International journal of psychiatry in medicine · 2016
Validating screening tools for depression in stroke and transient ischemic attack patients.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Prisnie Joey C, Fiest Kirsten M, Coutts Shelagh B, Patten Scott B, Atta Callie Am, Blaikie Laura, Bulloch Andrew Gm, Demchuk Andrew, Hill Michael D, Smith Eric E, Jetté Nathalie
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The best screening questionnaires for detecting post-stroke depression have not been identified. We aimed to validate four commonly used depression screening tools in stroke and transient ischemic attack patients.
METHODS: Consecutive stroke and transient ischemic attack patients visiting an outpatient stroke clinic in Calgary, Alberta (Canada) completed a demographic questionnaire and four depression screening tools: Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-9, PHQ-2, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D), and Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15). Participants then completed the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID), the gold-standard for diagnosing major depression. The questionnaires were validated against the SCID and sensitivity and specificity were calculated at various cut-points. Optimal cut-points for each questionnaire were determined using receiver-operating curve analyses.
RESULTS: Among 122 participants, 59.5% were diagnosed with stroke and 40.5% with transient ischemic attack. The point prevalence of SCID-diagnosed current major depression was 9.8%. At the optimal cut-points, the sensitivity and specificity for each screening tool were as follows: PHQ-9 (sensitivity: 81.8%, specificity: 97.1%), PHQ-2 (sensitivity: 75.0%, specificity: 96.3%), HADS-D (sensitivity: 63.6%, specificity: 98.1%), and GDS-15 (sensitivity: 45.5%, specificity: 84.8%). Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were as follows: PHQ-9 86.6%, PHQ-2 86.7%, HADS-D 85.9%, and GDS-15 66.3%.
CONCLUSIONS: The PHQ-2 and PHQ-9 are both suitable depression screening tools, taking less than 5 minutes to complete. The HADS-D does not appear to have any advantage over the PHQ-based scales, even though it was designed specifically for medically ill populations. The GDS-15 cannot be recommended for general use in a stroke clinic based on this study as it had worse discrimination due to low sensitivity.
METHODS: Consecutive stroke and transient ischemic attack patients visiting an outpatient stroke clinic in Calgary, Alberta (Canada) completed a demographic questionnaire and four depression screening tools: Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-9, PHQ-2, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D), and Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15). Participants then completed the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID), the gold-standard for diagnosing major depression. The questionnaires were validated against the SCID and sensitivity and specificity were calculated at various cut-points. Optimal cut-points for each questionnaire were determined using receiver-operating curve analyses.
RESULTS: Among 122 participants, 59.5% were diagnosed with stroke and 40.5% with transient ischemic attack. The point prevalence of SCID-diagnosed current major depression was 9.8%. At the optimal cut-points, the sensitivity and specificity for each screening tool were as follows: PHQ-9 (sensitivity: 81.8%, specificity: 97.1%), PHQ-2 (sensitivity: 75.0%, specificity: 96.3%), HADS-D (sensitivity: 63.6%, specificity: 98.1%), and GDS-15 (sensitivity: 45.5%, specificity: 84.8%). Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were as follows: PHQ-9 86.6%, PHQ-2 86.7%, HADS-D 85.9%, and GDS-15 66.3%.
CONCLUSIONS: The PHQ-2 and PHQ-9 are both suitable depression screening tools, taking less than 5 minutes to complete. The HADS-D does not appear to have any advantage over the PHQ-based scales, even though it was designed specifically for medically ill populations. The GDS-15 cannot be recommended for general use in a stroke clinic based on this study as it had worse discrimination due to low sensitivity.