Zimmerman Mark, Martin Jacob, Clark Heather, McGonigal Patrick, Harris Lauren, Holst Carolina Guzman
From the Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Brown Medical School, The Department of Psychiatry, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, United States.
From the Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Brown Medical School, The Department of Psychiatry, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, United States.
J Psychiatr Res. 2017 Oct;93:59-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2017.05.014. Epub 2017 May 28.
DSM-5 included criteria for an anxious distress specifier for major depressive disorder (MDD). In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project we examined whether a measure of the specifier, the DSM-5 Anxious Distress Specifier Interview (DADSI), was as valid as the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA) as a measure of the severity of anxiety in depressed patients. Two hundred three psychiatric patients with MDD were interviewed by trained diagnostic raters who administered the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID) supplemented with questions to rate the DADSI, HAMA, and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD). The patients completed self-report measures of depression, anxiety, and irritability. Sensitivity to change was examined in 30 patients. The DADSI and HAMA were significantly correlated (r = 0.60, p < 0.001). Both the DADSI and HAMA were more highly correlated with measures of anxiety than with measures of the other symptom domains. The HAMD was significantly more highly correlated with the HAMA than with the DADSI. For each anxiety disorder, patients with the disorder scored significantly higher on both the DADSI and HAMA than did patients with no current anxiety disorder. A large effect size of treatment was found for both measures (DADSI: d = 1.48; HAMA: d = 1.37). Both the DADSI and HAMA were valid measures of anxiety severity in depressed patients, though the HAMA was more highly confounded with measures of depression than the DADSI. The DADSI is briefer than the HAMA, and may be more feasible to use in clinical practice.
《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM - 5)纳入了重度抑郁症(MDD)的焦虑痛苦附加说明标准。在罗德岛改善诊断评估与服务方法(MIDAS)项目的本报告中,我们研究了该附加说明的一种测量工具,即DSM - 5焦虑痛苦附加说明访谈(DADSI),作为评估抑郁症患者焦虑严重程度的工具,是否与汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA)一样有效。203名患有MDD的精神科患者接受了经过培训的诊断评估人员的访谈,评估人员使用补充了用于评定DADSI、HAMA和汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)问题的《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版(DSM - IV)结构化临床访谈。患者完成了抑郁、焦虑和易怒的自我报告测量。对30名患者进行了变化敏感性检查。DADSI与HAMA显著相关(r = 0.60,p < 0.001)。DADSI和HAMA与焦虑测量指标的相关性均高于与其他症状领域测量指标的相关性。HAMD与HAMA的相关性显著高于与DADSI的相关性。对于每种焦虑症,患有该疾病的患者在DADSI和HAMA上的得分均显著高于当前无焦虑症的患者。两种测量方法均发现了较大的治疗效应量(DADSI:d = 1.48;HAMA:d = 1.37)。DADSI和HAMA都是评估抑郁症患者焦虑严重程度的有效工具,尽管HAMA与抑郁测量指标的混淆程度高于DADSI。DADSI比HAMA更简短,在临床实践中可能更易于使用。