4.7 Review

Prevalence of anxiety disorder among older adults in Spain: A meta-analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS
卷 246, 期 -, 页码 408-417

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2018.12.087

关键词

Meta-analysis; Prevalence; Anxiety disorders; Older adults; Spain

资金

  1. PERIS program 2016-2020 Ajuts per a la Incorporacio de Cientifics i Tecnolegs [SLT006/17/00066]
  2. Health Department from the Generalitat de Catalunya

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Anxiety disorders are recognized as one of the most prevalent mental disorders in late-life. However, the prevalence of anxiety disorders in older Spanish people has not yet been determined. The aim was to review epidemiological studies systematically to calculate the overall prevalence of anxiety in Spanish older adults by using meta-analytic techniques. Methods: We searched relevant published studies in electronic databases up to January 2018 providing data on the prevalence of anxiety among people aged 65+ years in Spain. Overall anxiety prevalence estimates were calculated using random-effects models. Sources of heterogeneity were explored by means of univariate meta-regressions. Results: A total of 9 studies were included in the meta-analysis (N=12,577). Pooled overall prevalence of anxiety was 11% (95% confidence interval (CI): 6%-18%) representing 1958,471 people aged 65+ (95% CI: 1068,257-3204,771). Point, 12-month and lifetime prevalence of anxiety disorders were 12%, 6% and 19%, respectively. Limitations: We detected a small publication bias effect for life-time prevalence of anxiety. The use of different diagnostic methods across the studies would have required separate analyzes. Conclusion: Some heterogeneity was found across studies, probably due to different methodological issues. Overall, the pooled prevalence of anxiety disorders in Spanish older adults was lower than that observed in other countries. Due to the negative consequences of anxiety disorders in older adults, detection and treatment should be a priority in this population.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据