Skip to main content
Log in

Reliability and validity of a health-related quality of life battery for evaluating outpatient antidepressant treatment

  • Research Papers
  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study was designed to evaluate the reproducibility, validity and responsiveness of a health-related quality of life (HRQOL) battery that was assembled for the evaluation of antidepressant therapy. The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale was used to measure severity of depression. The HRQOL battery contained measures of energy and fatigue, social behaviour, cognitive function, home and work role function, and general well-being (i.e., health perceptions, life satisfaction) selected from previously developed and validated instruments. The clinical investigators and research nurses reported on difficulty in using the HRQOL battery. Most patients were able to complete the questionnaire without problems within 10 min. Reproducibility was very good with intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.74 to 0.97. The HRQOL scales showed evidence of good concurrent validity. The scales were moderately correlated with MADRS scores (r=0.30–0.62). The magnitude of these correlations indicate that HRQOL scales are related to depression measures, but they are not alternative measures of depression. Changes in MADRS scores were associated with changes in all scales, except for work behaviour, indicating that improvements in depression ratings also resulted in improvements in health status and well-being. The HRQOL scales included in this study were found to be reliable, reproducible, and valid and no appreciable burden was placed on patients or investigators participating in the study. With the exception of the Work Behaviour scale, the HRQOL scales were very responsive to changes in depression severity. This brief HRQOL instrument can provide a comprehensive assessment of the outcomes of antidepressant treatment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. BarrettJE, BarrettJA, OxmanTE, GerberPD. The prevalence of psychiatric disorders in primary care practice. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1988; 45: 1100–1106.

    Google Scholar 

  2. SchulbergHC, SaulM, McClellandM. Assessing depression in primary medical and psychiatric practices. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1985; 12: 1164–1170.

    Google Scholar 

  3. WellsKB, StewartA, HaysRD, et al. The functioning and well-being of depressed patients: results from the Medical Outcome Study. JAMA 1989; 262: 914–919.

    Google Scholar 

  4. RostK, SmithGR, BurnamMA, BurnsB. Measuring the outcomes of care for mental health problems: the case of depressive disorders. Med Care 1992; 30: MS266-MS273.

    Google Scholar 

  5. GeorgeLK, BlazerD, HughesD, FowlerN. Social support and the outcome of major depression. Br J Psychiatry 1989; 154: 478–485.

    Google Scholar 

  6. WeissmanMM, PrusoffBA, ThompsonWD, et al. Social adjustment by self-report in a community sample and in psychiatric outpatients. J Nerv Ment Dis 1978; 166: 317–326.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Revicki DA, Rothman M, Luce BR. Health-related quality of life assessment and the pharmaceutical industry. Pharmacoeconomics 1992; 1: in press.

  8. Ware JE. The use of health status and quality of life measures in outcomes and effectiveness research. Paper prepared for the National Agenda Setting Conference on Outcomes and Effectiveness Research, Alexandria, VA, April 1991.

  9. SpilkerB, ed. Quality of Life Assessments in Clinical Trials. New York: Raven Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  10. MontgomerySA, AsbergMA. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br J Psychiatry 1979; 134: 383–389.

    Google Scholar 

  11. BroadheadWE, BlazerDG, GeorgeLK, TseCK. Depression, disability days, and days lost from work in a prospective epidemiologic survey. JAMA 1990; 264: 2524–2528.

    Google Scholar 

  12. CampbellA, ConversePE, RogersWL. The Quality of American Life. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Stewart A, Ware J. Measuring Functioning and Wellbeing: The Medical Outcomes Study Approach. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, in press.

  14. StewartAL, HaysRD, WareJE. The MOS short-form general health survey: reliability and validity in a patient population. Med Care 1988; 26: 724–735.

    Google Scholar 

  15. StewartAL, GreenfieldS, HaysRD, et al. Functional status and well-being of patients with chronic conditions: results from the medical outcomes study. JAMA 1989; 262: 907–913.

    Google Scholar 

  16. BergnerM, BobbittRA, CarterWB, GilsonBS. The Sickness Impact Profile: validation of a health status measure. Med Care 1976; 14: 57–67.

    Google Scholar 

  17. BergnerM, BobbittRA, CarterWB, GilsonBS. The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Med Care 1981; 19: 787–805.

    Google Scholar 

  18. McDowellI, NewellC. Measuring Health: A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaires. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Umuik P, Thaulow E, Herland O, Eide I, Midha R, Turner R. Double-blind, parallel comparative study on quality of life during treatment with amlodipine or enalapril in mild or moderate hypertensive patients: a multicenter study. J Hypertension 1992; in press.

  20. DeyoRA, DiehrP, PatrickDL. Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures: statistics and strategies for evaluation. Controlled Clin Trials 1991; 12: 142S-158S.

    Google Scholar 

  21. FeinsteinAR. Clinimetrics. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  22. JohnsonJ, WeissmanMM, KlermanGL. Service utilization and social morbidity associated with depressive symptoms in the community. JAMA 1992; 267: 1478–1483.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This research was supported by a grant from Pfizer International.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Revicki, D.A., Turner, R., Brown, R. et al. Reliability and validity of a health-related quality of life battery for evaluating outpatient antidepressant treatment. Qual Life Res 1, 257–266 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00435635

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00435635

Key words

Navigation