Kørner Alex, Lauritzen Lise, Abelskov Kirsten, Gulmann Nils, Marie Brodersen Anne, Wedervang-Jensen Torben, Marie Kjeldgaard Karen
Psychiatric Department Q, Psychiatric Hospital, Frederiksborg County, Denmark.
Nord J Psychiatry. 2006;60(5):360-4. doi: 10.1080/08039480600937066.
The study is a validation study of two psychogeriatric depression rating scales, The Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) and the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD). The sensitivity and specificity, and the convergent and criterion validity of the two scales as well as the inter-rater reliability of the CSDD are reported. Two independent clinicians using the ICD-10 for depression and dementia, the Clinical Global Impression (CGI), the Hamilton Depression rating scale 17-items and the Mini-Mental-State Examination (MMSE), interviewed each patient or control subject. One hundred forty-five persons of 65 years or more of age were included, 73 were depressed only, 36 depressed and demented; 36 persons were control subjects, 11 of these were demented. The inter-rater reliabilities were high or very high equalling perfect correlation. There was very high convergent validity between the screening tools and the severity scales; the shorter versions of the GDS (15-, 10- or four-item version) had lower though still almost perfect correlations. The criterion validity in the total population showed the CSDD as the better scale with sensitivity and specificity of 93% and 97% with a cut-off value of > or =6. The GDS versions had sensitivities and specificities ranging from 82% to 90% and 75% to 94% respectively with cut-off values > or =9, 4, 3 and 1. The CSDD retained its validity and specificity as a screening tool for depression in a population of demented, while the GDS versions all diminished in validity. The GDS and the CSDD are both valid screening tools for depression in the elderly; however, the CSDD alone seems to be equally valid in populations of demented and non-demented.
该研究是对两种老年抑郁评定量表——老年抑郁量表(GDS)和康奈尔痴呆抑郁量表(CSDD)的效度验证研究。报告了这两种量表的敏感性和特异性、收敛效度和效标效度,以及CSDD的评分者间信度。两名独立的临床医生使用国际疾病分类第10版(ICD - 10)对抑郁和痴呆进行诊断,并结合临床总体印象量表(CGI)、汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表17项版以及简易精神状态检查表(MMSE),对每位患者或对照受试者进行访谈。纳入了145名65岁及以上的人员,其中73人仅患有抑郁症,36人患有抑郁症且患有痴呆症;36人为对照受试者,其中11人患有痴呆症。评分者间信度高或非常高,等同于完全相关。筛查工具与严重程度量表之间具有非常高的收敛效度;GDS的较短版本(15项、10项或4项版本)的相关性较低,但仍几乎为完全相关。总体人群中的效标效度表明,CSDD是更好的量表,其敏感性和特异性分别为93%和97%,临界值为≥6。GDS各版本的敏感性和特异性分别为82%至90%和75%至94%,临界值分别为≥9、4、3和1。CSDD作为痴呆人群中抑郁症的筛查工具,其效度和特异性得以保留,而GDS各版本的效度均有所降低。GDS和CSDD都是老年人抑郁症的有效筛查工具;然而,似乎只有CSDD在痴呆和非痴呆人群中同样有效。