RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The use of virtual reality (VR)-based biofeedback (BF), a relatively new intervention, is a non-pharmacological treatment of depressive and anxiety symptoms. However, studies on VR-based BF are lacking and inconclusive. METHODS: A total of 131 adults were recruited from the community. Participants who scored ≥10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) or ≥9 on the Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) were included in the group with depressive or anxiety symptoms (DAS group), and others as the healthy control group (HC group). Participants from the DAS group were randomly assigned to VR-based or conventional BF intervention. All individuals visited at three times (weeks 0, 2, and 4), and completed the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and a visual analog scale (VAS) before and after the intervention, and PHQ-9 at the beginning and final visit. RESULTS: The analysis included a total of 118 participants (DAS/VR: 40, DAS/BF: 38, HC/VR: 40). There was no significant difference in demographic variables among the three groups. After the intervention, the DAS/VR group exhibited significant decreases in MADRS (70.0 %), PHQ-9 (64.1 %), STAI (29.5 %), and VAS (61.7 %) scores compared to the baseline (p <0.001). There were no significant differences between the effects of VR-based BF and conventional BF with a therapist. The HC group also showed significant decreases in the measures of depression and anxiety after receiving VR-based BF. CONCLUSION: VR-based BF was effective in reducing depressive and anxiety symptoms, even for subthreshold depression and anxiety symptoms in the HC group.
RESUMEN
Background: Observer rating scales are necessary to evaluate the risk of suicide because individuals at risk for suicide are often unwilling to seek help on their own. Reliability and validity were evaluated for the newly developed Suicide Screening Questionnaire-Observer Rating (SSQ-OR). Methods: Preliminary items were assessed by 251 experts online and 25 questions were selected. 328 individuals at high-risk and 661 controls from 12 Crisis Response Centers and 5 university counseling centers were recruited to complete SSQ-OR, Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation (BSSI) and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). In a 6 months follow-up, we reached out to 176 participants to ask whether they had experienced a suicidal thought, plan, or attempt since the baseline assessment. Cronbach's α, Mann-Whitney U test, Spearman's correlation, factor analyses, Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and logistic regression analysis were used to verify the SSQ-OR. Results: Structural validity was supported by a two-factor solution using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Excellent model fit indices for the two-factor structure using exploratory factor analysis were confirmed (RMSEA = 0.033, TLI = 0.980, CFI = 0.983). The SSQ-OR demonstrated strong internal consistency. The concurrent validity based on the correlations with other self-reported indicators of suicidal potential-BSSI and PHQ-9- revealed substantial relationships. The high-risk group was effectively characterized by a cut-off point of 4, with a sensitivity of 0.73 and a specificity of 0.79. The SSQ-OR scores were significant predictors of suicidal thoughts and behaviors within 6 months. Conclusions: The SSQ-OR exhibits sound psychometric properties, and could be used as a complement to a self-report or clinical-administered scale to screen suicide risk comprehensively.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reliability and validity of the Korean version of Children's Depression Inventory 2 Short Version (CDI 2:S) in comparison with its full-length version (CDI 2) as a screening tool for depressive youth. METHODS: A total of 714 children from the community and 62 psychiatric patients were enrolled in this study. The Korean version of the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL-K) served as the reference standard for computing receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. To evaluate the ability of the CDI 2 and CDI 2:S to discriminate major depressive disorders, areas under the curves (AUCs) were compared. To investigate psychometric properties of the CDI 2:S, internal consistency was calculated and confirmatory factor analysis was conducted. RESULTS: For the CDI 2, the cutoff at 20 yielded the best balance between sensitivity (83%) and specificity (91%). For the CDI 2:S, the cutoff point of 10 resulted in high sensitivity (82%) and high specificity (93%). The short form was proven to be as sensitive and specific as the CDI 2. Further analyses confirmed that the CDI 2:S also had good reliability and validity. CONCLUSION: The CDI 2:S, a sensitive and brief form of the CDI 2, may serve as a better option in time-constrained psychiatric settings.
