Carl Wikberg1, Shabnam Nejati1, Maria E H Larsson1, Eva-Lisa Petersson1, Jeanette Westman1, Nashmil Ariai1, Marie Kivi1, Maria Eriksson1, Robert Eggertsen1, Dominique Hange1, Amir Baigi1, Cecilia Björkelund1. 1. Department of Primary Health Care, Institute of Medicine (Drs Petersson, Eggertsen, Hange, Baigi, and Björkelund; Mr Wikberg; and Mss Nejati, Ariai, and Eriksson), Department of Clinical Neuroscience and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology (Dr Larsson), and Department of Psychology (Ms Kivi), University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; Närhälsan Research and Development Primary Health Care, Region Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden (Drs Larsson and Petersson); and Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Center for Family Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden (Dr Westman).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale-Self (MADRS-S) and the Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II) are commonly used self-assessment instruments for screening and diagnosis of depression. The BDI-II has 21 items and the MADRS-S has 9 items. These instruments have been tested with psychiatric inpatients but not in outpatient primary care, where most patients with symptoms of depression initially seek treatment. The purpose of this study was to compare these 2 instruments in the primary care setting. METHOD: Data were collected from 2 primary care randomized controlled trials that were performed from 2010 to 2013 in Sweden: the Primary Care Self-Assessment MADRS-S Study and Primary Care Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Study. There were 146 patients (73 patients each from both trials) who had newly diagnosed mild or moderate depression (per DSM-IV recommendations) and who had assessment with both the MADRS-S and BDI-II at primary care centers. Comparability and reliability of the instruments were estimated by Pearson product moment correlation and Cronbach α. RESULTS: A good correlation was observed between the 2 instruments: 0.66 and 0.62 in the 2 study cohorts. The reliability within the 2 study cohorts was good for both MADRS-S (Cronbach α: 0.76 for both cohorts) and BDI-II items (Cronbach α: 0.88 and 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: The 2 instruments showed good comparability and reliability for low, middle, and high total depression scores. The MADRS-S may be used as a rapid, easily administered, and inexpensive tool in primary care and has results comparable to the BDI-II in all domains.
OBJECTIVE: The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale-Self (MADRS-S) and the Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II) are commonly used self-assessment instruments for screening and diagnosis of depression. The BDI-II has 21 items and the MADRS-S has 9 items. These instruments have been tested with psychiatric inpatients but not in outpatient primary care, where most patients with symptoms of depression initially seek treatment. The purpose of this study was to compare these 2 instruments in the primary care setting. METHOD: Data were collected from 2 primary care randomized controlled trials that were performed from 2010 to 2013 in Sweden: the Primary Care Self-Assessment MADRS-S Study and Primary Care Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Study. There were 146 patients (73 patients each from both trials) who had newly diagnosed mild or moderate depression (per DSM-IV recommendations) and who had assessment with both the MADRS-S and BDI-II at primary care centers. Comparability and reliability of the instruments were estimated by Pearson product moment correlation and Cronbach α. RESULTS: A good correlation was observed between the 2 instruments: 0.66 and 0.62 in the 2 study cohorts. The reliability within the 2 study cohorts was good for both MADRS-S (Cronbach α: 0.76 for both cohorts) and BDI-II items (Cronbach α: 0.88 and 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: The 2 instruments showed good comparability and reliability for low, middle, and high total depression scores. The MADRS-S may be used as a rapid, easily administered, and inexpensive tool in primary care and has results comparable to the BDI-II in all domains.
Authors: D V Sheehan; Y Lecrubier; K H Sheehan; P Amorim; J Janavs; E Weiller; T Hergueta; R Baker; G C Dunbar Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 1998 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Eboni G Price-Haywood; Jewel Harden-Barrios; Christopher Carr; Laya Reddy; Lydia A Bazzano; Mieke L van Driel Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2018-11-21 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Jon Jarløv Rasmussen; Christian Selmer; Peter Busch Østergren; Karen Boje Pedersen; Morten Schou; Finn Gustafsson; Jens Faber; Anders Juul; Caroline Kistorp Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-08-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Susanne Mattsson; Erik Martin Gustaf Olsson; Maria Carlsson; Birgitta Beda Kristina Johansson Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-04-05 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Anna-Lena Flygare; Ingemar Engström; Mikael Hasselgren; Markus Jansson-Fröjmark; Rikard Frejgrim; Gerhard Andersson; Fredrik Holländare Journal: Internet Interv Date: 2019-12-29
Authors: John Wallert; Julia Boberg; Viktor Kaldo; David Mataix-Cols; Oskar Flygare; James J Crowley; Matthew Halvorsen; Fehmi Ben Abdesslem; Magnus Boman; Evelyn Andersson; Nils Hentati Isacsson; Ekaterina Ivanova; Christian Rück Journal: Transl Psychiatry Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 7.989