Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T04:00:09.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Time-stability of the “Functional Remission of General Schizophrenia” (FROGS) scale

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2020

C. Lançon ,
F.-J. Baylé ,
P.-M. Llorca ,
F. Rouillon ,
H. Caci ,
S. Lancrenon  and
P. Gorwood
C. Lançon*
Affiliation:
Département de Psychiatrie, CHU Sainte-Marguerite, 270, boulevard Sainte-Marguerite, 13274Marseille cedex 09, France
F.-J. Baylé
Affiliation:
Sainte-Anne Hospital (SHU), Paris V-Descartes University, Paris, France
P.-M. Llorca
Affiliation:
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Clermont-Ferrand, France
F. Rouillon
Affiliation:
Sainte-Anne Hospital (CMME), Paris V-Descartes University, Paris, France Inserm U675, Centre of Psychiatry and Neurosciences, Sainte-Anne Hospital, Paris, France
H. Caci
Affiliation:
CHU de Nice, Pôle Enfants-Adolescents, F-06200 Nice, France
S. Lancrenon
Affiliation:
SYLIA-STAT, Bourg-la-Reine, France
P. Gorwood
Affiliation:
Sainte-Anne Hospital (CMME), Paris V-Descartes University, Paris, France Inserm U675, Centre of Psychiatry and Neurosciences, Sainte-Anne Hospital, Paris, France
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Functional remission in schizophrenia is an important treatment goal, particularly for patients who have achieved symptomatic remission. The Functional Remission of General Schizophrenia (FROGS) scale has recently been developed, with the FROGS total score being reported as reliable in a cross-sectional study, with an exploratory factor analysis showing three oblique meaningful factors. As such an instrument should have a stable structure over time, but also be able to detect improvement of functioning with time, we have further analysed the validity of the FROGS scale, specifically assessing time-stability. We re-evaluated the initial patient sample around 1.5years after the first evaluation (mean=17.1months, standard deviation=1.9), restricting the analyses to patients who were still being followed-up and in clinical remission (n = 140 patients). The mean (standard deviation) FROGS total score was 75.82 (10.85) at the second evaluation, showing a significant improvement with time (3.84; P<0.0001 versus the first evaluation). The internal consistency/reliability of the FROGS scale was still very high (Cronbach's α = 0.919). Significant improvements between the first and second evaluations were also apparent for all the individual items in the FROGS scale (P<0.01) as well as for the subscores for the three extracted factors (P<0.0001). Statistically significant correlations were observed between the FROGS scale and other indices, including the Global Assessment of Functioning (r = 0.58; P<0.0001). These results provide further evidence of the solid psychometric properties of the FROGS scale.

Keywords

EvaluationFROGSFunctional remissionRecoverySocial functioningSchizophrenia
Type
Original articles
Information
European Psychiatry , Volume 27 , Issue 6 , August 2012 , pp. 437 - 441
Copyright
Copyright © Elsevier Masson SAS 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Psychiatric Association, 2000. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth Edition, text revision. American Psychiatric Association, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Andreasen, N.C., Carpenter, W.T., Kane, J.M., Lasser, R.A., Marder, S.R., Weinberger, D.R.Remission in schizophrenia: proposed criteria and rationale for consensus. Am J Psychiatry. 162 3: 2005 441–449.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ballenger, J.C.Treatment of anxiety disorders to remission. J Clin Psychiatry. 62 suppl. 12: 2001 5–9.Google Scholar
Barker, S., Barron, N., McFarland, B.H., Bigelow, D.A.A community ability scale for chronically mentally ill consumers: 1. Reliability and validity. Community Ment Health J. 30 4: 1994 363–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birchwood, M., Smith, J., Cochrane, R., Wetton, S., Copestake, S.The social functioning scale: the development and validation of a new scale of social adjustment for use in family intervention programmes with schizophrenic patients. Br J Psychiatry. 1990; 157: 853–859.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Hert, M., Van Winkel, R., Wampers, M., Kane, J., Van Os, J., Peuskens, J.Remission criteria for schizophrenia: evaluation in a large naturalistic cohort. Schizophr Res. 92 1–3: 2007 68–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Endicott, J., Spitzer, R.L., Fleiss, J.L., Cohen, J.The global assessment scale. A procedure for measuring overall severity of psychiatric disturbance. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 33 6: 1976 766–771.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fleischhacker, W.W., Rabinowitz, J., Kemmler, G., Eerdekens, M., Mehnert, A.Perceived functioning, well-being and psychiatric symptoms in patients with stable schizophrenia treated with long-acting risperidone for one year. Br J Psychiatry. 2005; 187: 131–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, E., Prien, R.F., Jarrett, R.B., Keller, M.B., Kupfer, D.J., Lavori, P.W.et al.Conceptualisation and rationale for consensus definition of terms in major depressive disorder. Remission, recovery, relapse and recurrence. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 48 9: 1991 851–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guy W. Early Clinical Drug Evaluation Unit (ECDEU) assessment manual for psychopharmacology. Revised. National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) publication DHEW Publ No. (Adm) 76-338. NIMH, Bethesda MD 1976:217-22.Google Scholar
Harvey, P.D., Davidson, M., Mueser, K.T., Parrella, M., White, L., Powchik, P.Social-Adaptive Functioning Evaluation (SAFE): A rating scale for geriatric psychiatric patients. Schizophr Bull. 23 1: 1997 131–145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Helldin, L., Kane, J.M., Karilampi, U., Norlander, T., Archer, T.Remission in prognosis of functional outcome: a new dimension in the treatment of patients with psychotic disorders. Schizophr Res. 93 1–3: 2007 160–168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Helmer, O.Looking forward: a guide to future research. 1983 Sage Beverley Hills CA 376.Google Scholar
Kay, S.R., Fiszbein, A., Opier, L.A.The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull. 13 2: 1987 261–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Llorca, P.-M., Lançon, C., Lancrenon, S., Bayle, F.-J., Caci, H., Rouillon, F., Gorwood, P.The “Functional Remission of General Schizophrenia” (FROGS) Scale: development and validation of a new questionnaire. Schizophrenia Research. 113 2–3: 2009 218–225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mueser, K.T.Cognitive functioning, social adjustment and long term outcome in schizophrenia.Sharma, T.Harvey, P.Cognition in schizophrenia: impairments, importance and treatment strategies. 2000 Oxford University Press New York NY157–177.Google Scholar
Padmavati, R., Thara, R., Srinivasan, L., Kumar, S.SCARF Social Functioning Index. Indian J Psychiatry. 37 4: 1995 161–164.Google Scholar
Rosen, A., Hadzi-Pavlovic, D., Parker, G.The Life Skills Profile: a measure assessing function and disability in schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull. 15 2: 1989 325–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saraswat, N., Rao, K., Subbakrishna, D.K., Gangadhar, B.N.The Social Occupational Functioning Scale (SOFS): a brief measure of functional status in persons with schizophrenia. Schizophr Res. 81 2–3: 2006 301–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallace, C.J., Liberman, R.P., Tauber, R., Wallace, J.The Independent Living Skills Survey: a comprehensive measure of the community functioning of severely and persistently mentally ill individuals. Schizophr Bull. 26 3: 2000 631–658.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiersma, D., De Jong, A., Ormel, J.The Groningen Social Disabilities Schedule: development, relationship with I.C.I.D.H. and psychometric properties. Int J Rehabil Res. 11 3: 1988 213–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Health Organization (WHO), 2000. World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHO DASII). World Health Organization, Geneva.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.