The responsiveness of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale

Abstract

In clinical studies of antidepressants, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) total score has been the gold standard instrument for establishing and comparing the efficacy of new treatments. However, the HAMD is a multidimensional measure, which may reduce its ability to detect differences between treatments, in particular, changes in core symptoms of depression. Two meta-analyses were conducted to compare the responsiveness of the HAMD total score with several published unidimensional subscale scores based upon core symptoms of depression. The first compared the above instrument's ability to detect differences between fluoxetine and placebo across eight studies involving over 1600 patients. The second analysis involved four studies and over 1200 patients randomized to tricyclic antidepressants and placebo. In both meta-analyses, the unidimensional core subscales outperformed the HAMD total score at detecting treatment differences. The implications of this on sample sizes and power for clinical studies will be discussed. In fact, studies based on the observed effect sizes from the core subscales would require approximately one-third less patients than studies based on the HAMD total score. Effect sizes from each individual HAMD item will also be presented to help explain the differences in responsiveness between the scales.