Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

The Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7) and the anxiety module of the Hospital and Depression Scale (HADS-A) as screening tools for generalized anxiety disorder among cancer patients

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  1. Body image mediates the effect of cancer-related stigmatization on depression: A new target for intervention

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Kind of blue: A systematic review and meta-analysis of music interventions in cancer treatment

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

  3. Patient information in phase I trials: A systematic review

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

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

OBJECTIVE: Anxiety in cancer patients may represent a normal psychological reaction. To detect patients with pathological levels, appropriate screeners with established cut-offs are needed. Given that previous research is sparse, we investigated the diagnostic accuracy of 2 frequently used screening tools in detecting generalized anxiety disorder (GAD).

METHODS: We used data of a multicenter study including 2141 cancer patients. Diagnostic accuracy was investigated for the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7) and the anxiety module of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A). GAD, assessed with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview for Oncology, served as a reference standard. Overall accuracy was measured with the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). The AUC of the 2 screeners were statistically compared. We also calculated accuracy measures for selected cut-offs.

RESULTS: Diagnostic accuracy could be interpreted as adequate for both screeners, with an identical AUC of .81 (95% CI: .79-.82). Consequently, the 2 screeners did not differ in their performance (P = .86). The best balance between sensitivity and specificity was found for cut-offs ≥7 (GAD-7) and ≥8 (HADS-A). The officially recommended thresholds for the GAD-7 (≥ 10) and the HADS-A (≥11) showed low sensitivities of 55% and 48%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: The GAD-7 and HADS-A showed AUC of adequate diagnostic accuracy and hence are applicable for GAD screening in cancer patients. Nevertheless, the choice of optimal cut-offs should be carefully evaluated.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftPsycho-Oncology
Vol/bind27
Udgave nummer6
Sider (fra-til)1509-1516
Antal sider8
ISSN1057-9249
DOI
StatusUdgivet - jun. 2018

ID: 54657774