OBJECTIVE: To investigate the factor structure and predictive validity of somatic and nonsomatic depressive symptoms over the first 2.5 years after spinal cord injury (SCI) using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). DESIGN: Somatic and nonsomatic symptoms were assessed at baseline during inpatient hospitalization (average of 50 days after onset) and during 2 follow-ups (average of 498 and 874 days after onset). SETTING: Data were collected at a specialty hospital in the Southeastern United States and analyzed at a medical university. We performed time-lag regression between inpatient baseline and follow-up somatic and nonsomatic latent factors of the PHQ-9. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with traumatic SCI (N=584) entered the study during inpatient rehabilitation. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: PHQ-9, a 9-item measure of depressive symptoms. RESULTS: The inpatient baseline nonsomatic latent factor was significantly predictive of the nonsomatic (r=.40; P=.000) and somatic latent factors at the second follow-up (r=.29; P=.006), whereas the somatic factor at inpatient baseline did not significantly predict either factor. In contrast, when regressing latent factors between the 2 follow-ups, the nonsomatic factor predicted only the nonsomatic factor (r=.66; P=.002), and the somatic factor predicted only future somatic symptoms (r=.66; P=.000). In addition, the factor structure was not stable over time. Item analysis verified the instability of somatic items between inpatient baseline and follow-up and also indicated that self-harm at inpatient baseline was highly predictive of future self-harm. CONCLUSIONS: Nonsomatic symptoms are better predictors of future depressive symptoms when first assessed during inpatient rehabilitation, whereas somatic symptoms become stable predictors only after inpatient rehabilitation. Self-harm (suicidal ideation) is the most stable symptom over time. Clinicians should routinely assess for suicidal ideation and use nonsomatic symptoms when performing assessments during inpatient rehabilitation.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the factor structure and predictive validity of somatic and nonsomatic depressive symptoms over the first 2.5 years after spinal cord injury (SCI) using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). DESIGN: Somatic and nonsomatic symptoms were assessed at baseline during inpatient hospitalization (average of 50 days after onset) and during 2 follow-ups (average of 498 and 874 days after onset). SETTING: Data were collected at a specialty hospital in the Southeastern United States and analyzed at a medical university. We performed time-lag regression between inpatient baseline and follow-up somatic and nonsomatic latent factors of the PHQ-9. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with traumatic SCI (N=584) entered the study during inpatient rehabilitation. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: PHQ-9, a 9-item measure of depressive symptoms. RESULTS: The inpatient baseline nonsomatic latent factor was significantly predictive of the nonsomatic (r=.40; P=.000) and somatic latent factors at the second follow-up (r=.29; P=.006), whereas the somatic factor at inpatient baseline did not significantly predict either factor. In contrast, when regressing latent factors between the 2 follow-ups, the nonsomatic factor predicted only the nonsomatic factor (r=.66; P=.002), and the somatic factor predicted only future somatic symptoms (r=.66; P=.000). In addition, the factor structure was not stable over time. Item analysis verified the instability of somatic items between inpatient baseline and follow-up and also indicated that self-harm at inpatient baseline was highly predictive of future self-harm. CONCLUSIONS: Nonsomatic symptoms are better predictors of future depressive symptoms when first assessed during inpatient rehabilitation, whereas somatic symptoms become stable predictors only after inpatient rehabilitation. Self-harm (suicidal ideation) is the most stable symptom over time. Clinicians should routinely assess for suicidal ideation and use nonsomatic symptoms when performing assessments during inpatient rehabilitation.
Authors: Jay S Patel; Youngha Oh; Kevin L Rand; Wei Wu; Melissa A Cyders; Kurt Kroenke; Jesse C Stewart Journal: Depress Anxiety Date: 2019-07-29 Impact factor: 6.505
Authors: Boliang Guo; Catherine Kaylor-Hughes; Anne Garland; Neil Nixon; Tim Sweeney; Sandra Simpson; Tim Dalgleish; Rajini Ramana; Min Yang; Richard Morriss Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2017-05-08 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Amanda P Miller; Cristina Espinosa da Silva; Leo Ziegel; Stephen Mugamba; Emma Kyasanku; Robert B Malyabe; Jennifer A Wagman; Anna Mia Ekström; Fred Nalugoda; Grace Kigozi; Gertrude Nakigozi; Josehp Kagaayi; Stephen Watya; Godfrey Kigozi Journal: Psychiatry Res Commun Date: 2021-10-30
Authors: Marzieh Majd; Joshua M Smyth; Nan Lv; Lan Xiao; Mark B Snowden; Elizabeth M Venditti; Leanne M Williams; Olusola A Ajilore; Trisha Suppes; Jun Ma Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2020-11-17 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Ada Keding; Jan R Böhnke; Tim J Croudace; Stewart J Richmond; Hugh MacPherson Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2015-07-30 Impact factor: 4.615