Research Repository

How do psychiatrists apply the minimum clinically important difference to assess patient responses to treatment?

McMichael, A and Rolison, JJ and Boeri, M and Francis, J and O?Neill, F and Kee, F (2016) 'How do psychiatrists apply the minimum clinically important difference to assess patient responses to treatment?' MDM Policy and Practice, 1 (1). ISSN 2381-4683

[img]
Preview
Text
2381468316678855.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.

Download (569kB) | Preview

Abstract

Symptom report scales are used in clinical practice to monitor patient outcomes. Using them permits the definition of a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) beyond which a patient may be judged as having responded to treatment. Despite recommendations that clinicians routinely use MCIDs in clinical practice, statisticians disagree about how MCIDs should be used to evaluate individual patient outcomes and responses to treatment. To address this issue, we asked how clinicians actually use MCIDs to evaluate patient outcomes in response to treatment. Sixty-eight psychiatrists made judgments about whether hypothetical patients had responded to treatment based on their pre- and post-treatment change scores on the widely used Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). Psychiatrists were provided with the scale?s MCID on which to base their judgements. Our secondary objective was to assess whether knowledge of the patient?s genotype influenced psychiatrists? responder judgements. Thus psychiatrists were also informed of whether patients possessed a genotype indicating hyper-responsiveness to treatment. While many psychiatrists appropriately used the MCID, others accepted a far lower post-treatment change as indicative of a response to treatment. When psychiatrists accepted a lower post-treatment change than the MCID, they were less confident in such judgements compared to when a patient?s post-treatment change exceeded the scale?s MCID. Psychiatrists were also less likely to identify patients as responders to treatment if they possessed a hyper-responsiveness genotype. Clinicians should recognise that when judging patient responses to treatment, they often tolerate lower response thresholds than warranted. At least some conflate their judgements with information, such as the patient?s genotype, that is irrelevant to a post hoc response-to-treatment assessment. Consequently, clinicians may be at risk of persisting with treatments that have failed to demonstrate patient benefits.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: quality of care, patient decision making, clinical practice guidelines, managed care
Subjects: B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology
Divisions: Faculty of Science and Health > Psychology, Department of
Depositing User: Jonathan Rolison
Date Deposited: 20 Dec 2016 12:07
Last Modified: 30 Jul 2018 13:15
URI: http://repository.essex.ac.uk/id/eprint/18616

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item