Correspondence Between the Neuropsychiatric Interview M.I.N.I. and the BDI-II and MADRS-S Self-Rating Instruments as Diagnostic Tools in Primary Care Patients with Depression.
Int J Gen Med
; 13: 177-183, 2020.
Article
em En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-32523369
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the correspondence between the diagnoses received by patients with symptoms of common mental disorder attending primary care, based on the diagnostic instrument International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.) and the self-assessment instruments such as Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale - self-rating version (MADRS-S), respectively. DESIGN: Data were collected from a prospective observational study, ADAS, between 2014 and 2015. SETTING: Twenty-eight primary care centers in Region Västra Gotaland, Sweden. PATIENTS: A total of 192 patients, 18-60 years of age, on sick leave ≥14 days, with mild/moderate depression, anxiety syndrome, and stress-related mental illness were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Scores of the assessment instruments (BDI-II and MADRS-S) on inclusion, sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for BDI-II and MADRS-S, respectively, with M.I.N.I used as diagnostic instrument. RESULTS: Using M.I.N.I. as gold standard, the BDI-II and MADRS-S showed almost the same sensitivity (86.9% and 87.4%, respectively), but specificity for MADRS-S was doubled compared to BDI-II (36% and 18%, respectively). There was a significant association between MADRS-S and M.I.N.I. (p=0.027). However, the same analysis between BDI and M.I.N.I. was not statistically significant (p= 0.635). NPV and PPV were calculated from assumed prevalences (10% and 75%) and were higher for MADRS-S compared to BDI-II. The PPV differences were between 2% and 7% and NPV differences were between 3% and 19%. CONCLUSION: With M.I.N.I. as gold standard, MADRS-S performs better than BDI-II as a self-assessment tool in the primary care context for depression diagnostics.
Texto completo:
1
Coleções:
01-internacional
Base de dados:
MEDLINE
Tipo de estudo:
Diagnostic_studies
/
Observational_studies
/
Prognostic_studies
/
Qualitative_research
Idioma:
En
Revista:
Int J Gen Med
Ano de publicação:
2020
Tipo de documento:
Article
País de afiliação:
Suécia
País de publicação:
Nova Zelândia