Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Groningen, Grote Kruisstraat 2/1, 9712 TS Groningen, The Netherlands.
Department of General Practice, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands; Department of Psychiatry, Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion regulation (ICPE), University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Psychiatry Res. 2014 Dec 15;220(1-2):287-93. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.06.052. Epub 2014 Jul 10.
Mood is a key element of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), and is perceived as a highly dynamic construct. The aim of the current study was to examine whether a single-item mood scale can be used for mood monitoring. One hundred thirty remitted out-patients were assessed using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis-I Disorders (SCID-I), Visual Analogue Mood Scale (VAMS), 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17), and Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report (IDS-SR). Of all patients, 13.8% relapsed during follow-up assessments. Area under the curves (AUCs) for the VAMS, HAM-D17 and IDS-SR were 0.94, 0.91, and, 0.86, respectively. The VAMS had the highest positive predictive value (PPV) without any false negatives at score 55 (PPV=0.53; NPV=1.0) and was the best predictor of current relapse status (variance explained for VAMS: 60%; for HAM-D17: 49%; for IDS-SR: 34%). Only the HAM-D17 added significant variance to the model (7%). Assessing sad mood with a single-item mood scale seems to be a straightforward and patient-friendly avenue for life-long mood monitoring. Using a diagnostic interview (e.g., the SCID) in case of a positive screen is warranted. Repeated assessment of the VAMS using Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) might reduce false positives.
情绪是重性抑郁障碍(MDD)的一个关键因素,被认为是一个高度动态的结构。本研究的目的是检验单项目情绪量表是否可用于情绪监测。采用DSM-IV 轴 I 障碍的结构临床访谈(SCID-I)、视觉模拟情绪量表(VAMS)、汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表 17 项(HAM-D17)和抑郁症状自评量表-自我报告(IDS-SR)对 130 名缓解的门诊患者进行评估。在随访评估中,所有患者中有 13.8%复发。VAMS、HAM-D17 和 IDS-SR 的曲线下面积(AUC)分别为 0.94、0.91 和 0.86。VAMS 的阳性预测值(PPV)最高,评分为 55 时没有任何假阴性(PPV=0.53;NPV=1.0),并且是当前复发状态的最佳预测因子(VAMS 的方差解释率:60%;HAM-D17:49%;IDS-SR:34%)。只有 HAM-D17 对模型增加了显著的方差(7%)。使用单项目情绪量表评估悲伤情绪似乎是一种简单直接、适合患者的终生情绪监测方法。在出现阳性筛查时,使用诊断性访谈(如 SCID)是有必要的。使用生态瞬时评估(EMA)重复评估 VAMS 可能会减少假阳性。