Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Response and remission of subjective well-being in patients suffering from schizophrenia spectrum disorders

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2020

R. Schennach-Wolff
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Nussbaumstraße 7, 80336Munich, Germany
F. Seemüller
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Nussbaumstraße 7, 80336Munich, Germany
M. Obermeier
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Nussbaumstraße 7, 80336Munich, Germany
T. Messer
Affiliation:
Psychiatric Clinic, District Hospital Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
G. Laux
Affiliation:
Psychiatric Clinic, District Hospital Gabersee, Wasserburg/Inn, Germany
H. Pfeiffer
Affiliation:
Psychiatric Clinic, District Hospital Haar, Munich, Germany
D. Naber
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
L.G. Schmidt
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
W. Gaebel
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany
J. Klosterkötter
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
I. Heuser
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Charite Berlin, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany
W. Maier
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
M.R. Lemke
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Alsterdorf Hospital, Hamburg, Germany
E. Rüther
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
G. Buchkremer
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
M. Gastpar
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Essen, Essen, Germany
M. Jäger
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Nussbaumstraße 7, 80336Munich, Germany
H.J. Möller
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Nussbaumstraße 7, 80336Munich, Germany
M. Riedel
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Nussbaumstraße 7, 80336Munich, Germany Psychiatric Clinic, Vinzenz-von-Paul-Hospital, Rottweil, Germany
Corresponding

Abstract

Background

Purpose of this study was to assess subjective well-being in schizophrenia inpatients and to find variables predictive for response and remission of subjective well-being.

Method

The subjective well-being under neuroleptic treatment scale (SWN-K) was used in 232 schizophrenia patients within a naturalistic multicenter trial. Early response was defined as a SWN-K total score improvement of 20% and by at least 10 points within the first 2 treatment weeks, response as an improvement in SWN-K total score of at least 20% and by at least 10 points from admission to discharge and remission in subjective well-being as a total score of more or equal to 80 points at discharge. Logistic regression and CART analyses were used to determine valid predictors of subjective well-being outcome.

Results

Twenty-nine percent of the patients were detected to be SWN-K early responders, 40% fulfilled criteria for response in subjective well-being and 66% fulfilled criteria for remission concerning subjective well-being. Among the investigated predictors, SWN-K early improvement and the educational status were significantly associated with SWN-K response. The SWN-K total score at baseline showed a significant negative predictive value for response. Baseline SWN-K total score, PANSS global subscore, and side effects as well as the educational status were found to be significantly predictive for remission.

Conclusions

Depressive symptoms should be radically treated and side effects closely monitored to improve the patient's subjective well-being. The important influence of subjective well-being on overall treatment outcome could be underlined.

Type
Original article
Copyright
Copyright © Elsevier Masson SAS 2011

1. Introduction

The concept of subjective well-being in schizophrenia is the subject of an ongoing and controversial debate. Ranging from incomprehension to enthusiasm the positioning of quality of life in the treatment and evaluation of outcome in schizophrenia is still evolving Reference Bobes, Garcia-Portilla, Saiz, Bascaran and Bousono[3]. Interestingly, studies often found high levels of general life satisfaction despite deprived living conditions in patients with schizophrenia.

This is why some researchers doubt whether schizophrenia patients are capable of self-assessment of their quality of life because of cognitive deficits and lack of insight into their illness or illness-associated reduced expectations Reference Bobes, Garcia-Portilla, Saiz, Bascaran and Bousono[3]. Franz et al. believe that experiences of restricted and deprived living conditions might induce accommodation processes and response-shifts, which should be taken into account when interpreting quality of life data Reference Franz, Meyer, Reber and Gallhofer[13]. Other authors were able to demonstrate convergent validity in the perception of quality of life between patients and clinicians and showed that schizophrenic patients feel and experience their deficits, supporting the thesis that quality of life can be assessed subjectively in schizophrenics Reference Lehman, Postrado and Rachuba[26,Reference Skantze, Malm, Dencker, May and Corrigan42].

Since then, several trials have been performed to assess and classify patients’ subjective well-being in schizophrenia. Psychopathological symptoms Reference gtsson-Tops, Hansson, Sandlund, Bjarnason, Korkeila and Merinder[15,Reference Sim, Mahendran, Siris, Heckers and Chong41] and side effects of antipsychotic treatment have among other factors been found to significantly influence the patient's well-being Reference Voruganti, Heslegrave and Awad[45,Reference Young, Sullivan, Burnam and Brook49]. Most important, as impairments in well-being often result in higher rates of non-compliance the patients’ subjective well-being has become a frequent additional outcome criterion Reference Rettenbacher, Hofer, Eder, Hummer, Kemmler and Weiss[36,Reference Wehmeier, Kluge, Schneider, Schacht, Wagner and Schreiber46]. Also, attempts have been made to predict subjective well-being in order to enhance treatment outcome and patients’ compliance Reference Caron, Lecomte, Stip and Renaud[4].

However, studies evaluating predictors of well-being are rare and results have not shown any consistent picture Reference Ritsner, Gibel and Ratner[38]. This is mainly due to the fact that only sparse sets of predictor variables were used, additionally varying between studies. Recently, as one of the first, Lambert et al. examined response and remission of subjective well-being and found remission mainly predicted by low negative symptoms, better social functioning and early response in subjective well-being Reference Lambert, Naber, Eich, Schacht, Linden and Schimmelmann[24]. However, the authors focused on outcome of severely impaired subjective well-being in patients with schizophrenia, thereby possibly overlooking valuable information regarding the heterogeneity of schizophrenia and the multidimensional construct of well-being.

Therefore, the aims of the present study were to:

  1. assess subjective well-being in a heterogeneous schizophrenia inpatient sample;

  2. to find clinical and sociodemographic variables predictive for response and remission of subjective well-being.

2. Methods

2.1. Study design

A multicenter follow-up programme (German Research Network on Schizophrenia) Reference Wolwer, Buchkremer, Hafner, Klosterkotter, Maier and Moller[48] was carried out at 11 psychiatric university hospitals and three psychiatric district hospitals. Patients with the diagnosis of schizophrenia (paranoid, disorganized, catatonic or undifferentiated subtype), schizophreniform disorder, delusional disorder and schizoaffective disorder according to DSM-IV criteria who were admitted between January 2001 and December 2004 to one of the above-mentioned hospitals were randomly selected. The patient selection was carried out with a randomisation software. Patients included in the study were aged between 18 and 65 years. The exclusion criteria were a head injury, a history of major medical illness and alcohol or drug dependency. To participate in the study, an informed written consent had to be provided to. The study protocol was approved by the local ethics committees Reference Jager, Riedel, Messer, Laux, Pfeiffer and Naber[18].

2.2. Assessments

Clinical researchers assessed DSM-IV diagnoses on the basis of the German version of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV [1]. During interviews with patients, relatives and care providers, sociodemographic variables (partnership, employment state) and course-related variables such as age at onset, duration of untreated psychosis or episodes of illness were collected using a standardized documentation system (BADO) Reference Cording[7].

The Subjective well-being under neuroleptic treatment scale, short version (SWN-K) was used to assess well-being. Reference Naber[31]. Symptom severity was assessed via the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale for schizophrenia (PANSS) Reference Kay, Opler and Lindenmayer[21]. To quantify antipsychotic side effects the Udvalg for Klinske Undersogelser (UKU) side effect rating scale Reference Lingjaerde, Ahlfors, Bech, Dencker and Elgen[27] was used comprising a total of 48 symptoms classified into four groups: psychic, autonomic, neurological and other side effects.

Ratings were performed within the first 3 days after admission and biweekly during hospital stay until discharge. Since in the present analysis, possible predictor variables at baseline were examined, only PANSS baseline data is presented. To better detect possible side effects, the UKU total score was not only examined at baseline, but additionally at week 2. The observation period in the presented analyses was 8 weeks of treatment. All raters had been trained using the applied scales. A high inter-rater reliability was achieved (ANOVA-ICC > 0.8).

2.3. Statistical analysis

Definition of SWN-K early response, SWN-K response and SWN-K remission following Lambert et al. Reference Lambert, Naber, Eich, Schacht, Linden and Schimmelmann[24]:

  • early response was defined as a SWN-K total score improvement of 20% and by at least 10 points within the first two treatment weeks;

  • the authors defined subjective well-being response as improvement in SWN-K total score of at least 20% and by at least 10 points from admission to discharge;

  • remission in subjective well-being was defined as a total score of more or equal to 80 points at discharge.

Symptomatic response was defined as a PANSS total score reduction of 40% from baseline to discharge Reference Kinon, Chen, scher-Svanum, Stauffer, Kollack-Walker and Sniadecki[22] and remission according to the Remission in Schizophrenia Working Group's criteria Reference Andreasen, Carpenter, Kane, Lasser, Marder and Weinberger[2].

2.3.1 Statistical methods

The Wilcoxon test, a non-parametric test for comparing two independent random variables (responder/non responder, remitter/non remitter) and for at least ordinal scaled variables, the t-test was applied. The t-test was applied when the population was assumed to be normally distributed. For categorical data the Fisher's exact test was used. Furthermore, the Pearson's correlation coefficient was applied to estimate the linear relationship between two random variables.

Two different methods were used to select the most important predictors of response and remission:

  • regression model;

  • classification and regression trees (CART) analysis.

Starting with a mixed regression model including clinical and sociodemographic variables, a backward-forward method based on the Akaike Information Criterion was used to identify the relevant predictors. Eight BADO items representing the patients’ clinical, sociodemographic and functional status were investigated with respect to their predictive value (age, gender, duration of illness, length of current episode, length of hospital stay, suicidal behaviour before hospitalisation, living situation (with partner/single), employment status (employed, unemployed, retired). Also, SWN total score at baseline and SWN early improvement, PANSS positive, negative and global subscores at baseline, the UKU total score from baseline, week 2, the percentaged change from baseline to week 2 and the kind of medical treatment applied (typical antipsychotics, atypical antipsychotics, typical and atypical antipsychotics) were considered potential predictors. The final model was computed with only these predictors. The discriminative ability of the regression model was also evaluated using a receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The area under the curve (AUC) is a measure of the overall discriminative power.

A value of 0.5 for the AUC does not represent discriminative ability, whereas a value of 1.0 indicates a perfect power. A value of 0.7 to 0.8 is considered as a reasonable value and a value greater than 0.8 as a good discriminative capacity Reference Weinstein and Fineberg[47]. Additionally, the CART were modelled to confirm the results of the linear model.

All statistical analyses were performed using the statistical program R2.6.1 [35].

3. Results

3.1. Patients

The entire multicenter study comprised 474 patients. Forty-six patients dropped out for different reasons (e.g. retrospective violation of inclusion criteria, withdrawal of informed consent, incomplete information). Another 196 patients had to be excluded from analysis: 28 patients because they were discharged from the hospital within 7 days after admission, 168 patients due to missing SWN-K data. Therefore, the sample available for analyses enrolled 232 patients, with 135 male and 97 female patients. A comparison between dropped-out patients and study participants is shown in Table 1. The mean number of clinical treatments was 2.97 (±3.86) and the length of current period was less than 1 month for 82 patients, less than 3 months for 36 patients, less than 6 months for 38 patients, less than 2 years for 25 patients and less than 10 years for 30 patients. For 15 patients, the length of current period was more than 10 years and six patients could not be assigned. The length of hospital stay was 74.26 days (± 47.13) and the mean age at first treatment 28.15 years (±9.32). 204 patients reported to be living on their own, 27 lived together with a partner/family. 176 patients had graduated from school with a certificate, whereas 56 patients were without a graduation certificate. One hundred and seven patients were employed, 43 unemployed and 77 not working on a regular basis. Suicide attempts before hospitalization were documented for 53 patients. DSM-IV diagnoses are listed in Table 2.

Table 1 Comparison of dropped-out patients and study participants.

Table 2 DSM-IV diagnoses.

Patients were treated under naturalistic conditions as follows: 46.23% of the patients received typical antipsychotics, 68.75% atypical antipsychotics and 41.62% of the patients were treated with typical as well as atypical antipsychotics. Furthermore, in 63.27% of patients tranquilizers were administered, in 9.46% mood stabilizers and in 26.54% of the patients antidepressants.

3.2. Assessments

3.2.1 Clinical characteristics and improvement of subjective well-being

Psychopathological characteristics and the UKU scale are presented in Table 2. The SWN-K total score at admission and from week 2 to week 8 in biweekly intervals up to discharge is shown in Tables 3 and 4.

Table 3 Mean of assessments at admission, week 2 and discharge.

Table 4 Course of subjective well-being from admission to discharge.

3.2.2. Subjective well-being of responders and remitters

Of the 232 patients, 67 patients (29%) were detected to be SWN-K early responders. Ninety-three patients (40%) fulfilled criteria for response in subjective well-being, 139 patients were non responders (60%). One hundred and fifty-three patients (66%) fulfilled criteria for remission and 79 patients (34%) were non remitters concerning subjective well-being at discharge. The Phi-coefficient between early response and response was 0.47, suggesting a strong association between the two measures. Subjective well-being responders/non responders and remitters/non remitters are compared in Tables 5 and 6.

Table 5 Comparison of subjective well-being responder/non responder with regard to sociodemographic and clinical baseline variables.

a Subjective well-being under neuroleptic treatment scale.

Table 6 Comparison of subjective well-being remitter/non remitter with regard to sociodemographic and clinical baseline variables.

a Subjective well-being under neuroleptic treatment scale.

3.2.3. Association of subjective well-being and symptomatic change and outcome

No significant association was found between SWN-K and PANSS responders (p = 0.85), nor between SWN-K and PANSS remitters (p = 0.32). The correlation between the subjective improvement measured by the SWN-K and an objective improvement measured by the PANSS was again not found to be significant (Pearson's correlation coefficient: −0.07).

3.2.4. Regression models for response and remission

3.2.4.1 SWN-K response

Among the investigated predictors, SWN-K early improvement and the educational status were significantly associated with SWN-K response. The SWN-K total score at baseline showed a significant negative predictive value for response. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) revealed an AUC of 0.80, indicating very reasonable predictability for this set of predictors (Table 7, Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 ROC-curve for predicting response of subjective well-being.

Table 7 Logistic regression model for the prediction of response.

3.2.4.2. SWN-K remission

Baseline SWN-K total score, PANSS global subscore, and the UKU total score as well as the educational status were found to be significantly predictive for remission. ROC revealed an AUC of 0.84, indicating excellent predictability (Table 8, Fig. 2).

Fig. 2 ROC-curve for predicting remission of subjective well-being.

Table 8 Logistic regression model for the prediction of remission.

3.2.5. CART-analysis

3.2.5.1 SWN-K response

CART-analysis confirmed all three predictors identified by the regression model (SWN-K early improvement, SWN-K total score, educational status). CART-analysis further found a low PANSS global subscore and fewer side effects at baseline to be significant predictors of SWN-K response (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3 CART-analysis for predicting response of subjective well-being.

3.2.5.2. SWN-K remission

SWN-K total score at baseline was confirmed significant predictor for remission by CART-analysis (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4 CART-analysis for predicting remission of subjective well-being.

4. Discussion

4.1. Sociodemographic and clinical baseline variables

Out of all evaluated sociodemographic and clinical baseline variables, the existence of a school degree was found to be significantly predictive for response and remission of subjective well-being via both statistical methods. One explanation for this result might be that patients with a graduation certificate are the ones cognitively less impaired, as they were able to complete school successfully. Therefore, these patients might show greater insight into their illness, as other authors were able to demonstrate a negative association between cognitive dysfunction and insight Reference Karow, Pajonk, Reimer, Hirdes, Osterwald and Naber[20]. We believe that this patient cohort is more capable of self-assessment and able to evaluate changes in their well-being better than patients with less insight, cognitively more impaired and maybe without a graduation certificate. Regarding comparative literature, a higher educational level has often been associated with greater general well-being in other trials Reference Carpiniello, Lai, Pariante, Carta and Rudas[5,Reference Vandiver44].

Results of the univariate tests found patients in subjective well-being remission to be significantly less suicidal before admission than patients without subjective well-being remission. The importance of quality of life in the context of suicidality and suicidal attempts in patients with schizophrenia has been of high scientific interest in the past few years, and impairments in subjective well-being have been associated with repeated suicide attempts Reference Ponizovsky, Grinshpoon, Levav and Ritsner[33]. This is also underlined by long-term study results finding life satisfaction in the general population to have a long-term effect on the risk of suicide Reference Koivumaa-Honkanen, Honkanen, Viinamaki, Heikkila, Kaprio and Koskenvuo[23]. Therefore, the need for clinicians to include aspects of quality of life in the evaluation of patients with schizophrenia that are suspected of being suicidal should be highlighted Reference Pedrelli, McQuaid, Granholm, Patterson, McClure and Beck[32].

4.2. Subjective well-being

We found the SWN-K total score at baseline to be significantly predictive for response and remission of subjective well-being Reference Lambert, Schimmelmann, Naber, Schacht, Karow and Wagner[25]. Keeping both outcome definitions in mind, this result is almost to be expected and is in good accordance with the so-called law of initial value (LIV), which suggests that the magnitude of any psychobiological response is dependent on the initial baseline level Reference Myrtek and Foerster[30]. The influence of baseline well-being for its course and outcome is furthermore underlined by long-term data. When evaluating influencing factors of well-being in a 6-year follow-up period using different assessment tools, Hannson and Björkman showed that the only baseline predictor of subjective quality of life was baseline quality of life Reference Hansson and Bjorkman[16]. They believe that the degree of satisfaction with emotional and social relations represses symptoms of unmet needs and illness, especially over the course of treatment. In a 16-month-follow-up, Ritsner et al. found the baseline levels of emotional distress, oriented coping and self-esteem to explain 41% of the variability in the general subjective well-being index 16 months later Reference Ritsner, Gibel and Ratner[38].

In addition, we found SWN-K early response to be a significant predictor of outcome in subjective well-being. The importance of early subjective well-being response as a major determinant of long-term satisfying quality of life in schizophrenia has already been highlighted by Lambert et al. Reference Lambert, Naber, Eich, Schacht, Linden and Schimmelmann[24]. In their study, the authors found only 9% of patients without early response of subjective well-being to achieve remission in well-being after 12 weeks of treatment, emphasizing the necessity to improve well-being early in order to resolve with moderate and stable subjective well-being. Given the strong association (Phi-coefficient = 0.47) between early response and response, our results are not surprising. However, we consider the significant influence of early response on subsequent response not as an innovative and unexpected predictor revealed to be important for subjective well-being outcome, but more as an adjusting variable in the statistical model applied. Additionally, against the backdrop of the importance of early symptomatic response for subsequent symptomatic outcome, the necessity to apply treatment radically and early in the course of the illness is also highlighted considering the course of subjective well-being Reference Emsley, Rabinowitz and Medori[10,Reference Emsley, Rabinowitz and Medori11].

4.3. Psychopathology

Regarding psychopathological predictors, we found the PANSS global subscore to be significantly predictive for response and remission in subjective well-being. Also, considering the univariate tests, patients with remission of subjective well-being featured significantly fewer negative symptoms than patients not achieving remission criteria. Symptoms of depression, which are among other means assessed via the PANSS global subscore, and negative symptoms have most consistently and most strongly been related to subjective well-being Reference Corrigan and Buican[8,Reference Mueser, Douglas, Bellack and Morrison29,Reference Sim, Mahendran, Siris, Heckers and Chong41]. The PANSS negative and global subscores have also been found to be significantly correlated with the SWN total score, underlining the strong relation between subjective well-being and psychopathology Reference Putzhammer, Perfahl, Pfeiff and Hajak[34]. Findings that the level of general psychopathology strongly influences the patients’ well-being also highlight the importance of the patients’ symptomatic status Reference gtsson-Tops and Hansson[14,Reference Sullivan, Wells and Leake43]. This suggests that an early and adequate symptom control might be the precondition for experiencing satisfying subjective well-being. The important influence of psychopathology on well-being is furthermore underlined when study drop-outs and study participants are compared. One hundred and sixty-eight had to be excluded due to missing SWN-K data, and the only difference between these patients and those who had filled in the SWN-K scale is that study drop-outs suffered from significantly more psychotic symptoms.

In addition, we found patients achieving remission to score significantly higher on the PANSS insight into illness item. Previous studies found good insight into having a mental disorder significantly related to better quality of life Reference Schwartz[40]. On the other hand, good insight has been associated with greater compliance and satisfaction with antipsychotic treatment Reference Mintz, Addington and Addington[28,Reference Pedrelli, McQuaid, Granholm, Patterson, McClure and Beck32]. Therefore, consequently improved insight is one of the major goals in the treatment of patients suffering from schizophrenia Reference Cooke, Peters, Kuipers and Kumari[6]. However, there are also recently published studies finding a negative relationship between insight and subjective well-being Reference Ritsner[37,Reference Sim, Mahendran, Siris, Heckers and Chong41]. There are some possible explanations for these differing results. Some studies evaluated patients including diagnoses other than schizophrenia spectrum disorders, and the psychopathological stability also seems to influence results on insight and well-being Reference Karow, Pajonk, Reimer, Hirdes, Osterwald and Naber[20]. Furthermore, in the present study, insight was assessed using the PANSS G12 item only instead of using a multidimensional measure of the construct of illness insight Reference Karow, Pajonk, Reimer, Hirdes, Osterwald and Naber[20].

4.4. Side effects

We found that fewer side effects at baseline predicted SWN-K response and remission, and that patients with remission status suffered from significantly fewer side effects already at baseline. Antipsychotic side effects have often been associated with a substantial reduction of subjective well-being, suggesting that patients with fewer side effects feel less impaired in their well-being Reference Ritsner, Ponizovsky, Endicott, Nechamkin, Rauchverger and Silver[39]. Especially, the distress resulting from akathisia and its far-reaching impact on clinical stability, well-being and even the rate of suicide have been noted by a number of different authors Reference Drake and Ehrlich[9].

In view of the strong relationship between dopamine D2 receptor occupancy, extrapyramidal side effects (EPS), and neuroleptic dysphoria, one might reasonably presume a different impact on well-being comparing typical and atypical antipsychotics Reference Fleischhacker, Maj and Sartorius[12]. This assumption is underlined by reports in the literature that did not find antipsychotic side effects to be predictive for subjective well-being when patients were treated with atypical antipsychotics Reference Fleischhacker, Maj and Sartorius[12,Reference Lambert, Naber, Eich, Schacht, Linden and Schimmelmann24]. Interestingly, the type of treatment (comparing typical/atypical/and a combination of typical and atypical antipsychotics) was not revealed to be a significant predictor by the statistical model in the present study. And keeping in mind that in the present study, 70% of the patients were treated with atypical antipsychotics, it is surprising that we found a significant association between side effects and subjective well-being. However, this might be due to the heterogeneity of the atypical antipsychotic treatment applied. All antipsychotics available could be administered, including antipsychotics such as risperidone or ziprasidone that are known to induce EPS such as akathisia Reference Kane, Fleischhacker, Hansen, Perlis, Pikalov and ssuncao-Talbott[19]. This suggests that the favorable influence of atypical antipsychotics on subjective well-being might depend on the individual compound prescribed. Although atypical antipsychotics cause fewer EPS, they have been found to cause other disturbing side effects such as sedation, body weight gain or sexual dysfunctions which can also influence the patient's well-being Reference Hofer, Kemmler, Eder, Edlinger, Hummer and Fleischhacker[17]. Taken together, it should be kept in mind that this was a naturalistic trial limiting a sufficient control of psychopharmacological effects. No treatment regimen was recommended, and clinicians were able to adjust the medical treatment according to their assessment of the patient's psychopathological status and well-being.

4.5. Strengths and limitations

In this multicenter trial, patients were treated under naturalistic conditions, and such a design lacks a sufficient control of study results for the effect of different psychological and pharmacological treatments. Also, patients were treated with different typical as well as atypical antipsychotics, so that homogeneity of antipsychotic treatment and potential side effects might be limited. Furthermore, as neurocognition was not examined, the potential link between cognition and insight into illness cannot be confirmed by the present data. Altogether, this study has a hypothesis-generating rather than a confirmatory character. Another limitation is that depression, in this study, was assessed via the PANSS scale and without using a depression-specific rating instrument.

The strengths of this study include the rather large sample in the assessment of well-being. In addition, due to the liberal inclusion and exclusion criteria, findings of this study on treatment-seeking patients might be more generalizable and have a greater external validity than in randomised controlled trials.

5. Conclusion

Considering that the Remission in Schizophrenia Working Group phrased the importance of the patients’ functional remission comprising quality of life for treatment outcome, the need for an early identification of patients with an impaired subjective well-being or without early improvement is highlighted by the study's results Reference Andreasen, Carpenter, Kane, Lasser, Marder and Weinberger[2]. Depressive and negative symptoms should be radically treated and side effects closely monitored. Regarding the important influence of subjective well-being on overall treatment outcome, clinicians should be encouraged to improve the patients’ subjective well-being in order to positively influence their overall long-term outcome.

Acknowledgements

The study was performed within the framework of the German Research Network on Schizophrenia, which is funded by the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research BMBF (grant 01 GI 0233).

References

American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth edition. Washington DC, American Psychiatric Association, 1994.Google Scholar
Andreasen, N.C., Carpenter, W.T. Jr., Kane, J.M., Lasser, R.A., Marder, S.R., Weinberger, D.R.Remission in schizophrenia: proposed criteria and rationale for consensus. Am J Psychiatry 2005; 162: 441449CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bobes, J., Garcia-Portilla, P., Saiz, P.A., Bascaran, T., Bousono, M.Quality of life measures in schizophrenia. Eur Psychiatry 2005; 20(Suppl. 3): S313S317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caron, J., Lecomte, Y., Stip, E., Renaud, S.Predictors of quality of life in schizophrenia. Community Ment Health J 2005; 41: 399417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpiniello, B., Lai, G.L., Pariante, C.M., Carta, M.G., Rudas, N.Symptoms, standards of living and subjective quality of life: a comparative study of schizophrenic and depressed out-patients. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1997; 96: 235241CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooke, M.A., Peters, E.R., Kuipers, E., Kumari, V.Disease, deficit or denial? Models of poor insight in psychosis. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2005; 112: 417CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cording, C.Conceptual aspects in development and implementation of basic psychiatric documentation. Psychiatr Prax 1998; 25: 175178Google ScholarPubMed
Corrigan, P.W., Buican, B.The construct validity of subjective quality of life for the severely mentally ill. J Nerv Ment Dis 1995; 183: 281285CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drake, R.E., Ehrlich, J.Suicide attempts associated with akathisia. Am J Psychiatry 1985; 142: 499501Google ScholarPubMed
Emsley, R., Rabinowitz, J., Medori, R.Time course for antipsychotic treatment response in first-episode schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry 2006; 163: 743745CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emsley, R., Rabinowitz, J., Medori, R.Remission in early psychosis: Rates, predictors, and clinical and functional outcome correlates. Schizophr Res 2007; 89: 129139CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fleischhacker, W.W.Pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia: a review;.. In: Maj, M.Sartorius, N.WPA Series Evidence and Experience in Psychiatry Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons; 2002.75113Google Scholar
Franz, M., Meyer, T., Reber, T., Gallhofer, B.The importance of social comparisons for high levels of subjective quality of life in chronic schizophrenic patients. Qual Life Res 2000; 9: 481489CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
gtsson-Tops, A., Hansson, L.Subjective quality of life in schizophrenic patients living in the community relationship to clinical and social characteristics. Eur Psychiatry 1999; 14: 256263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
gtsson-Tops, A., Hansson, L., Sandlund, M., Bjarnason, O., Korkeila, J., Merinder, L., et al.Subjective versus interviewer assessment of global quality of life among persons with schizophrenia living in the community: a Nordic multicentre study. Qual Life Res 2005; 14: 221229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansson, L., Bjorkman, T.Are factors associated with subjective quality of life in people with severe mental illness consistent over time? A 6-year follow-up study. Qual Life Res 2007; 16: 916CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hofer, A., Kemmler, G., Eder, U., Edlinger, M., Hummer, M., Fleischhacker, W.W.Quality of life in schizophrenia: the impact of psychopathology, attitude toward medication, and side effects. J Clin Psychiatry 2004; 65: 932939CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jager, M., Riedel, M., Messer, T., Laux, G., Pfeiffer, H., Naber, D., et al.Psychopathological characteristics and treatment response of first episode compared with multiple episode schizophrenic disorders. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2007; 257: 4753CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kane, J.M., Fleischhacker, W.W., Hansen, L., Perlis, R., Pikalov, A. III, ssuncao-Talbott, S.Akathisia: an updated review focusing on second-generation antipsychotics. J Clin Psychiatry 2009; 70: 627643CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karow, A., Pajonk, F.G., Reimer, J., Hirdes, F., Osterwald, C., Naber, D., et al.The dilemma of insight into illness in schizophrenia: self- and expert-rated insight and quality of life. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2008; 258: 152159CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kay, S.R., Opler, L.A., Lindenmayer, J.P.Reliability and validity of the positive and negative syndrome scale for schizophrenics. Psychiatry Res 1988; 23: 99110CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kinon, B.J., Chen, L., scher-Svanum, H., Stauffer, V.L., Kollack-Walker, S., Sniadecki, J.L., et al.Predicting response to atypical antipsychotics based on early response in the treatment of schizophrenia. Schizophr Res 2008; 102: 230240CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koivumaa-Honkanen, H., Honkanen, R., Viinamaki, H., Heikkila, K., Kaprio, J., Koskenvuo, M.Life satisfaction and suicide: a 20-year follow-up study. Am J Psychiatry 2001; 158: 433439CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lambert, M., Naber, D., Eich, F.X., Schacht, M., Linden, M., Schimmelmann, B.G.Remission of severely impaired subjective wellbeing in 727 patients with schizophrenia treated with amisulpride. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2007; 115: 106113CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lambert, M., Schimmelmann, B.G., Naber, D., Schacht, A., Karow, A., Wagner, T., et al.Prediction of remission as a combination of symptomatic and functional remission and adequate subjective well-being in 2960 patients with schizophrenia. J Clin Psychiatry 2006; 67: 16901697CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehman, A.F., Postrado, L.T., Rachuba, L.T.Convergent validation of quality of life assessments for persons with severe mental illnesses. Qual Life Res 1993; 2: 327333CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lingjaerde, O., Ahlfors, U.G., Bech, P., Dencker, S.J., Elgen, K.The UKU side effect rating scale. A new comprehensive rating scale for psychotropic drugs and a cross-sectional study of side effects in neuroleptic-treated patients. Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl. 3341987[1-100:1-100]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintz, AR, Addington, J, Addington, D. Insight in early psychosis: a 1-year follow-up. Schizophr Res 2004;67:213–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueser, K.T., Douglas, M.S., Bellack, A.S., Morrison, R.L.Assessment of enduring deficit and negative symptom subtypes in schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 1991; 17: 565582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myrtek, M., Foerster, F.The law of initial value: a rare exception. Biol Psychol 1986; 22: 227237CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naber, D.A self-rating to measure subjective effects of neuroleptic drugs, relationships to objective psychopathology, quality of life, compliance and other clinical variables. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 1995; 10(Suppl. 3): 133138Google ScholarPubMed
Pedrelli, P, McQuaid, JR, Granholm, E, Patterson, TL, McClure, F, Beck, AT, et al. Measuring cognitive insight in middle-aged and older patients with psychotic disorders. Schizophr Res 2004;71:297–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponizovsky, A.M., Grinshpoon, A., Levav, I., Ritsner, M.S.Life satisfaction and suicidal attempts among persons with schizophrenia. Compr Psychiatry 2003; 44: 442447CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Putzhammer, A., Perfahl, M., Pfeiff, L., Hajak, G.Correlation of subjective well-being in schizophrenic patients with gait parameters, expert-rated motor disturbances, and psychopathological status. Pharmacopsychiatry 2005; 38: 132138CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Development Core Team. A language and environment for statistical computing. URL http://w.R-project.org 2008 Vienna, Austria, Foundation for Statistical Computing. Ref Type: Computer Program.Google Scholar
Rettenbacher, M.A., Hofer, A., Eder, U., Hummer, M., Kemmler, G., Weiss, E.M., et al.Compliance in schizophrenia: psychopathology, side effects, and patients’ attitudes toward the illness and medication. J Clin Psychiatry 2004; 65: 12111218CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ritsner, M.Predicting changes in domain-specific quality of life of schizophrenia patients. J Nerv Ment Dis 2003; 191: 287294CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ritsner, M., Gibel, A., Ratner, Y.Determinants of changes in perceived quality of life in the course of schizophrenia. Qual Life Res 2006; 15: 515526CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ritsner, M., Ponizovsky, A., Endicott, J., Nechamkin, Y., Rauchverger, B., Silver, H., et al.The impact of side-effects of antipsychotic agents on life satisfaction of schizophrenia patients: a naturalistic study. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 2002; 12: 3138CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwartz, R.C.Insight and illness in chronic schizophrenia. Compr Psychiatry 1998; 39: 249254CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sim, K, Mahendran, R, Siris, SG, Heckers, S, Chong, SA. Subjective quality of life in first episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders with comorbid depression. Psychiatry Res 2004;129:141–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skantze, K., Malm, U., Dencker, S.J., May, P.R., Corrigan, P.Comparison of quality of life with standard of living in schizophrenic out-patients. Br J Psychiatry 1992; 161: 797801CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sullivan, G., Wells, K.B., Leake, B.Clinical factors associated with better quality of life in a seriously mentally ill population. Hosp Community Psychiatry 1992; 43: 794798Google Scholar
Vandiver, V.L.Quality of life, gender and schizophrenia: a cross-national survey in Canada, Cuba, and USA. Community Ment Health J 1998; 34: 501511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voruganti, L.N., Heslegrave, R.J., Awad, A.G.Quality of life measurement during antipsychotic drug therapy of schizophrenia. J Psychiatry Neurosci 1997; 22: 267274Google ScholarPubMed
Wehmeier, PM, Kluge, M, Schneider, E, Schacht, A, Wagner, T, Schreiber, W. Quality of life and subjective well-being during treatment with antipsychotics in out-patients with schizophrenia. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2007;31:703–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinstein, M.C., Fineberg, H.V.Clinical decisions analysis. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders: 1980Google Scholar
Wolwer, W., Buchkremer, G., Hafner, H., Klosterkotter, J., Maier, W., Moller, H.J., et al.German research network on schizophrenia-bridging the gap between research and care. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2003; 253: 321329CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, A.S., Sullivan, G., Burnam, M.A., Brook, R.H.Measuring the quality of outpatient treatment for schizophrenia. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1998; 55: 611617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 5
Total number of PDF views: 7 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 16th April 2020 - 23rd January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Access
Hostname: page-component-76cb886bbf-wsww6 Total loading time: 1.431 Render date: 2021-01-23T17:28:21.428Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "1", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Response and remission of subjective well-being in patients suffering from schizophrenia spectrum disorders
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Response and remission of subjective well-being in patients suffering from schizophrenia spectrum disorders
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Response and remission of subjective well-being in patients suffering from schizophrenia spectrum disorders
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *