Adapting the Goal Attainment Approach for Major Depressive Disorder

Goal setting and goal attainment in patients with major depressive disorder: a narrative review on shared decision making in clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

Narrative review of the processes of goal setting and goal attainment scaling, as practical approaches to operationalizing and implementing the principles of shared decision making (SDM) in the routine care of people living with major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

We searched electronic databases for clinical studies published in English using key terms related to MDD and goal setting or goal attainment scaling. Two clinical studies of goal setting in MDD are considered in detail to exemplify the practicalities of the goal setting approach.

RESULTS

While SDM is widely recommended for people living with mental health problems, there is general agreement that it has thus far been implemented variably. In other areas of medicine, the process of goal setting is an established way to engage the patient, facilitate motivation, and assist the recovery process. For people living with MDD, the concept of goal setting is in its infancy, and only few studies have evaluated its clinical utility. Two clinical studies of vortioxetine for MDD demonstrate the utility of goal attainment scaling as an appropriate outcome for assessing functional improvement in ways that matter to the patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Goal setting is a pragmatic approach to turning the principles of SDM into realities of clinical practice and aligns with the principles of recovery that encompasses the notions of self-determination, self-management, personal growth, empowerment, and choice. Accumulating evidence supports the use of goal attainment scaling as an appropriate personalized outcome measure for use in clinical trials.

Goal Attainment Scaling in Patients With Burning Mouth Syndrome: A Real-World Clinical Study Protocol

Introduction Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is characterized by persistent chronic burning pain. Because BMS shows various symptoms, levels of severity, and treatment outcomes, measuring recovery is difficult in this patient population. Goal attainment scaling (GAS), a flexible and responsive technique for assessing outcomes in complex interventions, assimilates the achievement of individual goals into a single standardized "goal attainment scale." To our knowledge, this is the first clinical study protocol to investigate the effectiveness of adopting GAS in patients with BMS. Methods This study will involve two phases. In phase 1, the suitability of GAS for BMS will be examined in 30 patients. All practitioners will be trained to support patients in setting their clinical goals. In phase 2, all 155 patients with BMS will set two clinical goals emphasizing specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timed (SMART) goals at the initiation of psychopharmacotherapy for BMS. During the follow-up at weeks four, 8, 12, and 24, the GAS T-scores for each patient will be derived from the result of the individual goal attainment scores multiplied by goal weighting. Other clinical rating scales, including the visual analog scale (VAS), oral dysesthesia rating scale, pain catastrophizing scale, patient's global impression of change, and clinical global improvement will be assessed simultaneously with the assessment of goal attainment. The interactions between GAS T-scores and other clinical scales or clinical characteristics, including baseline age and sex, will be analyzed, followed by a discussion on the effectiveness of adopting the GAS for BMS. Results The information gleaned from phase 1 will help train practitioners and develop the use of GAS for BMS. In phase 2, analyzing the GAS T-score, a quantitative assessment, will accurately reveal patient outcomes and satisfaction. The effectiveness of using the GAS and some factors contributing to patient satisfaction will be revealed by analyzing the interaction between the T-score and other clinical scales. Conclusions In addition to revealing the usefulness of GAS for BMS, we believe this study will prompt further investigations to clarify the factors contributing to patient satisfaction and shed light on a new treatment strategy that reinforces the previous treatments for BMS.

Characteristics of goal-setting tools in adult rehabilitation: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aims to map the literature on goal-setting tools in adult rehabilitation, exploring their characteristics, target users and supporting evidence to inform practice and future research in this area.

METHODS

We completed a comprehensive search of four databases to identify relevant articles on tools for goal setting in rehabilitation. We followed Arkey and O'Malley's scoping review process to guide article selection, data extraction and data analysis.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 165 studies that reported on 55 different goal-setting tools, including tools for goal selection and goal documentation (n = 31), goal setting and intervention planning (n = 15), and for measuring the quality of the goal-setting process (n = 9). Over half of the tools were primarily designed for use in rehabilitation of physical disabilities (n = 32). Some tools fell under multiple sub-categories based on their characteristics as follows: 22 framework tools, 12 interview tools, 9 outcome measurement tools for goal achievement, 6 outcome measurement tools for goal quality and 25 documentation tools. The majority of goal-setting instruments targeted goals at the level of activity and participation (n = 51) and aimed to facilitate a client-centred or shared decision-making approach to rehabilitation planning (n = 46).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a comprehensive overview of existing goal-setting tools, highlighting their characteristics, target users and identified needs. These findings can enhance practitioners' awareness of the range of goal-setting tools available and can enable more effective utilization of these tools in clinical practice. Further research should investigate how clinicians can combine multiple tools to deliver goal setting.

Goal Attainment Scaling for Depression: Validation of the Japanese GAS-D Tool in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder

Purpose

Goal attainment scaling (GAS) has been proposed as a person-centric, semi-quantitative measure that assimilates achievement of individually set goals into a single standardized "goal attainment score" that can be compared at the population level. We aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the GAS for depression (GAS-D) tool in assessing goal attainment in people living with major depressive disorder (MDD).

Patients and Methods

This was a prespecified analysis of a prospective, 24-week, multicenter, observational cohort study of employed Japanese outpatients with MDD initiating treatment with vortioxetine according to the Japanese label (JRCT1031210200). Participants were assessed using the Japanese version of the GAS-D and other clinical rating scales at baseline and Weeks 8, 12 and 24.

Results

Goal attainment was significantly associated with symptom severity as assessed by the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scale, confirming convergent validity. In particular, GAS-D scores were significantly related to MADRS total score at Weeks 12 and 24, indicating that improvements in overall symptom severity with vortioxetine treatment were likely to be reflected in the achievement of individualized treatment goals. With an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.67 (95% CI 0.45-0.82), the GAS-D also showed moderate test-retest reliability between Weeks 8 and 12 while proving independent of demographic characteristics.

Conclusion

The results of this open-label study support the use of the GAS-D as a valid and sensitive outcome measure in the assessment of treatment response in MDD.

Is There Room for Individual Patient-Specified Preferences in the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Revolution?

Purpose

The study aim was to test the feasibility of collecting qualitative patient-preferred outcomes or goals and the degree of their attainment as an addition to a standardized process for collecting quantitative composite patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) from patients undergoing knee joint replacement.

Methods

Patients of a large Midwestern medical group scheduled to have total replacement of their knee joint have been asked to complete a PROMs survey preoperatively and at 3 and 12 months after surgery since 2014. In March 2020, an open-ended question about their most important preferred outcome was added to the existing questionnaire. The responses for all 3 time periods from the first 6 months of this addition were summarized quantitatively and analyzed by 2 reviewers.

Results

During that 6-month period, 1481 people completed the main survey while 1463 (98.8%) also completed the open-ended question. At baseline, 90.8% of the 590 baseline respondents identified a preferred outcome. If multiple-choice categories had been used, 82.7% of the responses would have lost some or a large amount of their preferred goals' meaning. Of the 144 who completed surveys at both baseline and 3 months, 86.1% reported another outcome in addition to pain relief, while 54.2% reported "Complete or Mostly" achieving their self-identified preferred outcome.

Conclusions

Most people who have joint replacement surgery and respond to a quantitative PROMs survey are willing to report on their other preferred outcomes as well. Adding an open-ended question to PROMs surveys may increase clinician focus on addressing outcomes important to each patient.

Assessing Reliability and Validity of the Oxford Depression Questionnaire (ODQ) in a Japanese Clinical Population

Purpose

Originally developed in English, the Oxford Depression Questionnaire (ODQ) is a patient-reported scale specifically developed for assessing emotional blunting in people with major depressive disorder (MDD). We aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the ODQ.

Patients and methods

This was a prespecified analysis of a prospective, 24-week, multicenter, observational cohort study of employed Japanese outpatients with MDD initiating treatment with vortioxetine according to the Japanese label (JRCT1031210200). Participants were assessed using the Japanese version of the ODQ and other clinical rating scales at baseline and Weeks 8, 12 and 24.

Results

One hundred and sixteen patients initiated vortioxetine and had ≥1 post-baseline visit. Directionally, the associations between ODQ scores and other clinical measures were as expected and demonstrated good concurrent validity. Factor analysis shows that the scale has a good fit for three factors. The Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.912, and the scale also showed good test-retest reliability with intraclass correlation coefficients for the ODQ total score and domains ranging between 0.69 and 0.82. ODQ scores had strong positive correlations with symptom severity assessed using the Montgomery and Åsberg Depression Rating Scale and were moderately correlated with work productivity, overall functioning, and quality of life scales.

Conclusion

Data from this prospective analysis confirm that the Japanese version of the ODQ retains the good validity and reliability of the original English scale and is suitable for use in prospective studies wanting to capture treatment effects on emotional blunting in MDD.

Treatment-resistant depression: definition, prevalence, detection, management, and investigational interventions

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is common and associated with multiple serious public health implications. A consensus definition of TRD with demonstrated predictive utility in terms of clinical decision-making and health outcomes does not currently exist. Instead, a plethora of definitions have been proposed, which vary significantly in their conceptual framework. The absence of a consensus definition hampers precise estimates of the prevalence of TRD, and also belies efforts to identify risk factors, prevention opportunities, and effective interventions. In addition, it results in heterogeneity in clinical practice decision-making, adversely affecting quality of care. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) have adopted the most used definition of TRD (i.e., inadequate response to a minimum of two antidepressants despite adequacy of the treatment trial and adherence to treatment). It is currently estimated that at least 30% of persons with depression meet this definition. A significant percentage of persons with TRD are actually pseudo-resistant (e.g., due to inadequacy of treatment trials or non-adherence to treatment). Although multiple sociodemographic, clinical, treatment and contextual factors are known to negatively moderate response in persons with depression, very few factors are regarded as predictive of non-response across multiple modalities of treatment. Intravenous ketamine and intranasal esketamine (co-administered with an antidepressant) are established as efficacious in the management of TRD. Some second-generation antipsychotics (e.g., aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, cariprazine, quetiapine XR) are proven effective as adjunctive treatments to antidepressants in partial responders, but only the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination has been studied in FDA-defined TRD. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is established as effective and FDA-approved for individuals with TRD, with accelerated theta-burst TMS also recently showing efficacy. Electroconvulsive therapy is regarded as an effective acute and maintenance intervention in TRD, with preliminary evidence suggesting non-inferiority to acute intravenous ketamine. Evidence for extending antidepressant trial, medication switching and combining antidepressants is mixed. Manual-based psychotherapies are not established as efficacious on their own in TRD, but offer significant symptomatic relief when added to conventional antidepressants. Digital therapeutics are under study and represent a potential future clinical vista in this population.

Design of a real-world, prospective, longitudinal, observational study to compare vortioxetine with other standard of care antidepressant treatments in patients with major depressive disorder: a PatientsLikeMe survey

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a recurrent psychiatric condition that presents challenges in responding to treatment and achieving long-term remission. To improve outcomes, a shared decision-making treatment approach with patient and healthcare practitioner (HCP) engagement is vital. PatientsLikeMe (PLM), a peer community of patients, provides information on MDD, symptoms, and treatment through forums and resources, helping patients stay engaged in their treatment journey. Data on PLM can be harnessed to gain insights into patient perspectives on MDD symptom management, medication switches, and treatment goals and measures.

METHODS

This ongoing, decentralized, longitudinal, observational, prospective study is being conducted using the PLM platform in two parts, enrolling up to 500 patients with MDD in the United States aged ≥ 18 years to compare vortioxetine with other monotherapy antidepressants. The first qualitative component consists of a webinar and discussion forum with PLM community members with MDD, followed by a pilot for functionality testing to improve the study flow and questions in the quantitative survey. The quantitative component follows on the PLM platform, utilizing patient-reported assessments, over a 24-week period. Three surveys will be conducted at baseline and weeks 12 and 24 to collect data on patient global impression of improvement, depression severity, cognitive function, quality of life (QoL) and well-being, medication satisfaction, emotional blunting, symptoms of anhedonia and resilience, as well as goal attainment. Quantitative results will be compared between groups. The qualitative component is complete; patient recruitment is underway for the quantitative component, with results expected in late 2023.

DISCUSSION

These results will help HCPs understand patient perspectives on the effectiveness of vortioxetine versus other monotherapy antidepressants in alleviating symptoms of MDD and improvements in QoL. Data from the PLM platform will support a patient goal-based treatment approach, as results can be shared by patients with their HCPs, providing them with insights on patient-centric goals, treatment management and adherence, as well as allowing them to observe changes in patient-related outcomes scores. Findings from the study will also help to optimize the PLM platform to build scalable solutions and connectivity within the community to better serve patients with MDD.

Using the Goal Attainment Scale adapted for depression to better understand treatment outcomes in patients with major depressive disorder switching to vortioxetine: a phase 4, single-arm, open-label, multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Response to pharmacologic treatment is generally evaluated by traditional clinician- and patient-reported rating scales. Assessing therapeutic efficacy using the Goal Attainment Scale offers a complementary measure that focuses on recovery-oriented outcomes that patients consider valuable and vital to their well-being. This study aimed to examine outcomes using the Goal Attainment Scale adapted for depression (GAS-D).

METHODS

A phase 4, single-arm, open-label, multicenter study enrolled patients with MDD who were switching antidepressant medication. Patients received vortioxetine 10-20 mg over 12 weeks. Three specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-bound goals were collaboratively set by patients with their clinicians. One goal was determined by the patient's self-defined objectives; 2 were related to predefined domain categories. Prespecified domains included psychological, motivational, emotional, physical/functional, and cognitive categories. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved a GAS-D score ≥ 50 at week 12. Secondary and exploratory endpoints included changes from baseline in several clinical and patient-reported measures of depression and cognitive function. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.

RESULTS

At week 12, of the 122 adults participating in the study, 57.8% achieved a GAS-D score ≥ 50. Depression severity, cognitive function, cognitive performance, well-being, employment, and quality of life also significantly improved. Treatment response and remission rates were 65 and 40%, respectively. Vortioxetine was well tolerated, with adverse events consistent with product labeling.

CONCLUSIONS

A majority of patients with MDD switching to vortioxetine achieved their treatment goals, including improvement in specific functional outcomes relating to physical and emotional goals, as assessed by the GAS-D and standard patient- and clinician-reported measures. When assayed for convergent validity in a separate analysis, changes in goal scores on the GAS-D were statistically significantly correlated with multiple commonly used clinical measures of depression assessed in this study. The GAS-D approach provides a new patient-centric paradigm for the collaborative development and assessment of progress toward meaningful treatment goals, contributing to a comprehensive evaluation of treatment outcomes in patients with MDD. Longer studies against a control intervention are justified.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02972632 . Registered 21 November 2016.