Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009;11(1):8-15.
doi: 10.4088/pcc.08m00670.

Patient-assessed versus physician-assessed disease severity and outcome in patients with nonspecific pain associated with major depressive disorder

Affiliations

Patient-assessed versus physician-assessed disease severity and outcome in patients with nonspecific pain associated with major depressive disorder

Koen Demyttenaere et al. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2009.

Abstract

Objectives: This post hoc analysis compared how patients and physicians estimate disease severity and global improvement during 8 weeks of treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) with associated nonspecific pain. In addition, predictors of pain and depression were identified.

Method: Data were derived from a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, European study (conducted from May 2005 to May 2006) in adult outpatients with MDD (DSM-IV criteria) and moderate pain not attributable to a diagnosed organic pain syndrome (Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form [BPI-SF] average pain score ≥ 3). Patients were randomly assigned to duloxetine 60 mg/day or placebo and treated for 8 weeks. Physicians were asked to rate severity of depression by using the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) and CGI-Improvement (CGI-I) scales. Patients were asked to assess pain using the BPI-SF, psychological symptomatology (9 domains including depression) with the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R), and overall improvement with the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). Multivariate linear regressions were performed as post hoc analyses to identify predictors of disease assessment at baseline and at the end of the study using a last-observation-carried-forward approach.

Results: All SCL-90-R domains improved during the 8 weeks of treatment. At baseline, the MADRS was associated only with the SCL-90-R obsessive-compulsive score, while the SCL-90-R depression score was associated with the BPI-SF average pain score and with many SCL-90-R subscores. The global impression of improvement was rated higher by the physicians than by the patients. At the end of the study, CGI-I was significantly associated with a decrease in depression severity (MADRS; p < .0001), younger age (p = .0005), and a decrease of the SCL-90-R interpersonal sensitivity score (p = .0359), but not with BPI-SF average pain. In contrast, patient-rated PGI-I was significantly associated with the SCL-90-R depressive domain (p < .0001), BPI-SF average pain (p = .0003), and the SCL-90-R anxiety domain (p = .0041) scores.

Conclusion: In patients with MDD associated with at least moderate nonspecific pain, physicians consider mainly the change in depressive symptoms as measured by MADRS in their CGI-I ratings, while patients also consider pain, depression, and anxiety in their PGI-I ratings. When treating depression and assessing treatment outcome, a broad spectrum of symptoms needs to be monitored.

Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00191919.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (A) Versus Patient Global Impression of Improvement (B) aCochran-Mantel-Haenszel test stratified by study center (full analysis set, last observation carried forward).
Figure 1
Figure 1
Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (A) Versus Patient Global Impression of Improvement (B) aCochran-Mantel-Haenszel test stratified by study center (full analysis set, last observation carried forward).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Guy W. Rockville, Md: National Institute of Mental Health; 1976. ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology. US Dept Health, Education, and Welfare publication (ADM) 76-338; pp. 218–222.
    1. Lehman AF, Babigian HM, Reed SK. The epidemiology of treatment for chronic and nonchronic mental disorders. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1984;172:658–666. - PubMed
    1. Beneke M, Rasmus W. “Clinical Global Impressions” (ECDEU): some critical comments. Pharmacopsychiatry. 1991;25(4):171–176. - PubMed
    1. Leon AC, Shear MK, Klerman GL, et al. A comparison of symptom determinants of patient and clinician global ratings in patients with panic disorder and depression. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 1993;13:327–331. - PubMed
    1. Zaider TI, Heimberg RG, Fresco DM, et al. Evaluation of the Clinical Global Impressions scale among individuals with social anxiety disorder. Psychol Med. 2003;33:611–622. - PubMed

Associated data