Suppr超能文献

类风湿关节炎中抑郁和焦虑障碍筛查工具的有效性和可靠性。

Validity and Reliability of Screening Measures for Depression and Anxiety Disorders in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

机构信息

Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.

Nova Scotia Health Authority and Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

出版信息

Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2020 Aug;72(8):1130-1139. doi: 10.1002/acr.24011. Epub 2020 Jul 8.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To test the validity and reliability of screening instruments for depression and anxiety in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Participants with RA completed the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2 or PHQ-9), the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System depression short form 8a and anxiety short form 8a, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale anxiety score (HADS-A) and depression score (HADS-D), the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2- and 7-item scales, and the Kessler-6 scale. Clinical depression and anxiety disorders were confirmed using the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Axis I Disorders (SCID-1) research version. We reported sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value using SCID-1 diagnoses as the criterion standard. Test-retest reliability was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

Of 150 participants, 11.3% had SCID-1-diagnosed depression, 7.3% had SCID-1-diagnosed generalized anxiety disorder, and 19.3% had any SCID-1-diagnosed anxiety disorder. For depression, sensitivity ranged from HADS-D (cut point 11; 35%) to PHQ-2 (88%) and PHQ-9 (87%). Specificity ranged from PHQ-9 (77%) and PHQ-2 (84%) to HADS-D (cut point 11; 94%). Positive predictive value ranged from 30% to 43%. Negative predictive value ranged from 92% to 98%. For generalized anxiety disorder, sensitivity ranged from HADS-A (cut point 11; 45%) to HADS-A (cut point 8; 91%). Specificity ranged from 81% to 89% for all measures except the HADS-A (cut point 8; 63%). Intraclass correlation coefficient estimates ranging from 0.69 to 0.88 confirmed good test-retest reliability.

CONCLUSION

Depression screening instruments had good diagnostic performance; anxiety instruments were more variable. Identified depression and anxiety require clinical confirmation.

摘要

目的

测试用于类风湿关节炎(RA)患者抑郁和焦虑的筛查工具的有效性和可靠性。

方法

RA 患者完成了患者健康问卷(PHQ-2 或 PHQ-9)、患者报告的结果测量信息系统抑郁 8a 短表和焦虑 8a 短表、医院焦虑抑郁量表焦虑评分(HADS-A)和抑郁评分(HADS-D)、总体焦虑严重程度和障碍量表、广泛性焦虑症 2 项和 7 项量表以及 Kessler-6 量表。使用精神障碍诊断与统计手册第四版轴 I 障碍的结构临床访谈(SCID-1)研究版确认临床抑郁症和焦虑症。我们使用 SCID-1 诊断作为标准,报告了灵敏度、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值。使用组内相关系数评估了重测信度。

结果

在 150 名参与者中,11.3%的人被 SCID-1 诊断为抑郁症,7.3%的人被 SCID-1 诊断为广泛性焦虑症,19.3%的人被 SCID-1 诊断为任何焦虑症。对于抑郁症,灵敏度从 HADS-D(切点 11;35%)到 PHQ-2(88%)和 PHQ-9(87%)不等。特异性从 PHQ-9(77%)和 PHQ-2(84%)到 HADS-D(切点 11;94%)不等。阳性预测值从 30%到 43%不等。阴性预测值从 92%到 98%不等。对于广泛性焦虑症,灵敏度从 HADS-A(切点 11;45%)到 HADS-A(切点 8;91%)不等。除 HADS-A(切点 8;63%)外,所有指标的特异性均在 81%至 89%之间。范围在 0.69 至 0.88 之间的组内相关系数估计值证实了良好的重测信度。

结论

抑郁筛查工具具有良好的诊断性能;焦虑工具则更具变异性。确定的抑郁和焦虑需要临床确认。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ddb8/7496677/4025605d32ab/ACR-72-1130-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验