Reliability, validity and sensitivity of Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale for patients with current major depression disorder

Abstract

Objective To examine the reliability,validity and sensitivity of Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) for patients with current major depression disorder (MDD). Methods One hundred and twenty-two current MDD (DSM-Ⅳ) patients were administered with MADRS, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-17 item version (HAMD) and Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) at baseline, 12 patients were selected to complete rater agreement test,and 47 patients receiving antidepressant treatment were followed up at 2,4,6 and 8 week and administered with MADRS and HAMD. Correlation analysis, reliability analysis and effect size (ES) calculation were used to determine the reliability,validity and sensitivity to changes during drug treatment. Results Intra rater reliability for MADRS was 0. 954. Baseline item-total score correlations were between 0. 445 and 0. 770 (P ＜ 0. 01 ), and the average correlation was 0. 629. The Cronbach α coefficient was 0. 847. The criterion related validity with HAMD and CGI-S was 0. 853 and 0. 672 (P＜0.01) ,respectively. The re-test reliability for MADRS at 2,4,6 and 8 week was 0. 737 ,0. 651,0. 543 and 0. 524 (P＜0. 01 ) ,respectively.MADRS had higher ES than HAMD when taken as clinical endpoint outcome measurement (0.41 vs 0.40,0.87 vs 0. 72,1.14 vs 0. 88,1.20 vs 0. 96 for 2nd,4th,6th and 8th week, respectively). Conclusion MADRS has good reliability and validity for patients with MDD. It is more sensitive to assess drug effect than HAMD. Key words: Montgomery-asberg depression rating scale ; Major depression disorder ; Reliability ; Validity ; Sensitivity ;