RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Social detachment includes the subjective aspect "loneliness" and the objective aspect "social isolation," but tools to assess both dimensions are limited. This study aims to develop a questionnaire, the Social Detachment Questionnaire for Older Population (SDQO), that considers multiple dimensions of social detachment simultaneously. METHODS: The study collected 600 valid samples from individuals aged 55 and above to examine the psychometric properties of the developed SDQO. Item analysis was conducted to assess the performance of each item, and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was employed to analyze its initial structure and eliminate less ideal items. Subsequently, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to examine the model fit of the suggested structure by EFA, using different subsamples. Internal consistency, concurrent validity, and other analyses were also performed. RESULTS: The original 27-item SDQO was reduced to 17 items after removing 4 questions in item analysis and 6 questions in EFA. The Cronbach's alpha for the 17-item version of SDQO was 0.80. Both EFA and CFA supported its 6-factor structure, with factors identified as community activities, loneliness, personal resources, leisure activities, friendship, and family resources. SDQO also demonstrated expected performance in concurrent validity. CONCLUSION: The 17-item version of SDQO exhibited good reliability and validity, measuring various aspects of social detachment behavior, feelings, and resources. It holds value for future research applications.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and biofeedback therapy are commonly regarded as effective treatment modalities for panic disorder. The aim of this study was to establish a Taiwanese version of an integrated cognitive-behavioral and biofeedback therapy (ICB) and examine its effects on panic disorder using psychological and physiological indicators. METHODS: Thirty patients with panic disorder were enrolled in this study. They were randomly assigned to either the ICB group (n = 15) or the treatment as usual (TAU) group (n = 15). The intervention consisted of six sessions, conducted once a week. Psychological indicators were measured at baseline (prior to intervention), week 3, and week 6, while physiological indicators were measured at baseline and week 6. The psychological indicators included five scales, with the Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) being the primary measure. The physiological indicators included respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA) and skin conductance, which respectively represent parasympathetic and sympathetic activity. RESULTS: Considering all participants, PDSS scores significantly decreased over time, but the difference between the ICB and TAU groups did not reach statistical significance. Among the physiological indicators, resting-state RSA and RSA under relaxation showed significant between-group differences over time, with the ICB group demonstrating a more pronounced improvement in RSA. CONCLUSION: In the context of existing pharmacological treatments, the benefits of ICB for panic disorder may not be observable through psychological indicators. However, it can lead to enhancement of parasympathetic activity as evidenced by the physiological indicators.