQ-14) and DASS-21. The results of these measures were compared.

Results: Of 786 admissions in total, the number of fully completed (ie paired admission and discharge) data sets for the DASS-21 depression, anxiety and stress subscales were 337, 328 and 347, respectively. All subscales showed statistically significant reductions in mean scores from admission to discharge (P < 0.001) and were significantly correlated with all MHQ-14 subscales and significantly related to CGI scale categories. The total DASS-21 and total HoNOS scores were also significantly correlated.

Conclusions: The findings from the present study support the validity of DASS-21 as a routine clinical outcome measure in the private in-patient setting.