Suppr超能文献

老年人抑郁症的病例发现:在不同治疗环境中平衡管理的简易性与有效性。

Case-finding for depression in elderly people: balancing ease of administration with validity in varied treatment settings.

作者信息

Blank Karen, Gruman Cynthia, Robison Julie T

机构信息

Braceland Center for Mental Health and Aging, Institute of Living, Hartford Hospital's Mental Health Network, Hartford, Connecticut 06106, USA.

出版信息

J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2004 Apr;59(4):378-84. doi: 10.1093/gerona/59.4.m378.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the performance of brief and ultrabrief (1- and 2-question) depression screens in older patients across varied treatment sites. This study (1) assesses their validity in clinics, hospitals, and nursing homes and (2) assesses cut-points for optimal clinical application.

METHODS

360 patients aged 60 years and older from 2 urban primary care practices (n = 125), 1 general hospital (n = 150), and 8 nursing homes (n = 85) were assessed using the Yale 1-question screen, the 2-question instrument derived from the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders, and long and short versions of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale and Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS). Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each screen compared with the criterion standard Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS) depression diagnosis and receiver operating characteristic curves generated.

RESULTS

9% of patients met DIS criteria for major depression and 7% for subsyndromal depression. Overall, the 10-item CES-D showed the best sensitivity/specificity for major depression in clinics (79%/81%) and hospitals (92%/77%), and the short GDS in nursing homes (86%/82%). Specificity of 1- and 2-question instruments was generally low. Established cut-points generally worked best for the short screens, while modifications were useful for longer versions.

CONCLUSIONS

Consideration of site of use is important in selecting brief case-finding instruments for late-life depression, with the 10-item CES-D working best in medical settings and the 15-item GDS in nursing homes.

摘要

背景

对于简短和超简短(1个问题和2个问题)的抑郁筛查工具在不同治疗场所的老年患者中的表现,人们了解甚少。本研究(1)评估它们在诊所、医院和疗养院中的有效性,(2)评估最佳临床应用的切点。

方法

对来自2家城市初级保健机构(n = 125)、1家综合医院(n = 150)和8家疗养院(n = 85)的360名60岁及以上患者,使用耶鲁1问题筛查工具、源自精神障碍初级保健评估的2问题工具,以及流行病学研究中心抑郁量表(CES-D)的长、短版本和老年抑郁量表(GDS)进行评估。将每个筛查工具与标准诊断访谈表(DIS)抑郁诊断进行比较,计算敏感性和特异性,并生成受试者工作特征曲线。

结果

9%的患者符合重度抑郁的DIS标准,7%符合亚综合征抑郁标准。总体而言,10项CES-D在诊所(79%/81%)和医院(92%/77%)对重度抑郁表现出最佳的敏感性/特异性,而在疗养院中短版GDS表现最佳(86%/82%)。1个问题和2个问题工具的特异性普遍较低。既定的切点通常对短筛查工具效果最佳,而调整对较长版本有用。

结论

在为老年抑郁选择简短的病例发现工具时,考虑使用场所很重要,10项CES-D在医疗环境中效果最佳,15项GDS在疗养院中效果最佳。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验