Quality Of Life Scale Total Score Research Articles

The centrality of motivation in psychosocial functioning: Network and bifactor analysis of the Quality of Life Scale in first-episode psychosis.

Psychosocial functioning impairment is prevalent in first-episode psychosis and chronic schizophrenia. The Quality of Life Scale (QLS) is a widely used tool to measure psychosocial functioning; however, given the overlap between negative symptoms and functioning, along with the QLS being conceptualized initially as a measure of the deficit syndrome, it is unclear whether summing QLS items into a total score is an appropriate measure of overall psychosocial functioning. This study aimed to examine the centrality of QLS items and the appropriateness of using a QLS total score. Participants with first-episode psychosis (n = 404) completed the QLS. Item centrality was assessed using a network analysis approach, while reliability and dimensionality of the QLS total score and subscales were measured using bifactor modeling and related psychometric indices. Network analysis results showed that an item relating to motivation was the most central item within the scale. Moreover, bifactor modeling results found that motivation and other items relating to negative symptoms may reflect the QLS total score more strongly than other functioning (i.e., Interpersonal, Instrumental) domains. Based on these findings, we urge researchers to use caution when using a QLS total score, as it may unequally confound functional domains and motivation. Moreover, our results continue to underscore the importance of negative symptoms, particularly motivational impairment, in psychosocial functioning. Future studies should aim to examine the centrality of other functioning measures in psychosis and schizophrenia, as our results suggest that psychosocial functioning may be greatly influenced by motivation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Evaluation of a few discrete clinical markers may predict categorization of actively symptomatic non-acute schizophrenia patients as treatment resistant or responders: A study by ROC curve analysis and multivariate analyses

Here, we used Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to determine whether clinical factors may aid predicting the categorization of schizophrenia patients as Treatment Resistant (TRS) or antipsychotic responsive schizophrenia (ARS). Patients with an established condition of TRS or ARS were assessed for: clinical presentation and course; neurological soft signs (NES); psychopathology by PANSS; cognitive performances; quality of life scale (QLS); functional capacity; social functioning (PSP and SLOF scales). In ROC curve analysis, significance indicated that the Area under curve (AUC) allowed distinguishing between TRS and ARS. Multivariate analyses were additionally used to provide independent predictive analysis. Multiple clinical variables showed significant AUCs. The largest significant AUCs were found for: NES total score; SLOF Area2; QLS subscale; antipsychotic doses. The highest sensitivity was found for NES total score, the highest specificity for previous hospitalizations. The highest Odds Ratio of being included within the TRS category were found for: NES total score (7.5); QLS total score (5.49); and previous hospitalizations (4.76). This same circumscribed group of variables was also found to be predictive of TRS when adopting stepwise logistic regression or discriminant analysis. We concluded that the evaluation of few clinical factors may provide reliable and accurate predictions on whether one schizophrenia patient may be categorized as a TRS.

What does the Managing Emotions branch of the MSCEIT add to the MATRICS consensus cognitive battery?

The Managing Emotions branch of the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT-ME) was included within the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) as the measure of social cognition, although limited research has examined its associations with psychosocial functioning in people with schizophrenia or other severe mental illnesses. This secondary analysis with 107 participants examined what the MSCEIT-ME contributes to our understanding of functioning in this population, and whether it uniquely predicts psychosocial functioning after controlling for performance on the other MCCB tests and negative symptoms. Performance on the MSCEIT-ME was significantly correlated with all three MCCP factors (processing speed, attention/working memory, learning) within schizophrenia-schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, and other mixed diagnoses groups. Better performance on MSCEIT-ME was associated with better psychosocial functioning on the Quality of Life Scale (QLS) in the schizophrenia-schizoaffective disorder group, but not in the bipolar or other mixed diagnoses groups. In addition, in the schizophrenia-schizoaffective disorder group, after controlling for demographic characteristics in stepwise multiple regression analyses, MSCEIT-ME was the only significant predictor of the QLS total score and the QLS interpersonal relations and intrapsychic foundations subscales, with none of the MCCB factors entering any of the regression models. The MSCEIT-ME may reflect a unique aspect of social cognition that is related to impaired psychosocial functioning in schizophrenia and is not tapped by the other cognitive tests on the MCCB. Further research on the MSCEIT-ME could provide unique insights into the social functioning problems in schizophrenia.

Long-term effectiveness of aripiprazole once-monthly for schizophrenia is maintained in the QUALIFY extension study

ObjectiveTo evaluate long-term safety and effectiveness of continued treatment with aripiprazole once-monthly 400mg (AOM 400) in patients with schizophrenia. MethodsPatients who completed the QUALIFY study (NCT01795547) in the AOM 400 arm were eligible for 6 additional once-monthly injections of AOM 400 during an open-label, 24-week extension (NCT01959035). Safety data were collected at each visit. Effectiveness measures included change from baseline in health-related qualify of life and functioning on the Heinrichs-Carpenter Quality of Life scale (QLS) and Clinical Global Impression – Severity (CGI-S) scale. ResultsOf the 88 patients enrolled, 77 (88%) completed the extension study. Most common treatment-emergent adverse events (incidence ≥2%) were weight increased (6/88, 7%), toothache (3/88, 3%) and headache (3/88, 3%). Effectiveness was maintained during the extension study, with small but continued improvements from baseline: the least squares mean (LSM) change (95% CI) from baseline to week 24 was 2.32 (−1.21 to 5.85) for the QLS total score and −0.10 (−0.26 to 0.06) for the CGI-S score. The aggregated LSM change (95% CI) from baseline of the lead-in study to week 24 of the extension study was 11.54 (7.45 to 15.64) for the QLS total score and −0.98 (−1.18 to −0.79) for the CGI-S score. ConclusionsAOM 400 was well tolerated in patients continuing AOM treatment during the extension phase of the QUALIFY study. Robust and clinically meaningful improvements in health-related quality of life and functioning were maintained, further supporting the long-term clinical benefits of AOM 400 for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia.

Reduced sexual dysfunction with aripiprazole once-monthly versus paliperidone palmitate: results from QUALIFY.

Sexual dysfunction, a common side effect of antipsychotic medications, may be partly caused by dopamine antagonism and elevation of prolactin. In QUALIFY, a randomized study, aripiprazole once-monthly 400 mg (AOM 400), a dopamine D2 receptor partial agonist, showed noninferiority and subsequent superiority versus paliperidone palmitate (PP), a dopamine D2 receptor antagonist, on the Heinrichs-Carpenter Quality-of-Life Scale (QLS) in patients with schizophrenia aged 18-60 years. Sexual dysfunction (Arizona Sexual Experience Scale) and serum prolactin levels were also assessed. Odds for sexual dysfunction were lower with AOM 400 versus PP [week 28 adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval), 0.29 (0.14-0.61); P=0.0012] in men [0.33 (0.13-0.86); P=0.023], women [0.14 (0.03-0.62); P=0.0099], and patients aged 18-35 years [0.04 (<0.01-0.34); P=0.003]. Among patients shifting from sexual dysfunction at baseline to none at week 28, there was a trend toward greater improvement in the QLS total score. The mean (SD) prolactin concentrations decreased with AOM 400 [-150.6 (274.4) mIU/l] and increased with PP [464.7 (867.5) mIU/l] in both men and women. Six PP-treated patients experienced prolactin-related adverse events. In addition to greater improvement on QLS, patients had a lower risk for sexual dysfunction and prolactin elevation with AOM 400 versus PP in QUALIFY.

Defining the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the Heinrichs-carpenter quality of life scale (QLS).

To determine the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) of the Heinrichs-Carpenter Quality of Life Scale (QLS). Data from the "Schizophrenia Trial of Aripiprazole" (STAR) study were used in this analysis. The MCID value of the QLS total score was estimated using the anchor-based method. These findings were substantiated/validated by comparing the MCID estimate to other measurements collected in the study. Half of the patients (49%) showed improvement in Clinical Global Impressions of Severity (CGI-S) during the trial. The estimated MCID of the QLS total score was 5.30 (standard error: 2.60; 95% confidence interval: [0.16; 10.43]; p < 0.05). Patients were divided into two groups: "QLS improvers" (QLS total score increased ≥ six points) and "non-improvers". The QLS improvers had significantly better effectiveness and reported significantly higher levels of preference for their current medications. There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in the change in two of the four domains of QLS; "Interpersonal relations" and "Intrapsychic foundations" domains during the study. These findings support the value of the estimated MCID for the QLS and may be a useful tool in evaluating antipsychotic treatment effects and improving long-term patient outcomes in schizophrenia. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Qualify: a randomized head-to-head study of aripiprazole once-monthly and paliperidone palmitate in the treatment of schizophrenia

ObjectiveTo directly compare aripiprazole once-monthly 400mg (AOM 400) and paliperidone palmitate once-monthly (PP) on the Heinrichs–Carpenter Quality-of-Life Scale (QLS), a validated health-related quality of life and functioning measure in schizophrenia. MethodThis 28-week, randomized, non-inferiority, open-label, rater-blinded, head-to-head study (QUALIFY) of AOM 400 and PP in adult patients (18–60 years) comprised oral conversion, initiation of AOM 400 or PP treatment, and continuation with intramuscular injections every 4weeks. The primary endpoint assessed non-inferiority and superiority on QLS total score analyzed using a mixed model for repeated measurements. ResultsOf 295 randomized patients, 100/148 (67.6%) of AOM 400 and 83/147 (56.5%) of PP patients completed 28weeks of treatment. A statistically significant least squares mean difference in change from baseline to week 28 on QLS total score (4.67 [95%CI: 0.32;9.02], p=0.036) confirmed non-inferiority and established superiority of AOM 400 vs PP. There were also significant improvements in Clinical Global Impression — Severity scale and the Investigator's Assessment Questionnaire for AOM 400 vs PP, and pre-defined sub-group analyses revealed a consistent pattern of significance favoring AOM 400 in patients ≤35years. Common treatment-emergent adverse events in the treatment continuation phase were more frequent with PP vs AOM 400, and adverse events were the most frequent reason for discontinuation (27/137 [19.7%] for PP and 16/144 [11.1%] for AOM 400). All-cause discontinuation was numerically lower with AOM 400. ConclusionSuperior improvements on clinician-rated health-related quality of life and a favorable tolerability profile suggest greater overall effectiveness for aripiprazole once-monthly vs paliperidone palmitate.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:NCT01795547.

Aripiprazole Once-monthly is Superior to Paliperidone Palmitate in a Randomized, Head-to-head Clinical Study

Introduction This study directly compares the effectiveness of aripiprazole once-monthly 400 mg (AOM) and paliperidone palmitate once-monthly (PP) on the validated and symptom-focused Heinrichs-Carpenter Quality-of-Life Scale (QLS) in schizophrenia. Methods A 28-week, randomized, open-label rater-blinded, head-to-head study (NCT01795547) of AOM and PP in adult patients (18-60 years) needing a change from current oral antipsychotic treatment for any reason. The study comprised oral conversion, initiation of AOM or PP treatment according to labels, and treatment continuation with injections every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint assessed non-inferiority and subsequently superiority on change from baseline to week 28 in QLS total score analyzed using a mixed model for repeated measurements. Results Of 295 randomized patients, 100/148 (67.6%) of AOM and 83/147 (56.5%) of PP patients completed 28 weeks of treatment. In treated patients, adverse events (AEs) were the most frequent reason for discontinuation; AOM: 16/144 (11.1%), PP: 27/137 (19.7%). The difference in change from baseline to week 28 on QLS total score was statistically significant (4.67 [95%CI: 0.32;9.02], p=0.036), confirming non-inferiority and establishing superiority of AOM compared to PP. The respective changes were 7.47±1.53 for AOM and 2.80±1.62 for PP. AEs occurring at rates ≥5% in either group in the treatment continuation phase were weight increased (AOM: 12/119 [10.1%]; PP: 17/109 [15.6%]), psychotic disorder (AOM: 3/119 [2.5%]; PP: 6/109 [5.5%]) and insomnia (AOM: 3/119 [2.5%]; PP: 6/109 [5.5%]). Conclusion Superior improvements on the clinician-rated QLS and lower rates of all-cause discontinuation suggest greater overall effectiveness for aripiprazole once-monthly vs paliperidone palmitate.

Empirically driven definitions of “good,” “moderate,” and “poor” levels of functioning in the treatment of schizophrenia

PurposeThis study used an empirical approach to identify and validate the classification of patients with schizophrenia in “good,” “moderate,” or “poor” functioning groups based on the assessment of functional measures.MethodsUsing data from a study of schizophrenia outpatients, patients were classified into functional groups using cluster analysis based on the Heinrich–Carpenter Quality of Life Scale (QLS), the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Summary Score, and a productivity measure. A three-cluster solution was chosen. Concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity were assessed. Criteria for classifying patient functioning as “good,” “moderate,” or “poor” were established using classification and regression tree analysis.ResultsThe three clusters consistently differentiated patients on the QLS, SF-36 Mental Component Summary Score, and productivity measure. The clusters also differed on other functional measures and were concordant with previous functional classifications. Concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity were good. “Good” functioning was identified as a QLS total score ≥84.5; “moderate” and “poor” functioning were separated by a cutoff score of 15.5 on the QLS intrapsychic foundation domain. Sensitivity ranged from 86 to 93 % and specificity from 89 to 99 %.ConclusionsThe heterogeneity in functioning of schizophrenia patients can be classified reliably in an empirical manner using specific cutoff scores on commonly used functional measures.

Effects of olanzapine long-acting injection on levels of functioning among acutely ill patients with schizophrenia

Objective:To assess the effects of olanzapine long-acting injection (olanzapine-LAI) on levels of functioning in acutely ill patients with schizophrenia.Research design and methods:During this 8-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 404 inpatients were randomized to four treatment arms (olanzapine-LAI 210 mg/2 weeks = 106; olanzapine-LAI 300 mg/2 weeks = 100; olanzapine-LAI 405 mg/4 weeks = 100; placebo = 98). Also, data from the three active dosing arms were combined and compared to placebo data.Clinical trial registration:NCT00088478Main outcome measures:The treatment group comparison of mean change from baseline to endpoint in the total score and four subdomains of the Heinrichs–Carpenter Quality of Life Scale (QLS) and in the 2 summary scores and 8 subscale scores of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were assessed using an ANOVA model.Results:All three olanzapine-LAI treatment groups and the combined olanzapine-LAI group were superior to placebo on the QLS total score (all p-values < 0.01) and the Intrapsychic Foundations subdomain (all p-values < 0.02). Olanzapine-LAI 210 mg/2 weeks (p < 0.001), 300 mg/2 weeks (p = 0.006), and the combined olanzapine-LAI group (p = 0.003) were superior to placebo on the Interpersonal Relations subdomain. The 300 mg/2 weeks group (p = 0.027) and the combined olanzapine-LAI group (p = 0.014) were also superior to placebo on the Instrumental Role subdomain. For the SF-36, the 300 mg/2 weeks and 405 mg/4 weeks olanzapine-LAI groups and the combined olanzapine-LAI group were superior to placebo on the Mental component score (all p-values < 0.05). Each olanzapine-LAI group and the combined group were superior on the Mental Health scale (all p-values < 0.05). Significant negative correlations between PANSS scores and measures of functioning indicate that as symptoms decreased, functioning increased.Conclusion:These results suggest that olanzapine-LAI may improve level of functioning in acutely ill patients with schizophrenia within 8 weeks of initiating treatment.

Quality of life and cognitive dysfunction in people with schizophrenia

The main purpose of the present study was to examine the relationship between quality of life (QOL) and cognitive dysfunction in schizophrenia. Subjects were 61 stabilized outpatients. Quality of life and cognitive function were assessed using the Quality of Life Scale (QLS) and the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS), respectively. Clinical symptoms were evaluated with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS). The BACS composite score and the BACS Verbal memory score were positively correlated with the QLS total score and two subscales. The BACS Attention and speed of information processing score had positive correlation with the QLS total and all the subscales scores. The PANSS Positive and Negative syndrome scores also had significant correlations with the QLS total score and all of the subscales. In addition, the CDSS score was negatively correlated with the QLS total score and some of the subscales. Stepwise regression analysis showed that the BACS Attention and speed of information processing score was an independent predictor of the QLS total score but it was less associated with the QLS than the PANSS Negative syndrome score and the CDSS score. The results suggest that negative and depressive symptoms are important factors on patients' QOL and also support the view that cognitive performance provides a determinant of QOL in patients with schizophrenia.

Challenging the assumption that improvement in functional outcomes is delayed relative to improvement in symptoms in the treatment of schizophrenia

ObjectivesFunctional improvement is generally thought to be distal to improvement in psychiatric symptoms in patients with schizophrenia. In this study, we assessed the effects of early response/non-response to an atypical antipsychotic across multiple outcome measures. MethodsThis was a randomized, double-blind, flexible-dose, 12-week study that enrolled chronically-ill patients (n=628) diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were experiencing acute symptom exacerbation. Patients were initially assigned to risperidone drug therapy (2–6mg/day), and their response status at 2weeks was determined. Early responders (ERs) continued with risperidone therapy, whereas early non-responders (ENRs) were randomized (1:1) in a double-blind manner to either continue on risperidone or switch to another atypical antipsychotic for 10 additional weeks of therapy. Subsequent treatment outcomes were measured by the Quality of Life Scale (QLS), Schizophrenia Objective Functioning Instrument (SOFI), and Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptics (SWN-K) scale. ResultsCompared to ENRs, ERs to risperidone showed significantly more improvement from baseline to endpoint on the QLS total score and all 4 categories (p<.01), the SOFI overall global score and all 4 domains (p<.001), and the SWN-K total score and all 5 subscales (p<.05). Among ERs, the majority of improvement had already been attained by Week 2. There was concordance among clinician- and patient-rated scales across outcomes. ConclusionImprovement across multiple outcome dimensions was not delayed relative to improvement in psychiatric symptoms. Rather, patients who showed an early response to antipsychotic treatment as defined by improvement in psychiatric symptoms also showed early and consistent improvement in functioning, quality of life, and subjective well-being.

What CATIE Found: Results From the Schizophrenia Trial

What CATIE Found: Results From the Schizophrenia Trial

Preference of medicine and patient-reported quality of life in community-treated schizophrenic patients receiving aripiprazole vs standard of care: Results from the STAR study

Objective To evaluate quality of life and patient preference for schizophrenia treatment in a community based study comparing the use of aripiprazole to the standard of care (SOC). Method This open-label, 26-week, multi-centre, randomised study compared aripiprazole with SOC (olanzapine, quetiapine or risperidone) in patients with schizophrenia (DSM-IV-TR criteria). The primary effectiveness variable was the mean total score of the Investigator Assessment Questionnaire (IAQ) at Week 26. The outcome research variables included the Preference of Medicine (POM) questionnaire, the Quality of Life Scale (QLS), and the EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D). The results from these outcome research variables are the focus of this paper addressing quality of life and patient preference. Results A total of 555 patients were randomised to receive aripiprazole ( n = 284) or SOC ( n = 271). The OC data at Week 26, reported that more respondents rated the study medication as ‘much better’ compared with their previous medication in the aripiprazole group versus SOC for patients (59% vs 35%, P < 0.001) and caregivers (58% vs 30%, P = 0.014). The improvement in QLS total score was also significantly greater in the aripiprazole group compared with SOC – mean change from baseline in QLS total score of 16.21 vs 10.01 ( P < 0.001) at Week 26 (OC data set). A greater proportion of patients (93% vs 85%; P = 0.005) in the aripiprazole group had a satisfactory response on the EQ-5D Self Care Scale; all other EQ-5D scores were similar. Conclusion The study findings suggest that quality of life and patient medication preference measures were better for aripiprazole than for SOC.

Association of symptomatology and cognitive deficits to functional capacity in schizophrenia

Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the association of positive and negative symptoms, as well as of neurocognition to functional status in patients with schizophrenia. Participants were 309 veterans with DSM-IV-diagnosed schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were enrolled in a 12-month double-blind clinical trial and randomized to receive either 5 to 20 mg/d of oral olanzapine or haloperidol. Patients were assessed at study entry and at 3, 6 and 12-months on the PANSS and measures of verbal memory, verbal fluency, fine motor coordination, visual sequencing/set shifting, and conceptual reasoning. Functional status was evaluated by the Heinrichs–Carpenter Quality of Life Scale (QLS) and by days of employment in the past 30. Hierarchical regression models examined the association of functional status with symptomatology and three neurocognitive factors (motor skills, memory and card sorting), controlling for demographics and visit number. A mixed effects model was used to adjust for repeated observations from the same subjects. Results The PANSS explained 16% additional variance in QLS total score after accounting for demographics and visit number ( p < .001), while the neurocognitive factors explained only 4% additional variance beyond the effect of symptoms. When neurocognition was entered before symptoms, it explained an additional 8% of the variance on the QLS total score, while the PANSS explained an additional 12% over and above neurocognition. Conclusions These findings suggest that symptoms may pose an equal or greater impediment to functional capacity independent of neurocognition, at least in younger non-institutionalized people with schizophrenia.

Influence of catechol- O-methyltransferase Val 158Met polymorphism on neuropsychological and functional outcomes of classical rehabilitation and cognitive remediation in schizophrenia

Neurocognitive deficits are recognized as core features of schizophrenia and have a great impact on functional outcome. Recent reports have suggested that a functional polymorphism, Val 158Met, of the catechol- O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene, partially influences cognitive performances (mainly cognitive flexibility and working memory) both in schizophrenic patients and in healthy controls, probably by modulating prefrontal dopamine function. While previous studies focused on single evaluation of cognitive functioning, we aimed to analyse the additive effect of COMT genotype and cognitive exercise on dynamic modulation of cognitive performances. We analysed the COMT Val 158Met polymorphism in 50 patients with chronic schizophrenia randomly allocated to two treatment conditions for 3 months: standard rehabilitation treatment (SRT) alone and SRT plus specific cognitive exercise of impaired functions. We then divided our sample in four subgroups on the basis of genotype (Val/Val versus Met carriers) and treatment (placebo versus active). We assessed patients with a neuropsychological battery, the Positive and Negative Symptoms Scale (PANSS) and the Quality of Life Scale (QLS) at enrolment, after 3 months of therapy and after further 3 months of follow-up. We found significantly greater improvement of cognitive flexibility performance and QLS total score for Met carriers on active treatment in comparison to Val/Val on placebo. The findings support the hypothesis that COMT polymorphism influences individual capacity to recover from cognitive deficit through rehabilitation therapy after a wider intervention also including deficit-specific cognitive exercise as a potentiating tool.

Quality of life and subjective well-being during treatment with antipsychotics in out-patients with schizophrenia

Objective To assess the Quality of Life (QOL) in outpatients with schizophrenia under antipsychotics from two perspectives: a “subjective” perspective as rated by the patient and an “objective” perspective as rated by the physician. Method EASE (External Assessment of Quality of Life in Out-patients with Schizophrenia) is a 12-month, prospective, naturalistic study of the QOL in patients on antipsychotic treatment for schizophrenia in an out-patient setting in Germany. The study included 1462 patients who were initiated on a new antipsychotic or switched to another antipsychotic. The Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptics scale (SWN) and the Quality of Life Scale (QLS) were used to assess the QOL in these patients. The Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale was used to assess overall symptom severity. Four cohorts were identified and evaluated: (a) patients treated with olanzapine monotherapy ( N = 1007), (b) another atypical antipsychotic as monotherapy ( N = 335), (c) a typical antipsychotic as monotherapy ( N = 32) and (d) combination therapy with more than one antipsychotic ( N = 88). Results QOL as assessed by both SWN and QLS improved in all treatment cohorts. SWN responses in the respective cohorts were (a) 52.3%, (b) 38.8%, (c) 31.3% and (d) 44.3%, whilst the QLS responses were (a) 58.2%, (b) 45.1%, (c) 59.4% and (c) 40.9%. Symptom severity as assessed by the CGI also improved over time regardless of the type of antipsychotic. An increase of one point on the CGI corresponded to a change in SWN total score of − 9.67 points and a change in QLS total score of − 13.36 points. Conclusions Both QOL and symptom severity improved over the 12-month study period, regardless of the type of antipsychotic taken. QOL improvement as perceived both from a “subjective” and an “objective” perspective was greatest in the cohort on olanzapine monotherapy.

Characteristics of two alternative schizophrenia remission definitions: Relationship to clinical and quality of life outcomes

Background The goal of these secondary analyses of clinical trial data was to characterize clinical outcomes in patients with schizophrenia who met symptom severity or duration thresholds for two alternative definitions of remission, and to explore their relationships to improvement duration and quality of life outcomes. Methods Definition 1 used threshold criteria for selected PANSS items sustained over at least 6-months Definition 2 used Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) % change, a threshold score for the Clinical Global Improvement-Severity (CGI-S) maintained for at least 8 weeks, and threshold scores for selected BPRS items. Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) and Quality of Life scale (QLS) total scores were pooled from 6 clinical trials. The extent to which the alternative severity thresholds from these two definitions and duration of clinical improvement were associated with different clinical and QLS outcomes was explored. Regression analysis also assessed the relative contribution of each of the components of the two definition severity thresholds to improvements in QLS Total score. Results Increases in QLS scores were greater for those patients who met either threshold criteria relative to those who met neither ( p < .0001). Significantly greater improvements in QLS scores were observed for patients who met either threshold criteria at the 8-, 16- and 24-week visits relative to those who met criteria at weeks 16 and 24, or at week 24 only ( p < 0.001), as well as for the subset of patients who met threshold criteria at both 24 and 52 weeks relative to those who met criteria at only one of these 2 time points. Only 31% to 47% of patients meeting threshold criteria for either definition at the 8-, 16- or 24-week visits remained in remission at the 52-week visit. Among the severity threshold components analyzed, BPRS total % change from baseline was the strongest predictor of improvement in QLS scores. Conclusions Quality of life improved most for patients who achieved severity thresholds associated with either remission criteria and who stayed improved for longer periods. Total BPRS change scores accounted for the greatest percentage of the QLS scores variance. Only a fraction of patients who meet severity criteria for either remission definition early in treatment will remain at that level of improvement within the subsequent 9–12 months.