首页> 外文期刊>Journal of affective disorders >Distinguishing between emotional distress and psychiatric disorder in primary care attenders: A cross sectional study of the four-dimensional symptom questionnaire (4DSQ)
【24h】

Distinguishing between emotional distress and psychiatric disorder in primary care attenders: A cross sectional study of the four-dimensional symptom questionnaire (4DSQ)

机译:区分初级保健社的情绪困扰和精神疾病:四维症状问卷(4DSQ)的横截面研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Detection of psychiatric disorder in primary care is a complex issue. Distinctions between 'normal' emotional distress and psychiatric disorder depend on how disorder is conceptualized. Our aim was to explore two different conceptualizations by examining patients' scores on one-dimensional depression measures and scores on the Four Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ), a measure that uniquely has separate dimensions for general distress and depressive disorder. Methods: This was a cross sectional study of 487 primary care patients attending general clinics in Hampshire, UK. Patients completed the 4DSQ, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) whilst in the waiting room.Results: The 4DSQ classified 26% (126/485) of patients as having heightened distress levels and 8% (38/ 468) as possible cases of depressive disorder. Casesness was consistently higher across the one-dimensional measures (PHQ-9: 16%, GHQ-12: 28%, HADS-D: 13%). Of those patients deemed possible cases by the PHQ-9 (≥10), the 4DSQ classified 91% (71/78) as having heightened distress and 44% (32/72) as possible cases of depressive disorder.Limitations: The sample was predominately older and white, which may limit generalizability of the findings to more diverse patient groups. There are limits to self-report measures in the assessment of complex diagnostic issues.Conclusions: Inclusion of a distinct general distress dimension alongside a dimension focusing on specific depression symptomatology lowered the number of primary care patients classified as possible cases of disorder. This view of symptoms may have implications for the targeting of existing treatments, and may be useful in guiding the development of novel self-management interventions.
机译:背景:初级保健中精神疾病的检测是一个复杂的问题。 “正常”情绪痛苦和精神疾病之间的区别取决于如何概念化。我们的目标是通过检查患者的一维抑郁措施和四维症状问卷(4DSQ)的分数来探讨两种不同的概念化,以唯一对一般痛苦和抑郁症的分开尺寸的措施。方法:这是对英国汉普郡总诊所的487名初级护理患者的横截面研究。患者完成了4DSQ,患者健康调查问卷-9(PHQ-9),一般健康问卷-12(GHQ-12)和医院焦虑和抑郁症(曾经),同时候诊室。结果:4DSQ分类26%( 126/485)患者的痛苦程度高达8%(38/468),应抑郁症的可能性。案件在一维措施(PHQ-9:16%,GHQ-12:28%,HADS-D:13%)中持续更高。在这些患者中被PPQ-9(≥10)视为可能的病例,将4DSQ分类为91%(71/78),因为患有增强的痛苦和44%(32/72),应抑郁症的可能案例。闪烁:样品是主要是较旧的和白色,这可能会限制调查结果的普遍性,以更多样化的患者群体。在评估复杂诊断问题时自我报告措施的限制。结论:将一个明显的一般痛苦维度与专注于特定的抑郁症症状的维度,降低了归类为紊乱病例的初级护理患者的数量。这种症状对现有治疗的目标可能有影响,并且可能有助于指导新的自我管理干预的发展。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号