Self-assessment scales have long been used in psychiatric research even if their validity has often been questioned, one reason being poor the concordance of expert ratings. In clinical practice the use of rating scales is restricted, since they are considered to be time-consuming and perhaps even to disrupt the clinician's rapport with the patient. In the present study, a self-assessment scale, the CPRS Self-rating Scale for Affective Syndromes (CPRS-S-A), was constructed by re-phrasing in a self-rating format 19 items from the original Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS) and covering depression, anxiety and obsessional symptoms. In a group of 30 patients with depression syndromes and anxiety syndromes, the CPRS-S-A and the original CPRS were both used on 2 occasions. The patient's Global Assessment of Functioning scores ranged from 30 to 76 (mean 58), which suggests a moderate severity of illness, as does the fact that the majority were outpatients. There was a high degree of concordance between the instruments for most items and for the scores on the subscales for both diagnostic groups (i.e., the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale and the Brief Anxiety Scale, which are both subscales drawn from the CPRS). The time taken to complete the CPRS-S-A varied from 5 to 30 min (mean 19 min for depressive and 16 min for anxiety patients on the first occasion, 13 min for both groups on the second), and the self-rating procedure was readily accepted by both groups of patients. The CPRS-S-A would thus seem to be a promising instrument for quantitative rating of symptoms in ambulatory patients, both in clinical practice and in research.

No abstract

Capsulotomy is effective in reducing OCD symptoms. There is a substantial risk of adverse effects, and the risk may vary between surgical methods. Our findings suggest that smaller lesions are safer and that high radiation doses and multiple procedures should be avoided.

The Depression Self-Rating Scale (DSRS) is a self-report inventory based on the DSM-IV criteria for major depression. This study aimed to investigate diagnostic concordance of a major depressive disorder (MDD) using the DSRS and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, axis I disorders (SCID-I). An additional aim was to investigate whether concordance could be improved by adding different cut-off scores for the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) or the self-report version of the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS-S). MDD was determined by means of the SCID-I interview and the DSRS in 83 psychiatric in- and outpatients. Depressive severity was assessed using the BDI and the MADRS-S. A DSRS-version including the A- and C-criteria for an MDD had a sensitivity and a specificity for an expert-rated diagnosis of 86% and 75%, respectively. By using cut-off scores for the BDI or the MADRS-S, specificity could be raised to 85% without loss of sensitivity. The DSRS appears to be a useful instrument in the diagnostic process involving MDD, particularly when used in combination with the BDI or the MADRS-S. The DSRS is thought to be of value in psychiatric outpatient departments, where treatment of patients is often delegated to paramedical staff or nurses. The scale might also be used as an independent diagnostic tool in epidemiological studies in order to achieve an estimate of the prevalence of MDD in different population settings.

International audienc