Spanish Validation of the MAP-SR: Two Heads Better Than One for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms of Schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: There is little research on self-reported negative symptomatology measures in schizophrenia. The aims of this study were to validate the Spanish version of the Motivation and Pleasure Scale-Self-Report (MAP-SR) and determine the concordance between patient-reported outcome measures for reflecting the severity of negative symptoms of schizophrenia and clinician-rated outcome measures. METHOD: A sample of 174 subjects who completed the MAP-SR and 104 who completed the Self-Evaluation of Negative Symptoms (SNS) were analyzed. The clinician-reported outcome measures (CROMs) were the Spanish versions of the Clinical Assessment Interview for Negative Symptoms (CAINS) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), while the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were MAP-SR and SNS. Cronbach's a, bivariate analyses and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were calculated. RESULTS: The Spanish version of the MAP-SR demonstrated excellent reliability (Cronbach's α=.923). Its correlation coefficients were higher with CAINS [CAINS-Total: r=.608, p<.005; CAINS-Motivation and Pleasure subscale(CAINS-MAP): r=.662, p<.005] than with PANSS negative scales [PANSS-Negative scale(PANSS-N): r=.393, p<.005; PANSS-Marder Negative Factor(PANSS-MNF): r=.478, p<.005]. Finally, concordance between clinician and patient ratings was low in all cases, varying from a CCC of 0.661 to .392. CONCLUSIONS: We found poor concordance between patient and clinician ratings, hence we believe that the two evaluations are not mutually exclusive but complementary.

[Evidence-Based Psychological Treatments for Adults: A Selective Review]

Evidence-Based Psychological Treatments for Adults: A Selective Review. BACKGROUND: Psychological treatments have shown their efficacy, effectiveness, and efficiency in dealing with mental disorders. However, considering the scientific knowledge generated in recent years, in the Spanish context, there are no updating studies about empirically supported psychological treatments. The main goal was to carry out a selective review of the main empirically supported psychological treatments for mental disorders in adults. METHOD: Levels of evidence and degrees of recommendation were collected based on the criteria proposed by the Spanish National Health System (Clinical Practice Guidelines) for different psychological disorders. RESULTS: The results indicate that psychological treatments have empirical support for the approach to a wide range of psychological disorders. These levels of empirical evidence gathered range from low to high depending on the psychological disorder analysed. The review indicates the existence of certain fields of intervention that need further investigation. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this selective review, psychology professionals will be able to have rigorous, up-to-date information that allows them to make informed decisions when implementing empirically based psychotherapeutic procedures based on the characteristics of the people who require help.

Validation of a European Spanish-version of the University of California performance Skills Assessment (Sp-UPSA) in patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

AIMS: To validate the Spanish version of the University of California Performance Skills Assessment (UPSA) in patients with severe mental disorders. METHODS: Naturalistic, 6month follow-up, multicentre, validation study. 139 patients with schizophrenia, 57 bipolar patients and 31 controls were evaluated using the following scales: Spanish UPSA (Sp-UPSA), Clinical Global Impression, Severity (CGI-S), Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF), and Personal and Social Performance (PSP). RESULTS: Reliability: Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) was 0.81 in schizophrenia and 0.58 in bipolar patients. Test-retest was 0.74 and 0.65 (p<0.0001) respectively. Construct validity: Pearson correlation coefficients between Sp-UPSA and PSP total scores were 0.42 (p<0.0001) for schizophrenia and 0.44 (p=0.001) for bipolar patients. For Sp-UPSA and GAF scores correlation coefficients were 0.43 and 0.52 (p<0.0001) respectively. Discriminant validity: The Sp-UPSA discriminated between patients and controls. In schizophrenia patients it also discriminated among different levels of illness severity according to CGI-S scores. In control versus patients with schizophrenia contrasts, the area under the curve was 0.89 and a cut-off point of 85 provided a sensitivity of 82.7% and a specificity of 77.4%. In bipolar patients, the area under the curve was 0.85 and a cut-off point of 90 provided a sensitivity of 82.5% and a specificity of 64.5%. CONCLUSION: The Spanish UPSA is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing functional capacity in severe mentally ill patients. It seems to be appropriate for use in clinical trials and in everyday clinical practice as a means of monitoring functional outcomes.

Development and cross-validation of the UPSA short form for the performance-based functional assessment of patients with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer disease.

BACKGROUND: Functional capacity includes basic and complex behaviors necessary to independently live in the community. It has been found that patients with cognitive impairment have daily living functional skills altered at very early stages of illness. OBJECTIVES: 1) To develop and validate a brief scale derived from the University of California, San Diego, performance-based skills assessment (UPSA); 2) to cross-validate this new UPSA short form with an independent healthy elderly sample. METHOD: Fifty-one healthy elderly subjects, 26 mild cognitive impairment (MCI) subjects defined per Petersen's criteria, and 22 probable Alzheimer Disease (AD) subjects according to National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke-AD and Related Disorders Association criteria were included. For cross-validation purpose, a comparison group of 108 older healthy subjects with Mini-Mental scores of 25 or greater was also recruited. A modified four-functional domain version of the UPSA was administered. RESULTS: Communication and comprehension/planning domains accounted for almost 90% of the variance (R = 0.89) and in all models entered first and second, respectively. An UPSA short form using these two domains was significantly correlated with the full UPSA scale in all the groups examined: 0.86 for healthy controls; 0.87 for MCI; and 0.88 for AD. Acceptable sensitivity and specificity values for the UPSA short form were found in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. A correlation of 0.80 was found between the short and the full UPSA scales in the cross-validation sample. CONCLUSIONS: The UPSA short form is a rapid, reliable, and efficient measure of functional capacity that is able to detect performance impairment in an ecologically valid setting in much less time compared with the extended form of the scale. Furthermore, it demonstrated adequate discriminative properties among healthy subjects, MCI patients, and AD patients.

Utility of combinations of biomarkers, cognitive markers, and risk factors to predict conversion from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer disease in patients in the Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative.

CONTEXT: Biomarkers have become increasingly important in understanding neurodegenerative processes associated with Alzheimer disease. Markers include regional brain volumes, cerebrospinal fluid measures of pathological Aß1-42 and total tau, cognitive measures, and individual risk factors. OBJECTIVE: To determine the discriminative utility of different classes of biomarkers and cognitive markers by examining their ability to predict a change in diagnostic status from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer disease. DESIGN: Longitudinal study. PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative database to study patients with mild cognitive impairment who converted to Alzheimer disease (n = 116) and those who did not convert (n = 204) within a 2-year period. We determined the predictive utility of 25 variables from all classes of markers, biomarkers, and risk factors in a series of logistic regression models and effect size analyses. SETTING: The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative public database. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were odds ratios, pseudo- R(2)s, and effect sizes. RESULTS: In comprehensive stepwise logistic regression models that thus included variables from all classes of markers, the following baseline variables predicted conversion within a 2-year period: 2 measures of delayed verbal memory and middle temporal lobe cortical thickness. In an effect size analysis that examined rates of decline, change scores for biomarkers were modest for 2 years, but a change in an everyday functional activities measure (Functional Assessment Questionnaire) was considerably larger. Decline in scores on the Functional Assessment Questionnaire and Trail Making Test, part B, accounted for approximately 50% of the predictive variance in conversion from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer disease. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive markers at baseline were more robust predictors of conversion than most biomarkers. Longitudinal analyses suggested that conversion appeared to be driven less by changes in the neurobiologic trajectory of the disease than by a sharp decline in functional ability and, to a lesser extent, by declines in executive function.