Citation

Zimmerman M, Martinez J, Attiullah N, Friedman M, Toba C, Boerescu DA, Rahgeb M. Depress. Anxiety 2012; 29(2): 160-166.

Affiliation

Bayside Medical Building, Providence, Rhode Island. mzimmerman@lifespan.org.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2012, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1002/da.20870

PMID

22495942

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 1991, the recommendations of a consensus conference were that a cutoff of 7 on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) be used to define remission from depression, and since then this has been the most commonly used definition of remission. The cutoff was not derived from empirical study. In the present report from the MIDAS project, we examined the level of current psychosocial morbidity in depressed patients identified as being in remission according to different thresholds on the 17-item HAM-D. METHODS: We interviewed 274 depressed outpatients in ongoing treatment. The patients completed measures of depressive and anxious symptoms, psychosocial functioning, and quality of life. RESULTS: Compared to patients scoring 3-7 on the HAM-D, patients scoring 0-2 had significantly lower levels of depression and anxiety on self-report symptom scales, better psychosocial functioning, better quality of life, and greater satisfaction with their mental health. Similar results were found comparing patients scoring 0-2 versus 3-5. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that significant heterogeneity exists among patients scoring 7 and below on the HAM-D. Whatever cutoff score is used to define remission on a symptom severity scale such as the HAM-D, some error will be inherent in dichotomizing a continuously distributed variable. We propose distinguishing between patients who are highly likely to be in remission (0-2 on the HAMD) from patients who are possibly in remission (scoring 3-7). Depression and Anxiety 0:1-7, 2011.© 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Language: en