01 March 2015 : Review article
Performance of Screening Tools in Detecting Major Depressive Disorder among Patients with Coronary Heart Disease: A Systematic Review
Yanping RenAEG, Hui YangBC, Colette BrowningBCD, Shane ThomasBCD, Meiyan LiuBCDDOI: 10.12659/MSM.892537
Med Sci Monit 2015; 21:646-653
Abstract
Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is common in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and there is no consensus on the optimal screening tool for use in identifying MDD. This study aimed to systematically review the performance of various screening tools in the identification of MDD. Material and Methods: Eligible studies published before 31 Dec 2013 were identified from the following databases: Ovid Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science. Results: Eight studies aiming to identify MDD in CHD patients were included, and there were 10 self-reporting questionnaires (such as PHQ-2, PHQ-9, PHQ categorical algorithm, HADS-D, BDI, BDI-II, BDI-II-cog, CES-D, SCL-90, 2 simple yes/no items) and 1 observer rating scale (Ham-D). For MDD alone, the sensitivity and specificity of various screening tools at the validity and optimal cut-off point varied from 0.34 [0.19, 0.52] to 0.96 [0.78, 1.00] and 0.69 [0.65, 0.73] to 0.97 [0.93, 0.99]. Results showed PHQ-9 (≥10), BDI-II (≥14 or ≥16), and HADS-D (≥5 or ≥4) were widely used for screening MDD in CHD patients. Conclusions: There is no consensus on the optimal screening tool for MDD in CHD patients. When evaluating the performance of a screening tool, balancing the high sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) between specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) for screening or diagnostic purpose should be considered. After screening, further diagnosis, appropriate management, and necessary referral may also improve cardiovascular outcomes.
Keywords: Coronary Disease - complications, Depressive Disorder, Major - etiology, Mass Screening - methods, Quality Assurance, Health Care
Editorial
01 March 2024 : Editorial
Editorial: First Regulatory Approvals for CRISPR-Cas9 Therapeutic Gene Editing for Sickle Cell Disease and Transfusion-Dependent β-ThalassemiaDOI: 10.12659/MSM.944204
Med Sci Monit 2024; 30:e944204
In Press
21 Feb 2024 : Clinical Research
Potential Value of HSP90α in Prognosis of Triple-Negative Breast CancerMed Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.943049
22 Feb 2024 : Review article
Differentiation of Native Vertebral Osteomyelitis: A Comprehensive Review of Imaging Techniques and Future ...Med Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.943168
23 Feb 2024 : Clinical Research
A Study of 60 Patients with Low Back Pain to Compare Outcomes Following Magnetotherapy, Ultrasound, Laser, ...Med Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.943732
26 Feb 2024 : Clinical Research
Predictive Value of Combined HbA1c and Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio for Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy in...Med Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.942509
Most Viewed Current Articles
17 Jan 2024 : Review article
Vaccination Guidelines for Pregnant Women: Addressing COVID-19 and the Omicron VariantDOI :10.12659/MSM.942799
Med Sci Monit 2024; 30:e942799
16 May 2023 : Clinical Research
Electrophysiological Testing for an Auditory Processing Disorder and Reading Performance in 54 School Stude...DOI :10.12659/MSM.940387
Med Sci Monit 2023; 29:e940387
14 Dec 2022 : Clinical Research
Prevalence and Variability of Allergen-Specific Immunoglobulin E in Patients with Elevated Tryptase LevelsDOI :10.12659/MSM.937990
Med Sci Monit 2022; 28:e937990
01 Jan 2022 : Editorial
Editorial: Current Status of Oral Antiviral Drug Treatments for SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Non-Hospitalized Pa...DOI :10.12659/MSM.935952
Med Sci Monit 2022; 28:e935952