PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

A Li Wan Po

Publications and source records attributed to A Li Wan Po.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

How high should total pain-relief score be to obviate the need for analgesic remedication in acute pain? Estimation using signal detection theory and individual-patient meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A pain relief score 50% of the maximum is often used as a clinically meaningful outcome in meta-analyses of analgesic trials. This arbitrary value requires validation. OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimum pain relief score for predicting pain relief sufficient to obviate the need for analgesic remedication in acute post-surgical pain. DESIGN: Individual-patient meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and use of signal detection theory to identify the optimum cut-off point on the total pain relief score (TOTPAR). Analgesic remedication was used as the clinical outcome. DATA SOURCES: Seven parallel-group, active and placebo-controlled trials of minor analgesics. RESULTS: The predictive value of the TOTPAR score [expressed as a percentage of the maximum score (%maxTOTPAR)] for remedication was excellent for all the trials. The pooled estimate of the area under the receiver operating curve, an index of discriminative power, was outstanding 0.96 (95% CI 0.95-0.97). The pooled estimate of the optimal %maxTOTPAR for predictive purposes was 44.11 (95% CI 44.00-44.23). CONCLUSION: The analysis suggests that the arbitrary 50% cut-off point TOTPAR score often used in meta-analyses of analgesic trials in dental pain is reasonably acceptable. This is different to the 33% cut-off point reported for analgesic trials of acute breakthrough cancer pain and some chronic pain states such as diabetic neuropathy and postherpetic neuralgia. These differences deserve careful consideration when reading reports of analgesic trials and meta-analyses. Remedication itself should be considered as the preferred outcome measure for analgesic trials.

Acetaminophen↗
PubMed2006

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of newer drugs for children with epilepsy. A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for epilepsy in children: gabapentin, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, tiagabine, topiramate and vigabatrin. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases. Drug company submissions. REVIEW METHODS: For the systematic review of clinical and cost-effectiveness, studies were assessed for inclusion according to predefined criteria. Data extraction and quality assessment were also undertaken. A decision-analytic model was constructed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the newer agents in children with partial seizures, the only condition where there were sufficient trial data to inform a model. RESULTS: The quality of the randomised controlled trial (RCT) data was generally poor. For each of the epilepsy subtypes considered in RCTs identified for this review (partial epilepsy with or without secondary generalisation, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, infantile spasms, absence epilepsy and benign epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes), there is some evidence from placebo-controlled trials that the newer agents tested are of some value in the treatment of these conditions. Where active controls have been used, the limited evidence available does not indicate a difference in effectiveness between newer and older drugs. The data are not sufficient to inform a prescribing strategy for any of the newer agents in any of these conditions. In particular, there is no clinical evidence to suggest that the newer agents should be considered as a first-choice treatment in any form of epilepsy in children. Annual drug costs of the newer agents ranges from around 400 pound to 1200 pound, depending on age and concomitant medications. An AED that is ineffective or has intolerable side-effects will only be used for a short period of time, and many patients achieving seizure freedom will successfully withdraw from drug treatment without relapsing. The results of the decision-analytic model do not suggest that the use of the newer agents in any of the scenarios considered is clearly cost-effective but, similarly, do not indicate that they are clearly not cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: The prognosis for children diagnosed with epilepsy is generally good, with a large proportion responding well to the first treatment given. A substantial proportion, however, will not respond well to treatment, and for these patients the clinical goal is to find an optimal balance between the benefits and side-effects of any treatment given. For the newly, or recently, diagnosed population, the key question for the newer drugs is how soon they should be tried. The cost-effectiveness of using these agents early, in place of one of the older agents, will depend on the effectiveness and tolerability of these agents compared with the older agents; the evidence from the available trial data so far suggests that the newer agents are no more effective but may be somewhat better tolerated than the older agents, and so the cost-effectiveness for early use will depend on the trade-off between effectiveness and tolerability, both in terms of overall (long-term) treatment retention and overall utility associated with effects on seizure rate and side-effects. There are insufficient data available to estimate accurately the nature of this trade off either in terms of long-term treatment retention or utility. Better information is required from RCTs before any rational evidence-based prescribing strategy could be developed. Ideally, RCTs should be conducted from a 'public health' perspective, making relevant comparisons and incorporating outcomes of interest to clinicians and patients, with sufficiently long-term follow-up to determine reliably the clinical utility of different treatments, particularly with respect to treatment retention and the balance between effectiveness and tolerability. RCTs should mirror clinical practice with respect to diagnosis, focusing on defined syndromes or, where no syndrome is identified, on groups defined by specific seizure type(s) and aetiology. Epilepsy in children is a complex disease, with a variety of distinct syndromes and many alternative treatment options and outcomes. Diagnosis-specific decision-analytic models are required; further research may be required to inform parameter values adequately with respect to epidemiology and clinical practice.

Anticonvulsants↗
PubMed2002

Randomised controlled trial of short bursts of a potent topical corticosteroid versus prolonged use of a mild preparation for children with mild or moderate atopic eczema.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a three day burst of a potent corticosteroid is more effective than a mild preparation used for seven days in children with mild or moderate atopic eczema. DESIGN: Randomised, double blind, parallel group study of 18 weeks' duration. SETTING: 13 general practices and a teaching hospital in the Nottingham area. PARTICIPANTS: 174 children with mild or moderate atopic eczema recruited from general practices and 33 from a hospital outpatient clinic. INTERVENTIONS: 0.1% betamethasone valerate applied for three days followed by the base ointment for four days versus 1% hydrocortisone applied for seven days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were total number of scratch-free days and number of relapses. Secondary outcomes were median duration of relapses, number of undisturbed nights, disease severity (six area, six sign atopic dermatitis severity scale), scores on two quality of life measures (children's life quality index and dermatitis family impact questionnaire), and number of patients in whom treatment failed in each arm. RESULTS: No differences were found between the two groups. This was consistent for all outcomes. The median number of scratch-free days was 118.0 for the mild group and 117.5 for the potent group (difference 0.5, 95% confidence interval -2.0 to 4.0, P=0.53). The median number of relapses for both groups was 1.0. Both groups showed clinically important improvements in disease severity and quality of life compared with baseline. CONCLUSION: A short burst of a potent topical corticosteroid is just as effective as prolonged use of a milder preparation for controlling mild or moderate atopic eczema in children.

Administration, Topical↗
PubMed2000

Combination regimens of topical calcipotriene in chronic plaque psoriasis: systematic review of efficacy and tolerability.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy and tolerability of calcipotriene combined with phototherapy or systemic therapies compared with monotherapy for the treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis. DESIGN: Quantitative systematic review of 11 randomized controlled trials involving a total of 756 patients with plaque psoriasis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate ratios (RRs) for marked improvement or clearance in patient and investigator overall assessments of response; mean difference in percentage change in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index; and RRs for clearance in patient and investigator overall assessments of response. Adverse effects were estimated with the RR and the rate difference in terms of withdrawal rate, proportion of patients experiencing adverse events, and proportion of patients with cutaneous and noncutaneous adverse effects. RESULTS: Antipsoriatic effects of acitretin, cyclosporine, and psoralen-UV-A phototherapy were enhanced with the addition of topical calcipotriene using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index as the outcome, but this is not translated into an increase in the number of patients who achieve at least marked improvement. At the end of treatment, the RRs for marked improvement or clearance in patient assessments were as follows: calcipotriene plus acitretin vs acitretin alone (12 weeks), 1.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-1. 9); calcipotriene plus cyclosporine vs cyclosporine alone (6 weeks), 1.2 (95% CI, 0.9-1.6); and calcipotriene plus psoralen-UV-A vs psoralen-UV-A alone (12 weeks), 1.2 (95% CI, 0.9-1.6). Patients were also no more likely to obtain marked improvement or better with calcipotriene plus UV-B therapy than with UV-B therapy alone (RR, 1. 0; 95% CI, 0.8-1.1 at 8 weeks in the patient assessment). There is limited evidence that use of calcipotriene might reduce the cumulative exposure to phototherapy and systemic treatment. During the short duration of these trials, there were no significant differences in withdrawal rates or adverse effects between the combined regimens and their corresponding monotherapy control interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is insufficient evidence to support any large effects in favor of combination treatment. In the patient assessments, the results do not show an adjuvant effect, but there is some evidence that use of calcipotriene might reduce cumulative exposure to systemic therapy to obtain clearance. There were no long-term morbidity data on the effectiveness of any of the combinations studied. Given that psoriasis is a chronic recurrent disease for most patients, longer trials are needed to determine whether the addition of topical calcipotriene to systemic therapy improves the risk-benefit ratio by reducing the long-term risk of toxic effects. Equally important is the need to examine the impact of such combinations on the duration of remission after treatment.

Administration, Cutaneous↗
PubMed2000

Human albumin solution for resuscitation and volume expansion in critically ill patients. The Albumin Reviewers.

BACKGROUND: Human albumin solutions are used in a range of medical and surgical problems. Licensed indications are the emergency treatment of shock and other conditions where restoration of blood volume is urgent, burns, and hypoproteinaemia. Human albumin solutions are more expensive than other colloids and crystalloids. OBJECTIVES: To quantify the effect on mortality of human albumin and plasma protein fraction (PPF) administration in the management of critically ill patients. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group trials register, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Embase and BIDS Index to Scientific and Technical Proceedings. Reference lists of trials and review articles were checked, and authors of identified trials were contacted. The search was last updated in November 1999. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing albumin/PPF with no albumin/PPF, or with a crystalloid solution, in critically ill patients with hypovolaemia, burns or hypoalbuminaemia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We collected data on the participants, albumin solution used, mortality at the end of follow up, and quality of allocation concealment. Analysis was stratified according to patient type. We assessed publication bias using the regression test for funnel plot asymmetry. MAIN RESULTS: We found 30 trials meeting the inclusion criteria and reporting death as an outcome. There were 156 deaths among 1419 trial participants. For each patient category the risk of death in the albumin treated group was higher than in the comparison group. For hypovolaemia the relative risk of death following albumin administration was 1.46 (95% confidence interval 0.97 to 2.22), for burns the relative risk was 2.40 (1.11 to 5.19), and for hypoalbuminaemia the relative risk was 1.69 (1.07 to 2.67). The pooled relative risk of death with albumin administration was 1.68 (1.26 to 2.23). Overall, the risk of death in patients receiving albumin was 14% compared to 8% in the control groups, an increase in the risk of death of 6% (3% to 9%). These data suggest that for every 17 critically ill patients treated with albumin there is one additional death. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that albumin administration reduces the risk of death in critically ill patients with hypovolaemia, burns or hypoalbuminaemia, and a strong suggestion that it may increase the risk of death. These data suggest that the use of human albumin in critically ill patients should be urgently reviewed and that it should not be used outside the context of a rigorously conducted randomised controlled trial.

Blood Proteins↗
PubMed2000

Minocycline for acne vulgaris: efficacy and safety.

BACKGROUND: Minocycline is a tetracycline antibiotic that is commonly used in the treatment of moderate to severe acne vulgaris. Although it is more convenient for patients to take than first-generation tetracyclines, as it only needs to be taken once or twice a day and can be taken with food, it is more expensive. Concerns have also been expressed over its safety following the deaths of two patients taking the drug. There is a lack of consensus among dermatologists over the relative risks and benefits of minocycline. As most acne prescribing is undertaken by general practitioners, it is important that guidelines issued to them are based on the best available evidence rather than personal judgements. OBJECTIVES: To collate and evaluate the evidence on the clinical efficacy of minocycline in the treatment of inflammatory acne vulgaris. Specific objectives were to compare the efficacy of minocycline with other drug treatments for acne and to collate information on the incidence of adverse drug reactions. SEARCH STRATEGY: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of minocycline for acne vulgaris were identified by searching the following electronic databases; MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biosis, Biological Abstracts, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Cochrane Skin Group's Trial Register, Theses Online, BIDS ISI Science Citation Index and Bids Index to Scientific and Technical Proceedings. Other strategies used were scanning the references of articles retrieved, hand-searching of major dermatology journals and personal communication with trialists and drug companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: To be eligible for the review, studies had to be RCTs comparing the efficacy of minocycline at any dose to active or placebo control, in subjects with inflammatory acne vulgaris. Diagnoses of papulo-pustular, polymorphic and nodular acne were also accepted. Trials were not excluded on the basis of language. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: 27 randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. The comparators used were placebo (2 studies), oxytetracycline (1), tetracycline (6), doxycycline (7), lymecycline (2), topical clindamycin (3), topical erythromycin/zinc (1), cyproterone acetate/ ethinyloestradiol (1), oral isotretinoin (2), topical fusidic acid (1) and there was one dose response study. One study is ongoing and it remains to be clarified whether one further study is a RCT. Major outcome measures used in the trials included lesion counts, acne grades/severity scores, doctors' and patients' global assessments, adverse drug reactions and drop out rates. The quality of each study was assessed independently by two assessors and an effect size calculated where possible. MAIN RESULTS: The trials were generally small and of poor quality and in many cases the published reports were inadequate for our purpose. Pooling of the studies was not attempted due to the lack of common outcome measures and endpoints and the unavailability of some primary data. Although minocycline was shown to be an effective treatment for acne vulgaris, in only two studies was it found to be superior to other tetracyclines. Both of these were conducted under open conditions and had serious methodological problems. A third study showed it to be more effective than 2% fusidic acid, applied topically, against inflammatory lesions in mild to moderate acne. Differences in the way adverse drug reactions were identified could have accounted for the wide variation between studies in numbers of events reported. This meant that no overall evaluation could be made of incidence rates of adverse events associated with minocycline therapy. No RCT evidence was found to support the benefits of minocycline in acne resistant to other therapies and the dose response has only been evaluated up to eight weeks of therapy. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

Acne Vulgaris↗
PubMed2000

Therapeutic strategies for psoriasis.

Psoriasis is a chronic, inflammatory, hyperproliferative skin disease that affects approximately 1-2% of the general population in the U.K. and U.S.A. It is rarely life-threatening, but causes considerable patient morbidity. The disease waxes and wanes, with substantial variability both between and within individual patients. There is no cure for psoriasis; therefore, the aim of treatment is to minimize the extent and severity of the disease to the point at which it no longer disrupts substantially the patient's quality of life. We review the current treatment options, which include topical therapies, phototherapy and systemic agents. Lack of efficacy, adverse effects and aesthetic problems limit the use of many topical therapies. Likewise, the risk of toxicity is a major problem with currently available phototherapies and systemic treatments. Advances in understanding the aetiology and pathogenesis of psoriasis allude to the possibility of innovative, targeted therapies in the future.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2000

Systematic overview of lithium treatment in acute mania.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of lithium in the treatment of acute mania. METHOD: Systematic overview of the literature and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Estimation of (i) the differences in the reduction in mania severity scores, and (ii) the ratio and difference in improvement response rates. RESULTS: A total of 658 patients from 12 trials were included. Treatment periods ranged from 3 to 4 weeks. The response rate ratio for lithium against placebo was 1.95 (95%CI 1.17-3.23). The mean number needed to treat was five (95%CI 3-20). Patients were twice as likely to obtain remission with lithium than with chlorpromazine (rate ratio = 1.96, 95%CI 1.02-3.77). The mean number needed to treat was four (95%CI 3-9). Neither carbamazepine nor valproate was more effective than lithium. The response rate ratios were 1.01 (95%CI 0.54-1.88) for lithium compared to carbamazepine and 1.22 (95%CI 0.91-1.64) for lithium against valproate. Haloperidol was no better than lithium on the basis of improvement based on assessment of global severity. The differences in effects between lithium and risperidone were -2.79 (95%CI -4.22 to -1.36) in favour of risperidone with respect to symptom severity improvement and -0.76 (95%CI -1.11 to -0.41) on the basis of reduction in global severity of disease. Symptom and global severity was as well controlled with lithium as with verapamil. Lithium caused more side-effects than placebo and verapamil, but no more than carbamazepine or valproate. CONCLUSION: The clinical trial evidence suggests that lithium should remain the first line treatment for acute mania.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2000

Pharmacogenetics and psychopharmacotherapy.

Response to drugs can vary between individuals and between different ethnic populations. The biological (age, gender, disease and genetics), cultural and environmental factors which contribute to these variations are considered in this review. The most important aspect is the genetic variability between individuals in their ability to metabolize drugs due to expression of 'polymorphic' enzymes. Polymorphism enables division of individuals within a given population into at least two groups, poor metabolisers (PMs) and extensive metabolisers (EMs) of certain drugs. The two most extensively studied genetic polymorphisms are those involving cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) and CYP2C19. CYP2D6 metabolizes a number of antidepressants, antipsychotics, beta-adrenoceptor blockers, and antiarrhythmic drugs. About 7% of Caucasians and 1% of Asians are PMs of CYP2D6 substrates. CYP2C19 enzyme participates in the metabolism of omeprazole, propranolol and psychotropic drugs such as hexobarbital, diazepam, citalopram, imipramine, clomipramine and amitriptyline. The incidence of PMs of CYP2C19 substrates is much higher in Asians (15-30%) than in Caucasians (3-6%). Variations in metabolism of psychotropic drugs result in variations in their pharmacokinetic parameters. This may lead to clinically significant intra- and inter-ethnic differences in pharmacological responses. Such variations are discussed in this review. Differential receptor-mediated response may play a role in ethnic differences in responses to antipsychotics and tricyclic antidepressants, but such pharmacodynamic factors remain to be systematically investigated. The results of studies of ethnic differences in response to psychopharmacotherapy appear to be discrepant, most probably due to limitations of study design, small sample size, inadequately defined study sample, and lack of control of confounding factors. The clinical value of understanding pharmacogenetics is in its use to optimize therapeutic efficacy, to prevent toxicity of those drugs whose metabolism is catalysed by polymorphic isoenzymes, and to contribute to the rational design of new drugs. Finally, applications and impact of pharmacogenetics in the field of psychopharmacotherapy are discussed.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2000

Cost-effectiveness analysis of topical calcipotriol versus short-contact dithranol. In the treatment of mild to moderate plaque psoriasis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relative cost effectiveness of topical calcipotriol and short-contact dithranol in the treatment of mild to moderate plaque psoriasis. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a modelling study from the perspective of the UK National Health Service as payer. METHODS: The interventions were compared using 2 decision-analytic models: one using a short term horizon (12 weeks) and the other using a longer term horizon (up to 1 year). Clinical success of treatment and relapse rates were obtained from the results of randomised controlled trials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: The outcome measure used was the degree of improvement in psoriasis as judged by the patient. In the short term comparison, calcipotriol was the most effective treatment (60.8% success), but it was also the most expensive (96.03 Pounds; 2000 values). The incremental cost per success was 577.50 Pounds using a 12-week course of calcipotriol compared with short-contact dithranol. Over the long term horizon, first-line treatment with calcipotriol still had the highest expected cost per successful treatment (164.91 Pounds), but the incremental cost using this strategy was 38.66 Pounds compared with short-contact dithranol. In terms of cost per successful day's treatment (i.e. the cost for a day in which the patient reported a marked improvement or cleared lesions), the cost of each additional successful day's treatment was 19.93 Pounds when using calcipotriol as first-line treatment rather than short-contact dithranol. CONCLUSION: The combination of differences in drug acquisition costs and relapse rates can lead to large differences in the comparative cost effectiveness of topical treatments for plaque psoriasis. From the perspective of the prescriber, the results of this analysis suggest that selecting short-contact dithranol as first-line treatment was the most cost-effective strategy.

Administration, Topical↗
PubMed2000

Systematic review of treatments for atopic eczema.

BACKGROUND: Atopic eczema is the commonest inflammatory skin disease of childhood, affecting 15-20% of children in the UK at any one time. Adults make up about one-third of all community cases. Moderate-to-severe atopic eczema can have a profound effect on the quality of life for both sufferers and their families. In addition to the effects of intractable itching, skin damage, soreness, sleep loss and the social stigma of a visible skin disease, other factors such as frequent visits to doctors, special clothing and¿the need to constantly apply messy topical applications all add to the burden of disease. The cause of atopic eczema is unknown, though a genetic pre-disposition and a combination of allergic and non-allergic factors appear to be important in determining disease expression. Treatment of atopic eczema in the UK is characterised by a profusion of treatments aimed at disease control. The evidential basis of these treatments is often unclear. Most people with atopic eczema are managed in primary care where the least research has been done. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this scoping review are two-fold. To produce an up-to-date coverage 'map' of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of treatments of atopic eczema. To assist in making treatment recommendations by summarising the available RCT evidence using qualitative and quantitative methods. METHODS DATA SOURCES: Data sources included electronic searching of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register, the Cochrane Skin Group specialised register of trials, hand-searching of atopic eczema conference proceedings, follow-up of references in retrieved articles, contact with leading researchers and requests to relevant pharmaceutical companies. INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Only RCTs of therapeutic agents used in the prevention and treatment of people with atopic eczema of any age were considered for inclusion. Only studies where a physician diagnosed atopic eczema or atopic dermatitis were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction was conducted by two observers onto abstraction forms, with discrepancies resolved by discussion. QUALITY ASSESSMENT: The quality assessment of retrieved RCTs included an assessment of: a clear description of method and concealment of allocation of randomisation, the degree to which assessors and participants were blinded to the study interventions, and whether all those originally randomised were included in the final main analysis. DATA SYNTHESIS: Where possible, quantitative pooling of similar RCTs was conducted using the Cochrane Collaboration's methods. Where statistical heterogeneity was found, sources of heterogeneity in terms of study participants, formulation or posology of intervention, and use of co-treatments were explored. Where pooling was not deemed to be appropriate, detailed descriptions of the study characteristics and main reported results were presented along with comments on study quality. RESULTS: A total of 1165 possible RCTs were retrieved in hard copy form for further scrutiny. Of these, 893 were excluded from further analysis because of lack of appropriate data. The 272 remaining RCTs of atopic eczema covered at least 47 different interventions, which could be broadly categorised into ten main groups. Quality of reporting was generally poor, and limited statistical pooling was possible only for oral cyclosporin, and only then after considerable data transformation. There was reasonable RCT evidence to support the use of oral cyclosporin, topical corticosteroids, psychological approaches and ultraviolet light therapy. There was insufficient evidence to make recommendations on maternal allergen avoidance for disease prevention, oral antihistamines, Chinese herbs, dietary restriction in established atopic eczema, homeopathy, house dust mite reduction, massage therapy, hypnotherapy, evening primrose oil, emollients, topical coal tar and topical doxepin. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

Administration, Cutaneous↗
PubMed1999

Measuring mania and critical appraisal of rating scales.

BACKGROUND: In clinical trials of acute mania, a number of measures have been used to assess the severity of illness and its response to treatment. Rating instruments need to be validated in order for a clinical study to provide reliable and meaningful estimates of treatment effects. OBJECTIVE: To critically assess rating scales used in measuring mania. METHOD: A systematic search of the literature, retrieval of reports of clinical trials of drugs used in mania and the rating scales and a critical and systematic appraisal of their quality. RESULTS: Eight symptom-rating scales were identified. The Mania Rating Scale (MRS) was the most commonly used for assessing treatment response. Two more recently developed scales are the Manchester Nurse Rating Scale for Mania (MNRS-M) and the Clinician-Administered Rating Scale for Mania (CARS-M). The latter appears well validated but its in-use reliability needs to be explored further. The translation of observed changes in instrumental ratings into clinically meaningful change has to be established further. In particular, the relative weighting to be attached to the individual items needs further study. The advantage of the MRS is that there is a relatively extensive database of studies based on it and this will no doubt ensure that it remains a gold standard for the foreseeable future. CONCLUSION: Useful rating scales are available for measuring mania but further cross-validation and validation against clinically meaningful global changes are required.

Acute Disease↗