BACKGROUND: Depression is common and associated with increased morbidity and mortality in elderly (≥65 years) hemodialysis patients. Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI) and the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) have been used in different cohorts to screen for depression. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the 15-item GDS (GDS-15) as such a tool in elderly hemodialysis patients and compare it with BDI, a previously validated tool in younger hemodialysis patients. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Four out-patient hemodialysis units; 1 based in a university hospital and 3 based in the community. PARTICIPANTS: Hemodialysis patients aged 65 years and older. INTERVENTION: Both tools were administered to all participants, and a geriatric psychiatrist blinded to the results evaluated them for depression by the gold standard psychiatric interview. MEASUREMENTS: The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for both tools were assessed against the psychiatric interview (n = 62). RESULTS: Patients who were depressed according to the psychiatric interview had significantly higher GDS-15 and BDI scores compared to those not depressed (p < 0.01 both). ROC curves showed high predictive accuracy of the GDS-15 and BDI (area under the curve: 0.808 and 0.729) versus the psychiatric interview. The GDS-15 cutoff with the best diagnostic accuracy was 5 with a sensitivity of 63%, specificity of 82%, PPV of 60% and NPV of 83%. The BDI cutoff with the best diagnostic accuracy was 10 with a sensitivity of 68%, specificity of 77%, PPV of 57% and NPV of 85%. CONCLUSION: These results provide evidence that the GDS-15 shows validity in comparison to a gold standard and can be used to screen for depression in the elderly hemodialysis population.
BACKGROUND:Depression is common and associated with increased morbidity and mortality in elderly (≥65 years) hemodialysis patients. Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI) and the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) have been used in different cohorts to screen for depression. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the 15-item GDS (GDS-15) as such a tool in elderly hemodialysis patients and compare it with BDI, a previously validated tool in younger hemodialysis patients. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Four out-patient hemodialysis units; 1 based in a university hospital and 3 based in the community. PARTICIPANTS: Hemodialysis patients aged 65 years and older. INTERVENTION: Both tools were administered to all participants, and a geriatric psychiatrist blinded to the results evaluated them for depression by the gold standard psychiatric interview. MEASUREMENTS: The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for both tools were assessed against the psychiatric interview (n = 62). RESULTS:Patients who were depressed according to the psychiatric interview had significantly higher GDS-15 and BDI scores compared to those not depressed (p < 0.01 both). ROC curves showed high predictive accuracy of the GDS-15 and BDI (area under the curve: 0.808 and 0.729) versus the psychiatric interview. The GDS-15 cutoff with the best diagnostic accuracy was 5 with a sensitivity of 63%, specificity of 82%, PPV of 60% and NPV of 83%. The BDI cutoff with the best diagnostic accuracy was 10 with a sensitivity of 68%, specificity of 77%, PPV of 57% and NPV of 85%. CONCLUSION: These results provide evidence that the GDS-15 shows validity in comparison to a gold standard and can be used to screen for depression in the elderly hemodialysis population.
Authors: Mi-Kyung Song; Sandra E Ward; Gerald A Hladik; Jessica C Bridgman; Constance A Gilet Journal: Hemodial Int Date: 2015-05-21 Impact factor: 1.812
Authors: Stefan Unterecker; Philip Müller; Christian Jacob; Peter Riederer; Bruno Pfuhlmann Journal: Clin Drug Investig Date: 2012-08-01 Impact factor: 2.859
Authors: Rasheed A Balogun; Emaad M Abdel-Rahman; Seki A Balogun; Evan H Lott; Jun Ling Lu; Sandra M Malakauskas; Jennie Z Ma; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh; Csaba P Kovesdy Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2012-08-16 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Fernanda Siqueira Viana; Yolanda Eliza M Boechat; Jocemir Ronaldo Lugon; Jorge Paulo Strogoff de Matos Journal: J Bras Nefrol Date: 2019-03-18
Authors: Karli Kondo; Jennifer R Antick; Chelsea K Ayers; Devan Kansagara; Pavan Chopra Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2020-11-17 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Kultigin Turkmen; Fatih Mehmet Erdur; Ibrahim Guney; Abduzhappar Gaipov; Faruk Turgut; Lutfullah Altintepe; Mustafa Saglam; Halil Zeki Tonbul; Emaad M Abdel-Rahman Journal: Int J Nephrol Renovasc Dis Date: 2012-10-08
Authors: Helena Kisvetrová; Jitka Tomanová; Romana Hanáčková; Peta Jane Greaves; Alison Steven Journal: Clin Nurs Res Date: 2021-08-08 Impact factor: 2.075