Lena Spangenberg1, Elmar Brähler, Heide Glaesmer. 1. Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR, Abteilung für Medizinische Psychologie und Medizinische Soziologie, Leipzig. Lena.Spangenberg@medizin.uni-leipzig.de
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the comparability of depression as defined by PHQ-9, PHQ-8 and PHQ-2 in the German general population. METHODS: The PHQ-9 was assessed in a representative sample (N = 2524). Depression diagnosis and depression severity as measured either by PHQ-9, PHQ-8 or PHQ-2 were compared. RESULTS: PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 performed comparably in identifying depressive persons, though there are slight differences in rating depression severity. In comparison, the PHQ-2 showed the best performance in the detection of any depressive disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The PHQ-9 should be used in clinical settings, whereas in research and when persons are being approached via telephone/mail/internet the PHQ-8 is preferable. The PHQ-2 is recommended as a very economic and brief screener for depressive disorders.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the comparability of depression as defined by PHQ-9, PHQ-8 and PHQ-2 in the German general population. METHODS: The PHQ-9 was assessed in a representative sample (N = 2524). Depression diagnosis and depression severity as measured either by PHQ-9, PHQ-8 or PHQ-2 were compared. RESULTS: PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 performed comparably in identifying depressivepersons, though there are slight differences in rating depression severity. In comparison, the PHQ-2 showed the best performance in the detection of any depressive disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The PHQ-9 should be used in clinical settings, whereas in research and when persons are being approached via telephone/mail/internet the PHQ-8 is preferable. The PHQ-2 is recommended as a very economic and brief screener for depressive disorders.
Authors: Eva-Maria Skoda; Anke Spura; Freia De Bock; Adam Schweda; Nora Dörrie; Madeleine Fink; Venja Musche; Benjamin Weismüller; Anke Benecke; Hannah Kohler; Florian Junne; Johanna Graf; Alexander Bäuerle; Martin Teufel Journal: Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz Date: 2021-01-22 Impact factor: 1.513