Using Fidelity Measurement to Assess Quality of Early Psychosis Intervention Services in Ontario.

OBJECTIVES: The First Episode Psychosis Services Fidelity Scale (FEPS-FS) is a validated measure of program delivery in relation to international standards. This study assessed fidelity in Ontario programs and the utility of the FEPS-FS for program improvement. METHODS: Assessments were conducted in a volunteer sample of nine early psychosis intervention (EPI) programs. Thirty components of care were each rated on a 5-point scale; a rating of 4 indicates satisfactory performance. Trained assessor teams conducted site visits, and ratings were made by consensus. RESULTS: Program mean fidelity ratings ranged from 3.1 to 4.4 and exceeded 4 in five programs. Across the programs, item mean fidelity ratings ranged from 2.1 to 5 and exceeded 4 for 14 of 30 items. CONCLUSIONS: The FEPS-FS captured variation in program implementation and provided a baseline for measuring change. Additions to the scale are planned to address components of the Ontario EPI standards not covered by the FEPS-FS.

The Persian version of the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS-P).

Determining depression symptoms in schizophrenic patients is a challenging process because of a degree of similarity between depression symptoms and negative symptoms and the extrapyramidal side effects of neuroleptic drugs, but it is crucial to evaluate and measure depression among patients with schizophrenia for a better clinical outcome. The Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) is a valid and reliable instrument used for the evaluation of depression in schizophrenia. This study aimed to determine the psychometric properties of the Persian version of CDSS in a sample of people with schizophrenia. Clinical interviews were conducted with 95 schizophrenic patients (40 inpatients and 55 outpatients), who were assessed with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17 and HDRS-24 items), and the Calgary Depression Rating Scale (CDSS). Then an exploratory factor analysis was conducted to determine correlations between scales, Cronbach's alpha, and cutoff scores. The factor analysis led to the extraction of a unifactorial solution. The CDSS had significant relationships with PANSS Negative and PANSS General. However, it had no significant relationship with PANSS Positive and the PANSS Total. The CDSS also had significant relationships with HDRS-17 and HDRS-24. In addition, Cronbach's alpha of total score, test-retest reliability, and cutoff score were estimated at 0.86, 0.82, and 8 (sensitivity = 0.79 and specificity = 0.84), respectively. The findings support the CDSS unifactorial approach. Results also showed that the CDSS Persian version had acceptable psychometric properties; thus, it could be employed to evaluate depression among schizophrenic patients.

Confirmatory factor analysis of the quality of life scale and new proposed factor structure for the quality of life scale-revised.

The Quality of Life Scale (QLS) is a frequently used semistructured interview for the assessment of functional outcomes in schizophrenia. Despite the use of the QLS for over 30years, the original 4-factor structure of the instrument (Interpersonal Relations, Instrumental Role, Intrapsychic Foundations, and Common Objects and Activities) has not been rigorously examined. Exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were used to evaluate the factor structure of the QLS in two independent datasets, including a mixed diagnostic sample of multi-episode participants (N=247), and a sample of individuals with a first episode of psychosis (N=337). A CFA with the first dataset indicated a poor fit for the 4-factor model of the QLS. Subsequent EFAs on this dataset led to a more promising 3-factor solution including 16/21 of the QLS items, which were similar to the first 3 of 4 factors originally proposed for the QLS. CFAs on the same dataset indicated that the 3-factor model for the QLS-Revised (QLS-R) fit the data well. This factor structure was evaluated with the second dataset using CFA and was also found to be fit the data well. The results support the robustness of the 3-factor model of the QLS-R in schizophrenia and mixed diagnostic samples. Future research should evaluate the validity of the 3-factor model of the QLS-R, and consider the merits of changing the name of the Intrapsychic Foundations factor to Motivation.

Efficacy and tolerability of ziprasidone versus risperidone in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: an 8-week, double-blind, multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: More head-to-head comparisons of antipsychotics are needed to discern the relative efficacy and safety profiles of these compounds. Thus, we compared ziprasidone and risperidone in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHOD: Patients with DSM-III-R acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were randomly assigned to double-blind ziprasidone 40 to 80 mg b.i.d. (N = 149) or risperidone 3 to 5 mg b.i.d (N = 147) for 8 weeks. Primary efficacy measures included Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S) score; secondary measures included scores on the PANSS negative sub-scale, CGI-Improvement scale (CGI-I), and PANSS-derived Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRSd) total and core items. Safety assessments included movement disorder evaluations, laboratory tests, electrocardiography, vital signs, and body weight. Efficacy analyses employed a prospectively defined Evaluable Patients cohort. Treatment equivalence was conferred if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of the ziprasidone/risperidone ratio of least-squares mean change from baseline was > 0.60. Data were gathered from August 1995 to January 1997. RESULTS: Equivalence was demonstrated in PANSS total scores, CGI-S scores, PANSS negative subscale scores, BPRSd total and core item scores, and PANSS total and CGI-I responder rates. Both agents were well tolerated. Risperidone exhibited a significantly higher Movement Disorder Burden (MDB) score (p < .05) and higher incidences of prolactin elevation and clinically relevant weight gain. However, compared with current recommendations, study dosing may have been high for some risperidone-treated patients (mean dose = 7.4 mg/day) and low for some ziprasidone-treated patients (mean dose = 114.2 mg/day). CONCLUSION: Both agents equally improved psychotic symptoms, and both were generally well tolerated, with ziprasidone demonstrating a lower MDB score and less effect on prolactin and weight than risperidone.

Impact of second-generation antipsychotics and perphenazine on depressive symptoms in a randomized trial of treatment for chronic schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: According to the American Psychiatric Association Clinical Practice Guidelines for schizophrenia, second-generation antipsychotics may be specifically indicated for the treatment of depression in schizophrenia. We examined the impact of these medications on symptoms of depression using the data from the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE), conducted between January 2001 and December 2004. METHOD: Patients with DSM-IV-defined schizophrenia (N = 1,460) were assigned to treatment with a first-generation antipsychotic (perphenazine) or one of 4 second-generation drugs (olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, or ziprasidone) and followed for up to 18 months (phase 1). Patients with tardive dyskinesia were excluded from the randomization that included perphenazine. Depression was assessed with the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS). Mixed models were used to evaluate group differences during treatment with the initially assigned drug. An interaction analysis evaluated differences in drug response by whether patients had a baseline score on the CDSS of ≥ 6, indicative of a current major depressive episode (MDE). RESULTS: There were no significant differences between treatment groups on phase 1 analysis, although there was a significant improvement in depression across all treatments. A significant interaction was found between treatment and experiencing an MDE at baseline (P = .05), and further paired comparisons suggested that quetiapine was superior to risperidone among patients who were in an MDE at baseline (P = .0056). CONCLUSIONS: We found no differences between any second-generation antipsychotic and the first-generation antipsychotic perphenazine and no support for the clinical practice recommendation, but we did detect a signal indicating a small potential difference favoring quetiapine over risperidone only in patients with an MDE at baseline.

A comparison of ziprasidone and risperidone in the long-term treatment of schizophrenia: a 44-week, double-blind, continuation study.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized, double-blind, multicentre extension study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of ziprasidone and risperidone for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHODS: Patients who had responded to treatment for an acute exacerbation of illness in an 8-week study received ziprasidone, 80 to 160 mg/day (n = 62), or risperidone, 6 to 10 mg/day (n = 77), for up to 44 additional weeks. Primary efficacy variables included changes in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score and Clinical Global Impression Severity (CGI-S) score. Tolerability and safety assessments included movement disorders, adverse events, study discontinuation rates, and weight and metabolic parameters. RESULTS: Both the ziprasidone and risperidone groups showed statistical improvement from baseline in PANSS and CGI-S scores at study end point with no significant differences between treatment groups. More risperidone-treated patients completed the study (41.6%) than ziprasidone-treated patients (33.9%), but the difference was not statistically significant. Ziprasidone-treated patients who completed the study showed greater improvement in depressive symptoms assessed by Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale than risperidone-treated patients (P < 0.05). Ziprasidone was associated with a more favourable effect on extrapyramidal symptom (EPS) measures and prolactin as well as less weight gain than risperidone. Median dosages were ziprasidone 120 mg/day and risperidone 8 mg/day. CONCLUSIONS: Ziprasidone and risperidone demonstrated similar efficacy during long-term treatment of patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. While more subjects on risperidone completed the extension study, ziprasidone was associated with fewer adverse effects on weight, EPS measures, and prolactin than risperidone.