O A Abiodun1. 1. Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The utility of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) as a screening instrument for anxiety and depressive disorders in non-psychiatric units (medical & surgical wards; gynaecology & antenatal clinics of a teaching hospital) and a community sample in Nigeria was investigated. METHOD: A two-stage screening procedure was employed. This involved the use of GHQ-12/GHQ-30 and HADS against the criteria of a standardised (PSE schedule) psychiatric interview, with psychiatric diagnosis assigned in accordance with ICD-9 criteria. RESULTS: Sensitivity for the anxiety sub-scale ranged from 85.0% in the medical and surgical wards to 92.9% in the ante-natal clinic, while sensitivity for the depression sub-scale ranged from 89.5% in the community sample to 92.1% in the gynaecology clinic. Specificity for the anxiety sub-scale ranged from 86.5% in the gynaecology clinic to 90.6% in the community sample, while specificity for the depression sub-scale ranged from 86.6% in the medical and surgical wards to 91.1% in the ante-natal clinic and community sample. Misclassification rates ranged from 9.9% in the community sample to 13.2% in the medical and surgical wards. Relative Operating Characteristic (ROC) analyses showed the HADS and the GHQ-12 to be quite similar in ability to discriminate between cases (anxiety and depression) and non-cases. CONCLUSIONS: The HADS is valid for use as a screening instrument in non-psychiatric units and although initially developed for use in hospital settings, it could be usefully employed in community settings of developing countries to screen for mental morbidity.
BACKGROUND: The utility of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) as a screening instrument for anxiety and depressive disorders in non-psychiatric units (medical & surgical wards; gynaecology & antenatal clinics of a teaching hospital) and a community sample in Nigeria was investigated. METHOD: A two-stage screening procedure was employed. This involved the use of GHQ-12/GHQ-30 and HADS against the criteria of a standardised (PSE schedule) psychiatric interview, with psychiatric diagnosis assigned in accordance with ICD-9 criteria. RESULTS: Sensitivity for the anxiety sub-scale ranged from 85.0% in the medical and surgical wards to 92.9% in the ante-natal clinic, while sensitivity for the depression sub-scale ranged from 89.5% in the community sample to 92.1% in the gynaecology clinic. Specificity for the anxiety sub-scale ranged from 86.5% in the gynaecology clinic to 90.6% in the community sample, while specificity for the depression sub-scale ranged from 86.6% in the medical and surgical wards to 91.1% in the ante-natal clinic and community sample. Misclassification rates ranged from 9.9% in the community sample to 13.2% in the medical and surgical wards. Relative Operating Characteristic (ROC) analyses showed the HADS and the GHQ-12 to be quite similar in ability to discriminate between cases (anxiety and depression) and non-cases. CONCLUSIONS: The HADS is valid for use as a screening instrument in non-psychiatric units and although initially developed for use in hospital settings, it could be usefully employed in community settings of developing countries to screen for mental morbidity.
Authors: Madalynn Neu; Ellyn Matthews; Nancy A King; Paul F Cook; Mark L Laudenslager Journal: J Pediatr Oncol Nurs Date: 2014 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 1.636
Authors: Brittany Litster; Kirsten M Fiest; Scott B Patten; John D Fisk; John R Walker; Lesley A Graff; James M Bolton; Jitender Sareen; James J Marriott; Lindsay I Berrigan; Charles N Bernstein; Ryan Zarychanski; Alexander Singer; Carol A Hitchon; Christine A Peschken; Ruth Ann Marrie Journal: Int J MS Care Date: 2016 Nov-Dec
Authors: Suzanne C Howitt; Matthew P Jones; Ahmed Jusabani; William K Gray; Eric Aris; Ferdinand Mugusi; Mark Swai; Richard W Walker Journal: J Neurol Date: 2011-02-19 Impact factor: 4.849