Revisiting the abnormal involuntary movement scale

Proceedings from the tardive dyskinesia assessment workshop

John M. Kane, Christoph U. Correll, Andrew A. Nierenberg, Stanley N. Caroff, Martha Sajatovic, Andrew J. Cutler, Joseph Patrick McEvoy, Mark Stacy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:To provide an historic overview of the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) in clinical trials of tardive dyskinesia (TD), with current recommendations for analyzing and interpreting AIMS data. PARTICIPANTS: even psychiatrists and 1 neurologist were selected by the workshop sponsor based on each individual's clinical expertise and research experience. EVIDENCE: sing PubMed entries from January 1970 to August 2017, participants selected studies that used the AIMS to evaluate TD treatments. The selections were intended to be representative rather than prescriptive or exhaustive, and no specific recommendations for TD treatment are implied. ONSENSUS PROCESS: he Working Group met in October 2016 to discuss the AIMS as an assessment tool, outline the challenges of translating clinical trial results into everyday clinical practice, and propose different methods for reporting AIMS data in clinically relevant terms. Recommendations for selecting TD studies for review, analyzing and interpreting AIMS data, and synthesizing discussions among the participants were initiated during the onsite workshop and continued remotely throughout development of this report. Disagreements were resolved via group e-mails and teleconferences. Consensus was based on final approval of this report by all workshop participants. CONCLUSIONS: For both research and clinical practice, the AIMS is a valid measure for assessing TD and the effects of treatment, but alternative analyses of AIMS data (eg, effect size, minimal clinically important difference, response analyses, category shifts) may provide broader evidence of clinical effectiveness. No single analysis of AIMS data can be considered the standard of clinical efficacy; multiple analytic approaches are recommended.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number17cs11959
JournalJournal of Clinical Psychiatry
Volume79
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2018

Fingerprint

Education
Clinical Trials
Telecommunications
Tardive Dyskinesia
Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale
Postal Service
Research
PubMed
Psychiatry
Consensus
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

Kane, J. M., Correll, C. U., Nierenberg, A. A., Caroff, S. N., Sajatovic, M., Cutler, A. J., ... Stacy, M. (2018). Revisiting the abnormal involuntary movement scale: Proceedings from the tardive dyskinesia assessment workshop. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 79(3), [17cs11959]. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.17cs11959

Revisiting the abnormal involuntary movement scale : Proceedings from the tardive dyskinesia assessment workshop. / Kane, John M.; Correll, Christoph U.; Nierenberg, Andrew A.; Caroff, Stanley N.; Sajatovic, Martha; Cutler, Andrew J.; McEvoy, Joseph Patrick; Stacy, Mark.

In: Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, Vol. 79, No. 3, 17cs11959, 01.05.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kane, John M. ; Correll, Christoph U. ; Nierenberg, Andrew A. ; Caroff, Stanley N. ; Sajatovic, Martha ; Cutler, Andrew J. ; McEvoy, Joseph Patrick ; Stacy, Mark. / Revisiting the abnormal involuntary movement scale : Proceedings from the tardive dyskinesia assessment workshop. In: Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. 2018 ; Vol. 79, No. 3.
@article{a7b8e13d2de14e038a02e13f9bde9f6d,
title = "Revisiting the abnormal involuntary movement scale: Proceedings from the tardive dyskinesia assessment workshop",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE:To provide an historic overview of the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) in clinical trials of tardive dyskinesia (TD), with current recommendations for analyzing and interpreting AIMS data. PARTICIPANTS: even psychiatrists and 1 neurologist were selected by the workshop sponsor based on each individual's clinical expertise and research experience. EVIDENCE: sing PubMed entries from January 1970 to August 2017, participants selected studies that used the AIMS to evaluate TD treatments. The selections were intended to be representative rather than prescriptive or exhaustive, and no specific recommendations for TD treatment are implied. ONSENSUS PROCESS: he Working Group met in October 2016 to discuss the AIMS as an assessment tool, outline the challenges of translating clinical trial results into everyday clinical practice, and propose different methods for reporting AIMS data in clinically relevant terms. Recommendations for selecting TD studies for review, analyzing and interpreting AIMS data, and synthesizing discussions among the participants were initiated during the onsite workshop and continued remotely throughout development of this report. Disagreements were resolved via group e-mails and teleconferences. Consensus was based on final approval of this report by all workshop participants. CONCLUSIONS: For both research and clinical practice, the AIMS is a valid measure for assessing TD and the effects of treatment, but alternative analyses of AIMS data (eg, effect size, minimal clinically important difference, response analyses, category shifts) may provide broader evidence of clinical effectiveness. No single analysis of AIMS data can be considered the standard of clinical efficacy; multiple analytic approaches are recommended.",
author = "Kane, {John M.} and Correll, {Christoph U.} and Nierenberg, {Andrew A.} and Caroff, {Stanley N.} and Martha Sajatovic and Cutler, {Andrew J.} and McEvoy, {Joseph Patrick} and Mark Stacy",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4088/JCP.17cs11959",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "79",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Psychiatry",
issn = "0160-6689",
publisher = "Physicians Postgraduate Press Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Revisiting the abnormal involuntary movement scale

T2 - Proceedings from the tardive dyskinesia assessment workshop

AU - Kane, John M.

AU - Correll, Christoph U.

AU - Nierenberg, Andrew A.

AU - Caroff, Stanley N.

AU - Sajatovic, Martha

AU - Cutler, Andrew J.

AU - McEvoy, Joseph Patrick

AU - Stacy, Mark

PY - 2018/5/1

Y1 - 2018/5/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE:To provide an historic overview of the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) in clinical trials of tardive dyskinesia (TD), with current recommendations for analyzing and interpreting AIMS data. PARTICIPANTS: even psychiatrists and 1 neurologist were selected by the workshop sponsor based on each individual's clinical expertise and research experience. EVIDENCE: sing PubMed entries from January 1970 to August 2017, participants selected studies that used the AIMS to evaluate TD treatments. The selections were intended to be representative rather than prescriptive or exhaustive, and no specific recommendations for TD treatment are implied. ONSENSUS PROCESS: he Working Group met in October 2016 to discuss the AIMS as an assessment tool, outline the challenges of translating clinical trial results into everyday clinical practice, and propose different methods for reporting AIMS data in clinically relevant terms. Recommendations for selecting TD studies for review, analyzing and interpreting AIMS data, and synthesizing discussions among the participants were initiated during the onsite workshop and continued remotely throughout development of this report. Disagreements were resolved via group e-mails and teleconferences. Consensus was based on final approval of this report by all workshop participants. CONCLUSIONS: For both research and clinical practice, the AIMS is a valid measure for assessing TD and the effects of treatment, but alternative analyses of AIMS data (eg, effect size, minimal clinically important difference, response analyses, category shifts) may provide broader evidence of clinical effectiveness. No single analysis of AIMS data can be considered the standard of clinical efficacy; multiple analytic approaches are recommended.

AB - OBJECTIVE:To provide an historic overview of the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) in clinical trials of tardive dyskinesia (TD), with current recommendations for analyzing and interpreting AIMS data. PARTICIPANTS: even psychiatrists and 1 neurologist were selected by the workshop sponsor based on each individual's clinical expertise and research experience. EVIDENCE: sing PubMed entries from January 1970 to August 2017, participants selected studies that used the AIMS to evaluate TD treatments. The selections were intended to be representative rather than prescriptive or exhaustive, and no specific recommendations for TD treatment are implied. ONSENSUS PROCESS: he Working Group met in October 2016 to discuss the AIMS as an assessment tool, outline the challenges of translating clinical trial results into everyday clinical practice, and propose different methods for reporting AIMS data in clinically relevant terms. Recommendations for selecting TD studies for review, analyzing and interpreting AIMS data, and synthesizing discussions among the participants were initiated during the onsite workshop and continued remotely throughout development of this report. Disagreements were resolved via group e-mails and teleconferences. Consensus was based on final approval of this report by all workshop participants. CONCLUSIONS: For both research and clinical practice, the AIMS is a valid measure for assessing TD and the effects of treatment, but alternative analyses of AIMS data (eg, effect size, minimal clinically important difference, response analyses, category shifts) may provide broader evidence of clinical effectiveness. No single analysis of AIMS data can be considered the standard of clinical efficacy; multiple analytic approaches are recommended.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049487021&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85049487021&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4088/JCP.17cs11959

DO - 10.4088/JCP.17cs11959

M3 - Article

VL - 79

JO - Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

JF - Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

SN - 0160-6689

IS - 3

M1 - 17cs11959

ER -