Health Behaviour Research Collaborative, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 4;14(1):e0210111. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210111. eCollection 2019.
Anxiety and depression can be heightened among individuals living with chronic diseases. Identifying these individuals is necessary for ensuring they are provided with adequate support. Traditional tools such as clinical interviews or symptom checklists are not always feasible to implement in practice. Robust single-item questions may be a useful alternative. This study aimed to measure agreement, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of a single-item question about anxiety and depression compared to the widely used Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). A cross-sectional survey of 2,811 people with cancer attending 19 treatment centres in Australia. Patients were approached in the waiting room prior to an outpatient clinic appointment and invited to complete a pen and paper survey. Participants completed the HADS as well as 2 single-items asking if they have felt anxious or depressed in the last week. The single-items for anxiety and depression each demonstrated moderate levels of sensitivity (0.78 for anxiety; 0.63 for depression) and specificity (0.75 for anxiety; 0.84 for depression) against the relevant HADS subscale. Positive predictive values were moderate (0.53 for anxiety and 0.52 for depression) while negative predictive values were high for both single-item questions (0.90 for anxiety and 0.89 for depression). The single-item measures of anxiety and depression may be useful to rule out individuals who do not require further psychological assessment or intervention for anxiety and depression. Further research is needed to explore whether these findings generalise to other chronic diseases.
患有慢性疾病的个体可能会经历更高程度的焦虑和抑郁。识别这些个体对于确保为他们提供足够的支持是必要的。在实践中，传统的工具，如临床访谈或症状清单，并不总是可行的。而强有力的单项问题可能是一个有用的替代方案。本研究旨在衡量与广泛使用的医院焦虑和抑郁量表（HADS）相比，一个关于焦虑和抑郁的单项问题在测量一致性、敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值方面的表现。这是一项在澳大利亚 19 个治疗中心进行的 2811 名癌症患者的横断面调查。在门诊预约前，在候诊室接近患者，并邀请他们完成纸笔调查。参与者完成了 HADS 以及两个单项问题，询问他们在过去一周是否感到焦虑或抑郁。焦虑和抑郁的单项问题在与相关 HADS 子量表相比时，均显示出中等水平的敏感性（焦虑为 0.78；抑郁为 0.63）和特异性（焦虑为 0.75；抑郁为 0.84）。阳性预测值适中（焦虑为 0.53；抑郁为 0.52），而两个单项问题的阴性预测值均较高（焦虑为 0.90；抑郁为 0.89）。焦虑和抑郁的单项测量可能有助于排除那些不需要进一步心理评估或干预的焦虑和抑郁个体。需要进一步的研究来探索这些发现是否适用于其他慢性疾病。
