Archivos de bronconeumologia · 2020
Validity of Self-rating Screening Scales for the Diagnosis of Depression and Anxiety in Adult Patients With Bronchiectasis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Colomo Natalia, Olveira Casilda, Hernández-Pedrosa Javier, Bergero Trinidad, Fábrega-Ruz Julia, Porras Nuria, Girón María Victoria, de Rota Luis Fernández, Olveira Gabriel
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There are no previous studies aimed at assessing the validity of the screening scales for depression and anxiety in adult patients with bronchiectasis.
AIMS: To analyze the psychometric properties of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and Hamilton Anxiety Scale and to evaluate the concordance for the diagnosis of depression and anxiety between these screening scales and the structured clinical interview in adult patients with bronchiectasis.
METHOD: Cross sectional study. 52 patients with bronchiectasis completed HADS, BDI and Hamilton Anxiety Scale; afterwards, were individually interviewed by a mental health care professional using the structured Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), which evaluates for depression and anxiety according to DSM-IV criteria.
RESULTS: Based on MINI, 18 subjects (34.6%) had a diagnosis of depression and 25 (48.1%) had anxiety. Optimal cut-off values to detect depression were ≥9 for the HADS-D (sensitivity 0.833, specificity 0.971, AUC 0.962 [95% CI 0.918-1]), and 17 for BDI (sensitivity 0.889, specificity 0.912, AUC 0.978 [95% CI 0.945-1]). Optimal cut-off values to detect anxiety were ≥4 for the HADS-A (sensitivity 0.960, specificity 0.593, AUC 0.833 [95% CI 0.723-0.943]), and 17 for Hamilton Anxiety Scale (sensitivity 0.800, specificity 0.852, AUC 0.876 [95% CI 0.781-0.970]).
CONCLUSION: The self-rating screening scales HADS, BDI and Hamilton Anxiety Scale are reliable tools to screen for depression and anxiety in adult patients with bronchiectasis. However, the use of specific cut-off values may improve the diagnostic accuracy of the previous scales in this specific group of patients.
AIMS: To analyze the psychometric properties of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and Hamilton Anxiety Scale and to evaluate the concordance for the diagnosis of depression and anxiety between these screening scales and the structured clinical interview in adult patients with bronchiectasis.
METHOD: Cross sectional study. 52 patients with bronchiectasis completed HADS, BDI and Hamilton Anxiety Scale; afterwards, were individually interviewed by a mental health care professional using the structured Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), which evaluates for depression and anxiety according to DSM-IV criteria.
RESULTS: Based on MINI, 18 subjects (34.6%) had a diagnosis of depression and 25 (48.1%) had anxiety. Optimal cut-off values to detect depression were ≥9 for the HADS-D (sensitivity 0.833, specificity 0.971, AUC 0.962 [95% CI 0.918-1]), and 17 for BDI (sensitivity 0.889, specificity 0.912, AUC 0.978 [95% CI 0.945-1]). Optimal cut-off values to detect anxiety were ≥4 for the HADS-A (sensitivity 0.960, specificity 0.593, AUC 0.833 [95% CI 0.723-0.943]), and 17 for Hamilton Anxiety Scale (sensitivity 0.800, specificity 0.852, AUC 0.876 [95% CI 0.781-0.970]).
CONCLUSION: The self-rating screening scales HADS, BDI and Hamilton Anxiety Scale are reliable tools to screen for depression and anxiety in adult patients with bronchiectasis. However, the use of specific cut-off values may improve the diagnostic accuracy of the previous scales in this specific group of patients.