OBJECTIVES: To establish the psychometric characteristics of the Patient Heath Questionnaire (PHQ) (PHQ-2, -9, and their sequential administration) in older adults who use community-based, social service care management. DESIGN: Comparison of screening tools with criterion standard diagnostic interview. SETTING: A community-based aging services agency. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred seventy-eight adults aged 60 years or older undergoing in-home aging services care management assessments. MEASUREMENTS: Subjects were administered the PHQ-9 and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR- fourth edition. The authors examined the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the PHQ-2 and PHQ-9 separately, and for a two-stage screening process that used each in sequence (the PHQ-2/9). RESULTS: Using a cut score of 3, the sensitivity of the PHQ-2 was 0.80 and the specificity was 0.78. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for the PHQ-2 was 0.87. Using a cut score of 10, the sensitivity and specificity of the PHQ-9 were 0.82 and 0.87. The AUC was 0.91. The sensitivity and specificity of the two-stage PHQ-2/9 were 0.81 and 0.89, respectively, and the AUC was 0.91. CONCLUSIONS: The greater specificity of the PHQ-9 is an advantage over the PHQ-2 in aging service settings in which false-positive tests have potentially high cost. The PHQ-2/9 performed equally well as the PHQ-9, but would be more efficient for the agency to administer. Combined with an appropriate referral system to healthcare providers, use of the PHQ-2/9 sequence by aging services personnel can efficiently assist in reducing the burden of late-life depression.
OBJECTIVES: To establish the psychometric characteristics of the Patient Heath Questionnaire (PHQ) (PHQ-2, -9, and their sequential administration) in older adults who use community-based, social service care management. DESIGN: Comparison of screening tools with criterion standard diagnostic interview. SETTING: A community-based aging services agency. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred seventy-eight adults aged 60 years or older undergoing in-home aging services care management assessments. MEASUREMENTS: Subjects were administered the PHQ-9 and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR- fourth edition. The authors examined the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the PHQ-2 and PHQ-9 separately, and for a two-stage screening process that used each in sequence (the PHQ-2/9). RESULTS: Using a cut score of 3, the sensitivity of the PHQ-2 was 0.80 and the specificity was 0.78. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for the PHQ-2 was 0.87. Using a cut score of 10, the sensitivity and specificity of the PHQ-9 were 0.82 and 0.87. The AUC was 0.91. The sensitivity and specificity of the two-stage PHQ-2/9 were 0.81 and 0.89, respectively, and the AUC was 0.91. CONCLUSIONS: The greater specificity of the PHQ-9 is an advantage over the PHQ-2 in aging service settings in which false-positive tests have potentially high cost. The PHQ-2/9 performed equally well as the PHQ-9, but would be more efficient for the agency to administer. Combined with an appropriate referral system to healthcare providers, use of the PHQ-2/9 sequence by aging services personnel can efficiently assist in reducing the burden of late-life depression.
Authors: Paul A Nutting; Kathryn Rost; Miriam Dickinson; James J Werner; Perry Dickinson; Jeffrey L Smith; Beth Gallovic Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jürgen Unützer; Wayne Katon; Christopher M Callahan; John W Williams; Enid Hunkeler; Linda Harpole; Marc Hoffing; Richard D Della Penna; Polly Hitchcock Noël; Elizabeth H B Lin; Patricia A Areán; Mark T Hegel; Lingqi Tang; Thomas R Belin; Sabine Oishi; Christopher Langston Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-12-11 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jeffrey M Lyness; Eric D Caine; Deborah A King; Yeates Conwell; Paul R Duberstein; Christopher Cox Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2002 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Jeffrey M Lyness; Moonseong Heo; Catherine J Datto; Thomas R Ten Have; Ira R Katz; Rebecca Drayer; Charles F Reynolds; George S Alexopoulos; Martha L Bruce Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-04-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Benjamin W Van Voorhees; Lisa A Cooper; Kathryn M Rost; Paul Nutting; Lisa V Rubenstein; Lisa Meredith; Nae-Yuh Wang; Daniel E Ford Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Angela R Ghesquiere; Renee Pepin; Jennifer Kinsey; Stephen J Bartels; Martha L Bruce Journal: Aging Ment Health Date: 2017-08-16 Impact factor: 3.658
Authors: Kimberly A Van Orden; Alisa A O'Riley; Adam Simning; Carol Podgorski; Thomas M Richardson; Yeates Conwell Journal: Gerontologist Date: 2014-04-08
Authors: Alisa A O'Riley; Kimberly A Van Orden; Hua He; Thomas M Richardson; Carol Podgorski; Yeates Conwell Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2013-04-18 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Jo Anne Sirey; Patrick J Raue; Nili Solomonov; Clara Scher; Alexandra Chalfin; Paula Zanotti; Jacquelin Berman; George S Alexopoulos Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 3.046