Marcus T Silva1, Mónica Caicedo Roa2, Silvia S Martins3, Andréa Tenório Correia da Silva4, Tais F Galvao5. 1. Faculty of Medicine, Federal University of Amazonas, Rua Afonso Pena, 1053, Manaus, Amazonas 69020-160, Brazil. Electronic address: marcusts@gmail.com. 2. Postgraduate Program of Collective Health, Faculty of Medicinal Sciences, State University of Campinas, Rua Tessália Vieira de Camargo, 126, Campinas, São Paulo 13083-887, Brazil. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 722 W 168th St, Room 509, New York, NY 10032, USA. 4. Santa Marcelina Faculty of Medicine, Rua São João das Duas Barras, 95, Vila Carmosina, São Paulo, São Paulo 08270-080, Brazil; Department of Preventive Medicine, University of São Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455 Room 2218, Cerqueira César, São Paulo, São Paulo 01246-903, Brazil. 5. Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, State University of Campinas, Campinas, Rua Candido Portinari, 200, Campinas, São Paulo 13083-871, Brazil.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence and associated factors of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) in adults using the seven-item GAD scale (GAD-7) and to evaluate the properties of the two-item (GAD-2) as a population screening tool. METHODS: We carried out a cross-sectional population-based study in the Manaus Metropolitan Region in 2015, Brazil. Adults aged 18 years or more were eligible to participate. We performed probabilistic three-phase sampling and collected sociodemographic and clinical variables. Descriptive statistics and a Poisson regression with robust variance with corrections for complex sampling were used. The accuracy of GAD-2 was assessed using GAD-7 as the gold standard. RESULTS: We included 4001 participants. The prevalence of GAD was 8.4% (95% confidence interval 7.6-9.4%) and was significantly associated with self-reported poor health status and presenting depressive symptoms (p < 0.01). GAD-2 sensitivity was 63.9%, and its specificity was 97.4%. LIMITATIONS: Because of the cross-sectional design of the study, the results are prone to reverse causality and recall bias. The surveyed people were not questioned about their medical diagnosis of anxiety, access to mental health services, or alcohol, tobacco or other drug use. The screening tools were not validated in the Brazilian or Amazon population. CONCLUSION: About eight in 100 adults living in Manaus presented GAD, and it is more prevalent among people with a poorer health status and depression. Because of its low sensitivity, GAD-2 is not useful as a screening tool.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence and associated factors of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) in adults using the seven-item GAD scale (GAD-7) and to evaluate the properties of the two-item (GAD-2) as a population screening tool. METHODS: We carried out a cross-sectional population-based study in the Manaus Metropolitan Region in 2015, Brazil. Adults aged 18 years or more were eligible to participate. We performed probabilistic three-phase sampling and collected sociodemographic and clinical variables. Descriptive statistics and a Poisson regression with robust variance with corrections for complex sampling were used. The accuracy of GAD-2 was assessed using GAD-7 as the gold standard. RESULTS: We included 4001 participants. The prevalence of GAD was 8.4% (95% confidence interval 7.6-9.4%) and was significantly associated with self-reported poor health status and presenting depressive symptoms (p < 0.01). GAD-2 sensitivity was 63.9%, and its specificity was 97.4%. LIMITATIONS: Because of the cross-sectional design of the study, the results are prone to reverse causality and recall bias. The surveyed people were not questioned about their medical diagnosis of anxiety, access to mental health services, or alcohol, tobacco or other drug use. The screening tools were not validated in the Brazilian or Amazon population. CONCLUSION: About eight in 100 adults living in Manaus presented GAD, and it is more prevalent among people with a poorer health status and depression. Because of its low sensitivity, GAD-2 is not useful as a screening tool.
Authors: Valentina N Burkova; Marina L Butovskaya; Ashley K Randall; Julija N Fedenok; Khodabakhsh Ahmadi; Ahmad M Alghraibeh; Fathil Bakir Mutsher Allami; Fadime Suata Alpaslan; Mohammad Ahmad Abdelaziz Al-Zu'bi; Kholoud Imhammad Meqbel Al-Mseidin; Derya Fatma Biçer; Hakan Cetinkaya; Oana Alexandra David; Silvia Donato; Seda Dural; Paige Erickson; Alexey M Ermakov; Berna Ertuğrul; Emmanuel Abiodun Fayankinnu; Maryanne L Fisher; Fakir Al Gharaibeh; Lauren Hocker; Ivana Hromatko; Elena Kasparova; Alexander Kavina; Yahya M Khatatbeh; Hareesol Khun-Inkeeree; Kai M Kline; Fırat Koç; Vladimir Kolodkin; Melanie MacEacheron; Irma Rachmawati Maruf; Norbert Meskó; Ruzan Mkrtchyan; Poppy Setiawati Nurisnaeny; Oluyinka Ojedokun; Damilola Adebayo; Mohd S B Omar-Fauzee; Barıs Özener; Edna Lúcia Tinoco Ponciano; Muhammad Rizwan; Agnieszka Sabiniewicz; Victoriya I Spodina; Stanislava Stoyanova; Nachiketa Tripathi; Satwik Upadhyay; Carol Weisfeld; Mohd Faiz Mohd Yaakob; Mat Rahimi Yusof; Raushaniia I Zinurova Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2022-05-19
Authors: Marta Kopańska; Danuta Ochojska; Agnieszka Dejnowicz-Velitchkov; Agnieszka Banaś-Ząbczyk Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-21 Impact factor: 3.390