Validation of the Chinese version of the "Mood Disorder Questionnaire" for screening bipolar disorder among patients with a current depressive episode

The Influence of Current Mood States on Screening Accuracy of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire

Objective

In this study we investigated whether current mood states of patients with bipolar disorder have an influence on the screening accuracy of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ).

Methods

A total of 452 patients with mood disorder (including 192 with major depressive disorder and 260 with bipolar disorder completed the Korean version of the MDQ. Patients with bipolar disorder were subdivided into three groups (bipolar depressed only, bipolar euthymic only, bipolar manic/hypomanic only) according to current mood states. The screening accuracy of the MDQ including sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were evaluated according to current mood states.

Results

The optimal cutoff of MDQ was 5 in this study sample. Sensitivity and specificity were not significantly different according to current mood states. Significant differences in AUCs of four independent ROC curves were not found (ROC 1st curve included all bipolar patients; ROC 2nd curve included only bipolar depressed patients; ROC 3rd curve included only bipolar manic/hypomanic patients; ROC 4th curve included only bipolar euthymic patients).

Conclusion

The study results showed that current mood states (either euthymic state, depressed or manic/hypomanic) did not significantly influence the screening accuracy of the MDQ suggesting that the MDQ could be a useful screening instrument for detecting bipolar disorder in clinical practice regardless of the current mood symptoms of subjects.

Bipolar features in major depressive disorder: Results from the Iranian mental health survey (IranMHS)

BACKGROUND

Past research suggests that individuals suffering from depressive disorders with bipolar features might have different clinical outcomes resembling bipolar disorders. The objectives of this study are to determine the prevalence of bipolar features among individuals meeting the criteria for 12-month major depressive disorder (MDD) in the Iranian population and to examine the demographic and clinical characteristics associated with these features.

METHODS

Data were drawn from the Iranian Mental Health Survey (IranMHS), a representative household survey of the Iranian population aged 15-64 years. The study sample consisted of all individuals with a 12-month MDD (n = 1014) ascertained by the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI 2.1) without a lifetime history of bipolar I or II disorders. Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) was used to screen for the lifetime history of bipolar features among participants with MDD.

RESULTS

Among participants meeting the 12-month MDD criteria, 22.1% (95% CI: 19.6-24.7) had a lifetime history of bipolar features. Compared with those without these features, participants with bipolar features had higher odds of endorsing suicidal ideations and suicide attempts, comorbid anxiety and substance use disorders, severe impairment, history of psychotic symptoms, some features of atypical depression and fewer depressive symptoms. Associations with comorbid anxiety disorders [Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.43; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00-2.03] and history of psychotic symptoms (OR = 2.63 95% CI: 1.81-3.81) persisted in multivariable models.

LIMITATION

Relying on self-reports of lifetime bipolar symptoms which is open to recall bias, and cross-sectional study design which limits interpretation of outcome and course of MDD are two major limitations of this study.

CONCLUSION

The presence of bipolar features is associated with a distinct demographic and clinical profile in MDD. Identifying these cases would enhance the homogeneity of the depressive disorder phenotype in general population surveys. Identifying MDD patients with these features has potential clinical implications.

Screening for psychiatric disorders with self-administered questionnaires

Given the time demands of clinical practice it is not surprising that diagnoses are sometimes missed. To improve diagnostic recognition, self-administered screening scales have been recommended. A problem with much of the research effort on screening scales is the confusion between diagnostic testing and screening. It is important for a screening test to have high sensitivity because the more time intensive/expensive follow-up diagnostic inquiry will presumably only occur in patients who are positive on the initial screen. Investigators vary in how they analyze their data in determining the recommended cutoff score on a self-administered screening questionnaire. To illustrate this, in the present report we examined how often each of the different approaches towards determining a cutoff score on bipolar disorder screening scales were used. We reviewed 68 reports of the performance of the 3 most commonly researched bipolar disorder screening scales to determine how the recommended cutoff on the scale was derived. Most studies recommended a cutoff point on the screening scale that optimized the level of agreement with the diagnostic gold standard. Only 11 (16.2%) studies recommended a cutoff that prioritized the scale's sensitivity. It is important for clinicians to understand the difference between screening and diagnostic tests. The results of the present study indicate that most studies of the performance of the 3 most commonly studied bipolar disorder screening measures have taken the wrong approach in deriving the cutoff score on the scale for the purpose of screening.

Efficacy and safety of quetiapine extended release monotherapy in bipolar depression: a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

RATIONALE

Quetiapine extended release (XR) has been used to treat various psychiatric disorders, including depressive episodes associated with bipolar I and II disorders. Quetiapine XR is the first approved drug in China for the treatment of bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVES

The study evaluated the efficacy and safety of short-term quetiapine XR monotherapy in the treatment of depressive episodes of bipolar I and II disorders.

METHODS

This was an 8-week multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose phase 3 study. The primary endpoint was the mean change of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Secondary endpoints included Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar (CGI-BP) and remission rates.

RESULTS

The study recruited 279 adult bipolar I or II patients currently experiencing depression from 11 Chinese provinces. Of these, 139 received quetiapine XR (300 mg/day) and 140 received placebo for 8 weeks. The mean change in the MADRS total score was significantly greater in the quetiapine XR group than in the placebo group (-19.00 ± 7.88 vs. -16.20 ± 9.32; p = 0.004). Adverse events occurred in 96 patients (65.3 %) in the quetiapine XR group and 72 (49.0 %) in the placebo group. The incidence of serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.247).

CONCLUSIONS

This study, which is the first to evaluate 300 mg/day quetiapine XR monotherapy for depression in Chinese patients with bipolar disorders, found that this drug was superior to the placebo. Quetiapine XR was generally safe and well tolerated (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01256177).

THE VALIDITY OF THE MOOD DISORDER QUESTIONNAIRE FOR SCREENING BIPOLAR DISORDER: A META-ANALYSIS

We conducted a meta-analysis to review the diagnostic accuracy of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) among patients with mood disorders. We used a bivariate random effects model to calculate summary sensitivity and specificity. Twenty-one studies were included. At the standard or modified cutoff value of 7, summary sensitivity was .62 and summary specificity was .85. When we pooled 11 studies including both patients with bipolar disorder (BD) and those with unipolar depression, the summary sensitivity was .76 and summary specificity was .81. However, among the six studies that excluded patients with known BD, the summary sensitivity was significantly reduced to .37 and summary specificity was .88. There were no significant differences on the diagnostic accuracy of the MDQ between studies from Eastern and Western countries after adjusting for various clinical correlates. The overall diagnostic accuracy of the MDQ was relatively good. However, when the MDQ is applied among patients with depression without previous diagnoses of BD, its sensitivity was significantly reduced. This suggests that when the MDQ is applied among this population, its optimal cutoff value should be adjusted to enhance its sensitivity.

Development and validation of a screening instrument for bipolar spectrum disorder: The Mood Disorder Questionnaire Thai version

BACKGROUND

The Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) has been translated to many languages and has been used in many countries as a screening instrument for bipolar disorder. The main objective of this study was to evaluate validity of the Thai version of the MDQ as a screening instrument for bipolar disorder in a psychiatric outpatient sample, and to determine its optimum question #1 item threshold value for bipolar disorder.

METHODS

The English language Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) was translated into Thai. The process involved back-translation, cross-cultural adaptation, field testing of the prefinal version, as well as final adjustments. Two hundred and fifty major depressive disorder outpatients were further assessed by the Thai version of the MDQ and the Thai version of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). During the assessment, reliability and validity analyses, and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis were performed.

RESULTS

The Thai version of the MDQ screening had adequate internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha =0.791, omega total =0.68, and omega hierarchical =0.69). The optimal question #1 item threshold value was at least five positive items, which yielded adequate sensitivity (76.5%), specificity (72.7%), positive predictive value (74.3%), and negative predictive value (75.0%). The ROC area under the curve (AUC) for this study was 0.82 (95% confidence interval: 0.70 to 0.90).

CONCLUSION

The Thai version of the MDQ had some useful psychometric properties for screening for bipolar disorder in a mood disorder clinic setting, with a recommended question #1 item threshold value of at least five positive items.

Usefulness of the combined application of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire and Bipolar Spectrum Diagnostic Scale in screening for bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine whether combined application of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) and Bipolar Spectrum Diagnostic Scale (BSDS) is more effective than exclusive application of either tool in screening for bipolar disorder (BD).

METHOD

The MDQ and BSDS were completed by a total of 113 patients diagnosed with BD and major depressive disorder who were experiencing a current major depressive episode. The initial diagnosis of the subject was confirmed during a 1-year follow-up period. When each MDQ and BSDS optimal cutoff score was calculated, a modified scoring method for the MDQ that considered only one item was used to increase its performance in this population. The following three combinations of the cutoff scores for the two tools were used to screen for BD: (A) The score on either the MDQ or BSDS was greater than or equal to the cutoff score; (B) the scores on both the MDQ and BSDS were greater than or equal to the cutoff score; and (C) Reducing either cutoff score by 1 point resulted in the MDQ and BSDS scores being greater than or equal to the cutoff score. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the three methods, the MDQ, and the BSDS were compared for screening BD.

RESULTS

The sensitivity and specificity of the MDQ were 0.741 and 0.844, respectively, and those for the BSDS were 0.731 and 0.742, respectively. These indicators for the combined application of the MDQ and BSDS were as follows, respectively: method A 0.901 and 0.688, method B 0.580 and 0.875, and method C 0.691 and 0.844. Method A was superior to using one measure alone as well as to methods B and C with regard to sensitivity and negative predictive values. Method A also showed a higher sensitivity for BD subtypes than did the individual tools. Compared with the use of individual instruments, method A showed a similar positive predictive value.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that combined use of the MDQ and BSDS is more effective than the individual use of either of these measures in screening for BD. The data also showed that when both tools were used, the most effective interpretation of the results in terms of screening for BD was achieved when positive scores were defined as those that were equal to or greater than the cutoff for the MDQ or BSDS.