Journal Home
Search for

Volume 170, Issue 2, Pages 161-167 (30 December 2009)


View previous. 13 of 39 View next.

Defining “good” and “poor” outcomes in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: A multidimensional data-driven approach

Ilya A. LipkovichaCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Walter Deberdta, John G. Csernanskybe, Peter Buckleyc, Joseph Peuskensd, Sara Kollack-WalkeraCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Matthew Rotellia, John P. Houstona

Received 28 September 2007; received in revised form 13 February 2008; accepted 19 September 2008.

Abstract 

The study's goal was to characterize the typology of patient outcomes based on social and occupational functioning and psychiatric symptoms following antipsychotic drug treatment, and to explore predictors of group membership representing the best/worst outcomes. A hierarchical cluster analysis was used to define groups of patients (n=1449) based on endpoint values for psychiatric symptoms, social functioning, and useful work measured up to 30 weeks of treatment. Stepwise logistic regression was used to construct predictive models of cluster membership for baseline predictors, and with 2/4/8 weeks of treatment. Five distinct clusters of patients were identified at endpoint (Clusters A–E). Patients in Cluster A (25.6%, best outcome) had minimal psychiatric symptoms and mild functional impairment, while patients in Cluster D (14.3%) and E (14.8%) (worst outcome) had moderate-to-severe symptoms and severe functional impairment. Occupational functioning, disorganized thinking, and positive symptoms were sufficient to describe the clusters. Membership in the best/worst clusters was predicted by baseline scores for functioning and symptom severity, and by early changes in symptoms with treatment. Psychiatric symptoms and functioning provided complementary information to describe treatment outcomes. Early symptom response significantly improved the prediction of outcome, suggesting that early monitoring of treatment response may be useful in clinical practice.

a Lilly Research Laboratories, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN 46285, USA

b Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Ave, St Louis, MO 63110, USA

c Department of Psychiatry and Health Behavior, Medical College of Georgia, 1515 Pope Avenue, Augusta, GA 30912, USA

d The Catholic University of Leuven, University Centre St Jozef, Kortenberg, Belgium

e Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA

Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding authors. Lipkovich is to be contacted at Tel.: +1 317 651 6095; fax: +1 317 276 7100. Kollack-Walker, Tel.: +1 317 433 4654; fax: +1 317 276 7100.

 This work has been previously presented at scientific meetings including the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics Annual Conference in Washington, DC, March 3–5, 2005; Society of Biological Psychiatry Annual Conference in Atlanta, GA, May 19–21, 2005; and New Clinical Drug Evaluation Unit Annual Conference in Boca Raton, FL, June 6–9, 2005.

PII: S0165-1781(08)00311-9

doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2008.09.004


View previous. 13 of 39 View next.