4.5 Article

Prediction of Posttraumatic Stress and Depression One-Month Post-Injury: A Comparison of Two Screening Instruments

Journal

HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 40, Issue 10, Pages 702-705

Publisher

AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/hea0001114

Keywords

posttraumatic stress disorder; depression; injury; diagnostic screening

Funding

  1. South Carolina Telehealth Alliance
  2. Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as part of the National Telehealth Center of Excellence Award [U66 RH31458-01-00]
  3. SmartState South Carolina Centers of Economic Excellence
  4. National Institutes of Mental Health [R56 MH116656]
  5. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [K23HD098325]
  6. Duke Endowment [6657-SP]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study showed that using both the PDI and ITSS screening tools can effectively predict depression and PTSD one-month post traumatic injury, and combining the two tools is more effective than using either one alone.
Objective: To examine the combined and individual utility of 2 screening tools in prediction of depression and PTSD one-month post traumatic injury. Method: 484 Level I Trauma Center patients were administered the Peritraumatic Distress Inventory (PDI) and Injured Trauma Survivor Screen (ITSS). Approximately 30 days post-injury, patients completed the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8). Results: Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) curves for the PDI suggested a cutoff score of 17.5 predicting PTSD (Sensitivity = 70%; Specificity = 62%) and depression (Sensitivity = 74%; Specificity = 64%). For the ITSS, ROC curves suggested a cutoff score of 1.5 to predict PTSD (Sensitivity = 72%; Specificity = 60%) and depression (Sensitivity = 67%; Specificity = 62%). Inclusion of both instruments in regression analyses accounted for 2.4%-6.8% greater variance than 1 measure alone in predicting PCL-5 and PHQ-8 scores. Conclusions: The ITSS and PDI each demonstrated significant clinical utility in practice. Use of both measures, versus either alone, likely does not produce sufficient added clinical benefit. Follow-up screening and/or ongoing symptom monitoring is recommended as an adjunct to brief bedside screening.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available