4.5 Article

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

期刊

HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY
卷 40, 期 10, 页码 702-705

出版社

AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/hea0001114

关键词

posttraumatic stress disorder; depression; injury; diagnostic screening

资金

  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]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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.

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

4.5
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