What does the HAMD mean?
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
Standard Standard
In: Journal of Affective Disorders, Vol. 148, No. 2-3, 01.06.2013, p. 243-248.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
HarvardHarvard
APA
CBE
MLA
VancouverVancouver
Author
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - What does the HAMD mean?
AU - Leucht, Stefan
AU - Fennema, Hein
AU - Engel, Rolf
AU - Kaspers-Janssen, Marion
AU - Lepping, Peter
AU - Szegedi, Armin
PY - 2013/6/1
Y1 - 2013/6/1
N2 - Little is known about the clinical relevance of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-17) total scores. It is unclear how total scores translate into clinical severity, or what commonly used measures for response (reduction from baseline of ≥50% in the total score) and remission (total HAMD-17 score ≤7) mean from a clinical perspective. We therefore compared: (a) the percentage and absolute change in the HAMD-17 total scores with Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I); (b) the absolute and percentage change in the HAMD-17 total scores with Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) absolute change; and (c) the percentage and absolute change in the HAMD-17 total scores with CGI-I in the subgroups of patients with≤median and>median HAMD-17 total scores at baseline. The method used was equipercentile linking of HAMD-17 and CGI ratings from 43 drug trials in patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) (n=7131). Our results confirm the validity of the commonly used measures for remission and response in MDD trials: a CGI-I score of 2 (‘much improved’) corresponded to a reduction from baseline of >50% and <60%, and a CGI-I score of 1 (‘very much improved’) to a reduction of >75% and <85%. The CGI-S score of 1 (‘normal., not at all ill’) corresponded to the HAMD-17 total score of <5 and the CGI-S score of 2 (‘borderline mentally ill’) to the score between 6 and 8. An effect of baseline illness severity was observed.
AB - Little is known about the clinical relevance of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-17) total scores. It is unclear how total scores translate into clinical severity, or what commonly used measures for response (reduction from baseline of ≥50% in the total score) and remission (total HAMD-17 score ≤7) mean from a clinical perspective. We therefore compared: (a) the percentage and absolute change in the HAMD-17 total scores with Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I); (b) the absolute and percentage change in the HAMD-17 total scores with Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) absolute change; and (c) the percentage and absolute change in the HAMD-17 total scores with CGI-I in the subgroups of patients with≤median and>median HAMD-17 total scores at baseline. The method used was equipercentile linking of HAMD-17 and CGI ratings from 43 drug trials in patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) (n=7131). Our results confirm the validity of the commonly used measures for remission and response in MDD trials: a CGI-I score of 2 (‘much improved’) corresponded to a reduction from baseline of >50% and <60%, and a CGI-I score of 1 (‘very much improved’) to a reduction of >75% and <85%. The CGI-S score of 1 (‘normal., not at all ill’) corresponded to the HAMD-17 total score of <5 and the CGI-S score of 2 (‘borderline mentally ill’) to the score between 6 and 8. An effect of baseline illness severity was observed.
U2 - 10.1016/j.jad.2012.12.001
DO - 10.1016/j.jad.2012.12.001
M3 - Article
VL - 148
SP - 243
EP - 248
JO - Journal of Affective Disorders
JF - Journal of Affective Disorders
SN - 0165-0327
IS - 2-3
ER -