Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, UK.
J Psychosom Res. 2010 Oct;69(4):371-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.04.006. Epub 2010 Jun 1.
To quantify the accuracy of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) as a case-finding instrument for anxiety and depressive disorders.
MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, BNI, and AMED were searched from January 1983 to June 2006. Studies were included that administered the HADS, used a standardized psychiatric interview to establish a diagnosis of anxiety or depression, and provided sufficient data on sensitivity and specificity (N=41). Summary sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratios were calculated for each study. Random effects meta-analytic pooling across studies at the recommended clinical (7/8) and research (10/11) cutoff points was undertaken and summary receiver operating characteristic curves constructed.
For major depressive disorders, a cut point of ≥8 gave a sensitivity of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.73-0.89) and a specificity of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.60-0.84) and a cut point ≥11 gave a sensitivity of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.40-0.71) and a specificity of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.79-0.97).
Many studies have shown that the HADS is a useful screening tool to identify emotional distress in nonpsychiatric patients. However, it does not appear to be superior to other screening instruments in terms of identifying specific mental disorders in physical health settings.
定量研究医院焦虑抑郁量表(HADS)作为焦虑和抑郁障碍病例发现工具的准确性。
检索 MEDLINE、PSYCHINFO、EMBASE、CINAHL、BNI 和 AMED 从 1983 年 1 月至 2006 年 6 月的文献。纳入研究标准为:使用 HADS 量表进行测评、采用标准化精神科访谈进行焦虑或抑郁诊断、并提供灵敏度和特异度的足够数据(N=41)。计算每个研究的汇总灵敏度、特异度、似然比和诊断比值比。对推荐的临床(7/8)和研究(10/11)切点进行了跨研究的随机效应荟萃分析,并构建了汇总受试者工作特征曲线。
对于重性抑郁障碍,切点≥8 时,灵敏度为 0.82(95%CI,0.73-0.89),特异度为 0.74(95%CI,0.60-0.84);切点≥11 时,灵敏度为 0.56(95%CI,0.40-0.71),特异度为 0.92(95%CI,0.79-0.97)。
许多研究表明,HADS 是一种有用的筛查工具,可用于识别非精神科患者的情绪困扰。然而,在识别生理健康环境中的特定精神障碍方面,它似乎并不优于其他筛查工具。