10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Development and validation of the Maudsley Modified Patient Health Questionnaire (MM-PHQ-9)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) is a widely used measure of depression in primary care. It was, however, originally designed as a diagnostic screening tool, and not for measuring change in response to antidepressant treatment. Although the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomology (QIDS-SR-16) has been extensively validated for outcome measurement, it is poorly adopted in UK primary care, and, although free for clinicians, has licensing restrictions for healthcare organisation use.

          Aims

          We aimed to develop a modified version of the PHQ-9, the Maudsley Modified PHQ-9 (MM-PHQ-9), for tracking symptom changes in primary care. We tested the measure's validity, reliability and factor structure.

          Method

          A sample of 121 participants was recruited across three studies, and comprised 78 participants with major depressive disorder and 43 controls. MM-PHQ-9 scores were compared with the QIDS-SR-16 and Clinical Global Impressions improvement scale, for concurrent validity. Internal consistency of the scale was assessed, and principal component analysis was conducted to determine the items’ factor structure.

          Results

          The MM-PHQ-9 demonstrated good concurrent validity with the QIDS-SR-16, and excellent internal consistency. Sensitivity to change over a 14-week period was d = 0.41 compared with d = 0.61 on the QIDS-SR-16. Concurrent validity between the paper and mobile app versions of the MM-PHQ-9 was r = 0.67.

          Conclusions

          These results indicate that the MM-PHQ-9 is a valid and reliable measure of depressive symptoms in paper and mobile app format, although further validation is required. The measure was sensitive to change, demonstrating suitability for use in routine outcome assessment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          An inventory for measuring depression.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The PHQ-9: A New Depression Diagnostic and Severity Measure

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS), clinician rating (QIDS-C), and self-report (QIDS-SR): a psychometric evaluation in patients with chronic major depression.

              The 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS), a new measure of depressive symptom severity derived from the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS), is available in both self-report (QIDS-SR(16)) and clinician-rated (QIDS-C(16)) formats. This report evaluates and compares the psychometric properties of the QIDS-SR(16) in relation to the IDS-SR(30) and the 24-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D(24)) in 596 adult outpatients treated for chronic nonpsychotic, major depressive disorder. Internal consistency was high for the QIDS-SR(16) (Cronbach's alpha =.86), the IDS-SR(30) (Cronbach's alpha =.92), and the HAM-D(24) (Cronbach's alpha =.88). QIDS-SR(16) total scores were highly correlated with IDS-SR(30) (.96) and HAM-D(24) (.86) total scores. Item-total correlations revealed that several similar items were highly correlated with both QIDS-SR(16) and IDS-SR(30) total scores. Roughly 1.3 times the QIDS-SR(16) total score is predictive of the HAM-D(17) (17-item version of the HAM-D) total score. The QIDS-SR(16) was as sensitive to symptom change as the IDS-SR(30) and HAM-D(24), indicating high concurrent validity for all three scales. The QIDS-SR(16) has highly acceptable psychometric properties, which supports the usefulness of this brief rating of depressive symptom severity in both clinical and research settings.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BJPsych Open
                BJPsych Open
                BJO
                BJPsych Open
                Cambridge University Press (Cambridge, UK )
                2056-4724
                July 2021
                02 July 2021
                : 7
                : 4
                : e123
                Affiliations
                [1]Department of Psychological Medicine, Centre for Affective Disorders, Institute of Psychiatry , Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
                [2]Department of Psychological Medicine, Centre for Affective Disorders, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London , UK
                [3]Department of Psychological Medicine, Centre for Affective Disorders, Institute of Psychiatry , Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
                [4]Department of Psychological Medicine, Centre for Affective Disorders, Institute of Psychiatry , Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
                [5]Department of Psychological Medicine, Centre for Affective Disorders, Institute of Psychiatry , Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
                [6]Department of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry , Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
                [7]Department of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry , Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
                [8]School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, King's College London , UK
                [9]Department of Psychological Medicine, Centre for Affective Disorders, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience , King's College London, UK; and National Service for Affective Disorders, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK
                [10]Department of Psychological Medicine, Centre for Affective Disorders, Institute of Psychiatry , Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK; and National Service for Affective Disorders, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Roland Zahn. Email: roland.zahn@ 123456kcl.ac.uk
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0620-7868
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6514-9904
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2291-6952
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8447-1453
                Article
                S2056472421009534
                10.1192/bjo.2021.953
                8281039
                34210374
                a7b22804-0109-41a1-a41d-ae811d6468bc
                © The Author(s) 2021

                This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 25 January 2021
                : 17 May 2021
                : 26 May 2021
                Page count
                Tables: 4, References: 32, Pages: 8
                Categories
                General Adult
                Papers

                depression,measurement,digital health,antidepressants,primary care

                Comments

                Comment on this article