File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Assessing depression in patients with chronic pain: A comparison of three rating scales

TitleAssessing depression in patients with chronic pain: A comparison of three rating scales
Authors
KeywordsBDI
CES-D
Chinese
Chronic pain
Depression
Issue Date2011
PublisherElsevier BV. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jad
Citation
Journal Of Affective Disorders, 2011, v. 133 n. 1-2, p. 179-187 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: Considerable evidence has suggested depression is significantly more prevalent in patients with chronic pain. A number of studies exclusively based on Western samples have evaluated the effectiveness of depression rating scales in assessing depression in the chronic pain context. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to compare within a Chinese chronic pain sample three depression rating scales commonly used in identifying depression. Methods: A total of 366 Chinese patients with chronic pain attending either an orthopedic specialist clinic (n = 185) or a multidisciplinary pain clinic (n = 181) in Hong Kong completed a structured interview using CIS-R and two depression rating scales, the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI standard and short form) and the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CES-D). Patient scores on the BDI and CES-D were then assessed against their responses on the CIS-R to determine their effectiveness. Results: The prevalence of depression was 20.2% and 57.8% in the Orthopedics and Pain Clinic sample respectively. Results of ROC analyses showed that all the three measures performed well at predicting depression with AUC ≥ 0.89 and high sensitivity and specificity. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the three depression measures assessed have good predictive validity in the Chinese chronic pain context, and they could be used as screening or diagnostic measures of depression in Chinese chronic pain patients. The decision of using a specific measure and a specific cutoff score should be based on study aim and setting. © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/139869
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.57
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.927
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWong, WSen_HK
dc.contributor.authorChen, PPen_HK
dc.contributor.authorYap, Jen_HK
dc.contributor.authorMak, KHen_HK
dc.contributor.authorTam, BKHen_HK
dc.contributor.authorFielding, Ren_HK
dc.date.accessioned2011-09-23T05:58:53Z-
dc.date.available2011-09-23T05:58:53Z-
dc.date.issued2011en_HK
dc.identifier.citationJournal Of Affective Disorders, 2011, v. 133 n. 1-2, p. 179-187en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0165-0327en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/139869-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Considerable evidence has suggested depression is significantly more prevalent in patients with chronic pain. A number of studies exclusively based on Western samples have evaluated the effectiveness of depression rating scales in assessing depression in the chronic pain context. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to compare within a Chinese chronic pain sample three depression rating scales commonly used in identifying depression. Methods: A total of 366 Chinese patients with chronic pain attending either an orthopedic specialist clinic (n = 185) or a multidisciplinary pain clinic (n = 181) in Hong Kong completed a structured interview using CIS-R and two depression rating scales, the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI standard and short form) and the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CES-D). Patient scores on the BDI and CES-D were then assessed against their responses on the CIS-R to determine their effectiveness. Results: The prevalence of depression was 20.2% and 57.8% in the Orthopedics and Pain Clinic sample respectively. Results of ROC analyses showed that all the three measures performed well at predicting depression with AUC ≥ 0.89 and high sensitivity and specificity. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the three depression measures assessed have good predictive validity in the Chinese chronic pain context, and they could be used as screening or diagnostic measures of depression in Chinese chronic pain patients. The decision of using a specific measure and a specific cutoff score should be based on study aim and setting. © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.en_HK
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherElsevier BV. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jaden_HK
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Affective Disordersen_HK
dc.subjectBDIen_HK
dc.subjectCES-Den_HK
dc.subjectChineseen_HK
dc.subjectChronic painen_HK
dc.subjectDepressionen_HK
dc.subject.meshAsian Continental Ancestry Group - psychology-
dc.subject.meshChronic Disease-
dc.subject.meshDepression - diagnosis-
dc.subject.meshPain - psychology-
dc.subject.meshPsychiatric Status Rating Scales-
dc.titleAssessing depression in patients with chronic pain: A comparison of three rating scalesen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0165-0327&volume=133&issue=1-2&spage=179&epage=187&date=2011&atitle=Assessing+depression+in+patients+with+chronic+pain:+a+comparison+of+three+rating+scales-
dc.identifier.emailFielding, R:fielding@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityFielding, R=rp00339en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jad.2011.04.012en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid21565408-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-80051667112en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros194880en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-80051667112&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume133en_HK
dc.identifier.issue1-2en_HK
dc.identifier.spage179en_HK
dc.identifier.epage187en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000294934700022-
dc.publisher.placeNetherlandsen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, WS=7403972073en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChen, PP=49561000000en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridYap, J=7007107499en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridMak, KH=12768176000en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridTam, BKH=36174749700en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridFielding, R=7102200484en_HK
dc.identifier.citeulike9318683-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats