Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T15:20:46.552Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Remission and relapse in psychosis: operational definitions based on case-note data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 August 2006

PAUL E. BEBBINGTON
Affiliation:
Royal Free & University College London Medical School, UCL – Department of Mental Health Sciences (Bloomsbury Campus), London, UK
TOM CRAIG
Affiliation:
King's College, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
PHILIPPA GARETY
Affiliation:
King's College, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
DAVID FOWLER
Affiliation:
School of Medicine, Health Policy and Practice, UEA, UK
GRAHAM DUNN
Affiliation:
School of Epidemiology and Health Sciences, University of Manchester, UK
SUSANNAH COLBERT
Affiliation:
Royal Free & University College London Medical School, UCL – Department of Mental Health Sciences (Bloomsbury Campus), London, UK
MIRIAM FORNELLS-AMBROJO
Affiliation:
King's College, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
ELIZABETH KUIPERS
Affiliation:
King's College, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK

Abstract

Background. In psychosis, the prime indicator of outcome has been relapse, but hospital readmission can no longer be used for this purpose. Researchers now require methods for assessing relapse that are objective, blind, reliable and valid. We describe the reliability and validity of such a technique using case-notes.

Method. Information from routine clinical notes of participants in the Lambeth Early Onset (LEO) study (less all references that would unblind the assessor) were recorded on a form divided into 1-month sections. Operational definitions of remission and relapse enabled clinicians to identify remissions and relapses blindly from the summary information. We calculated reliability regarding both the fact and the timing of remission and relapse. PANSS ratings at 6 and 18 months provided a measure of validity.

Results. The kappa value for the identification of remission by individuals ranged from 0·64 to 0·82, while that for consensus between paired raters was 0·56. The corresponding values for relapse were 0·57–0·59 and 0·71. Intra-class correlations for time to remission and to relapse were very high. Raters guessed correctly whether the participants came from the intervention or control group on 60–75% of occasions. Independent PANSS ratings were strongly related to the remission/relapse status of participants.

Conclusions. The reliability of the technique described here was moderate to good, its validity was good, and it provides a useful and timely addition to methods of evaluating remission and relapse in psychosis. On the basis of our experience, we recommend consensus rather than individual ratings.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

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.)