Stefan Grund1, Michael Kilb2, Eva Breitinger2, Wilfried Hundsdörfer3, Hans G Schäfer3, Jos M G A Schols4,5, Adam L Gordon6,7, Jürgen M Bauer8, Georg W Alpers2. 1. Department of Geriatrics and Geriatric Rehabilitation, Center for Geriatric Medicine, Agaplesion Bethanien Krankenhaus Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. stefan.grund@bethanien-heidelberg.de. 2. Department of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany. 3. Diakonissen Hospital Mannheim Department of Geriatric Rehabilitation, Mannheim, Germany. 4. Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 6. Division of Medical Sciences and Graduate Entry Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. 7. School of Health Sciences, City University of London, London, UK. 8. Department of Geriatrics and Geriatric Rehabilitation, Center for Geriatric Medicine, Agaplesion Bethanien Krankenhaus Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Although psychological distress has a negative impact on functional recovery, institutionalisation and mortality rates, there is typically no established procedure to screen for psychological distress in geriatric rehabilitation. The aim of the study was to evaluate a brief single-item Verbal Numerical Rating Scale (VNRS-PD) as a screening tool for psychological distress in multimorbid geriatric rehabilitation patients. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, N = 132 geriatric rehabilitation in-patients (M = 82 years old; 70.5% female) completed a verbal numerical rating scale (VNRS-PD) on satisfaction with their mood as well as the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the short-form of the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS). Based on the questionnaire data, the rehabilitation patients were classified as high or low in psychopathology. Using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, optimal cutoff scores of the VNRS-PD were calculated for each questionnaire to detect significant psychological distress. RESULTS: Between 28.8% (HADS ≥ 18) and 43.9% (GDS ≥ 6) of the sample had above-cutoff questionnaire scores. The area under the curve (AUC) of the VNRS-PD varied from 0.785 (95%-CI 0.709-0.861) (GDS ≥ 6) and 0.790 (95%-CI 0.716-0.864) (HADS ≥ 18) to 0.807 (95%-CI 0.734-0.880) (GDS ≥ 7). A score of ≤ 5 in the VNRS-PD proved to be the cutoff with an optimal trade-off between sensitivity (0.776-0.867) and specificity (0.638-0.703). CONCLUSION: The VNRS-PD may be a suitable screening instrument to detect patients with psychological distress in inpatient geriatric rehabilitation for and to initiate further diagnostics within a graduated psychodiagnostic scheme. This first step may help to identify older patients with psychological distress and mental disorders, to initiate targeted interventions. Further research is needed to replicate these findings in a larger sample.
PURPOSE: Although psychological distress has a negative impact on functional recovery, institutionalisation and mortality rates, there is typically no established procedure to screen for psychological distress in geriatric rehabilitation. The aim of the study was to evaluate a brief single-item Verbal Numerical Rating Scale (VNRS-PD) as a screening tool for psychological distress in multimorbid geriatric rehabilitation patients. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, N = 132 geriatric rehabilitation in-patients (M = 82 years old; 70.5% female) completed a verbal numerical rating scale (VNRS-PD) on satisfaction with their mood as well as the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the short-form of the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS). Based on the questionnaire data, the rehabilitation patients were classified as high or low in psychopathology. Using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, optimal cutoff scores of the VNRS-PD were calculated for each questionnaire to detect significant psychological distress. RESULTS: Between 28.8% (HADS ≥ 18) and 43.9% (GDS ≥ 6) of the sample had above-cutoff questionnaire scores. The area under the curve (AUC) of the VNRS-PD varied from 0.785 (95%-CI 0.709-0.861) (GDS ≥ 6) and 0.790 (95%-CI 0.716-0.864) (HADS ≥ 18) to 0.807 (95%-CI 0.734-0.880) (GDS ≥ 7). A score of ≤ 5 in the VNRS-PD proved to be the cutoff with an optimal trade-off between sensitivity (0.776-0.867) and specificity (0.638-0.703). CONCLUSION: The VNRS-PD may be a suitable screening instrument to detect patients with psychological distress in inpatient geriatric rehabilitation for and to initiate further diagnostics within a graduated psychodiagnostic scheme. This first step may help to identify older patients with psychological distress and mental disorders, to initiate targeted interventions. Further research is needed to replicate these findings in a larger sample.
Authors: Bianca I Buijck; Sytse U Zuidema; Monica Spruit-van Eijk; Alexander C H Geurts; Raymond T C M Koopmans Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2011-09-19 Impact factor: 3.485
Authors: Susan P Bell; Eduard E Vasilevskis; Avantika A Saraf; J M L Jacobsen; Sunil Kripalani; Amanda S Mixon; John F Schnelle; Sandra F Simmons Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2016-04-05 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Allison M Gustavson; Jason R Falvey; Jeri E Forster; Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley Journal: J Geriatr Phys Ther Date: 2019 Jul/Sep Impact factor: 3.381
Authors: Liang Feng; Samuel C Scherer; Boon Yeow Tan; Gribson Chan; Ngan Phoon Fong; Tze Pin Ng Journal: Int Psychogeriatr Date: 2009-12-02 Impact factor: 3.878