Robinson Jude, Khan Naila, Fusco Louise, Malpass Alice, Lewis Glyn, Dowrick Christopher
Department of Sociology, Social Policy and Criminology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
BMJ Open. 2017 May 4;7(4):e014519. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014519.
Our aims were to investigate discrepancies between depressed patients' GlobalRating of Change (GRC) and scores on the Patient Health Questionnaire depression module (PHQ-9). Our objectives were to ascertain patients' views on the source and meaning of mismatches and assess their clinical significance.
Qualitative study nested within a cohort, in a programme investigating the indications for prescribing antidepressants that will lead to a clinical benefit.
Primary care practices in north-west England.
We invited 32 adults with a recent diagnosis of depression and evidence of mismatch between GRC and PHQ-9 Scores to participate. Of these, 29 completed our interviews; most were women, identified as white British, had high school education or higher, were employed or retired and had been depressed for a long time.
We conducted semistructured interviews with a topic guide, focusing on experiences of depression; treatment experiences and expectations; effectiveness of the questionnaires; reasons for the mismatch; and social factors. Interviews were transcribed and subjected to interpretative phenomenological analysis.
We identified four themes as explanations for mismatch between GRC and PHQ-9: perceptions that GRC provided a more accurate assessment of current mental state than PHQ-9; impact of recent negative or positive life events on either measure; personal understanding of depression as normally fluctuating, and tendency to underscore on PHQ-9 as a means of self-motivation; and lack of recall.
The combined used of the PHQ-9 and a more open question better captures the patient's unique experiences of mental health. This approach ascertains the relevance of symptoms to the individual's experience and influences treatment decisions.
This study was an element of NIHR Programme Grant RP-PG 0610 10048.
我们的目标是调查抑郁症患者的整体变化评定(GRC)与患者健康问卷抑郁模块(PHQ - 9)得分之间的差异。我们的目标是确定患者对差异来源及意义的看法,并评估其临床意义。
在一项队列研究中进行的定性研究,该队列研究旨在调查开具具有临床益处的抗抑郁药的指征。
英格兰西北部的基层医疗诊所。
我们邀请了32名近期被诊断为抑郁症且有GRC与PHQ - 9得分不匹配证据的成年人参与。其中,29人完成了我们的访谈;大多数为女性,被认定为英国白人,具有高中或更高学历,已就业或退休,且患有抑郁症已久。
我们使用主题指南进行半结构化访谈,重点关注抑郁经历、治疗经历与期望、问卷的有效性、不匹配的原因以及社会因素。访谈内容被转录并进行解释性现象学分析。
我们确定了四个主题来解释GRC与PHQ - 9之间的不匹配:认为GRC比PHQ - 9能更准确地评估当前精神状态;近期负面或正面生活事件对任一测量方法的影响;个人认为抑郁症通常会波动,以及倾向于在PHQ - 9上低分以自我激励;以及记忆缺失。
将PHQ - 9与一个更开放性的问题结合使用,能更好地捕捉患者独特的心理健康经历。这种方法确定了症状与个体经历的相关性,并影响治疗决策。
本研究是英国国家卫生研究院项目资助RP - PG 0610 10048的一部分。