Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) as screening instruments for depression in patients with cancer

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  1. Glioma risk associated with extent of estimated European genetic ancestry in African Americans and Hispanics

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Psychological stress in long-term testicular cancer survivors: a Danish nationwide cohort study

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. A Weighted Genetic Risk Score of Adult Glioma Susceptibility Loci Associated with Pediatric Brain Tumor Risk

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  • Tim J Hartung
  • Michael Friedrich
  • Christoffer Johansen
  • Hans-Ulrich Wittchen
  • Herman Faller
  • Uwe Koch
  • Elmar Brähler
  • Martin Härter
  • Monika Keller
  • Holger Schulz
  • Karl Wegscheider
  • Joachim Weis
  • Anja Mehnert
Vis graf over relationer

BACKGROUND: Depression screening in patients with cancer is recommended by major clinical guidelines, although the evidence on individual screening tools is limited for this population. Here, the authors assess and compare the diagnostic accuracy of 2 established screening instruments: the depression modules of the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D), in a representative sample of patients with cancer.

METHODS: This multicenter study was conducted with a proportional, stratified, random sample of 2141 patients with cancer across all major tumor sites and treatment settings. The PHQ-9 and HADS-D were assessed and compared in terms of diagnostic accuracy and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition diagnosis of major depressive disorder using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview for Oncology as the criterion standard.

RESULTS: The diagnostic accuracy of the PHQ-9 and HADS-D was fair for diagnosing major depressive disorder, with areas under the ROC curves of 0.78 (95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.79) and 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.77), respectively. The 2 questionnaires did not differ significantly in their areas under the ROC curves (P = .15). The PHQ-9 with a cutoff score ≥7 had the best screening performance, with a sensitivity of 83% (95% confidence interval, 78%-89%) and a specificity of 61% (95% confidence interval, 59%-63%). The American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline screening algorithm had a sensitivity of 44% (95% confidence interval, 36%-51%) and a specificity of 84% (95% confidence interval, 83%-85%).

CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cancer, the screening performance of both the PHQ-9 and the HADS-D was limited compared with a standardized diagnostic interview. Costs and benefits of routinely screening all patients with cancer should be weighed carefully. Cancer 2017;123:4236-4243. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftCancer
Vol/bind123
Udgave nummer21
Sider (fra-til)4236-4243
Antal sider8
ISSN0008-543X
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 1 nov. 2017

ID: 52146585