|
|
||||||||||
|
J Am Coll Cardiol, 2004; 44:2254-2255, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2004.09.016 © 2004 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation |
* 125 Paterson Street, Suite 6100, New Brunswick, NJ 08903 (Email: freuders{at}umdnj.edu).
Although there is precedent for using the BDI to screen for depression in HF patients (4,5), we are concerned that the BDI may be inadequate as a single index of depression in this medically ill population. Because the BDI was not designed to diagnose or assess depression in medically ill patient samples, fully one-third of the scale's items are somatic in focus, assessing fatigue, appetite, libido, sleep habits, somatic worry, functional ability, and weight changeall symptoms consistent with HF. Previous studies of major depression in HF have used the BDI as a screening instrument before using a diagnostic interview such as the Diagnostic Interview Survey (DIS) (6) to diagnose major depression (4,5). Without a diagnostic interview for depression and/or a concurrent, nonsomatic measure of depression (e.g., the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) (7), using only the BDI to assess depression poses a potential threat to construct validity in these symptomatic HF patients. In their study, Gottlieb et al. (1) further operationalized depression as a BDI score
10. Whereas Beck et al. (2) categorize BDI scores of 4 to 10 as normal, and scores of 11 to 16 as indicative of mild depression, these cut-off points represent norms established in a nonmedically ill population. Thus, classifying stage II to IV HF patients with BDI scores
10 as depressed, in the absence of a secondary diagnostic or nonsomatic measure of depression, may potentially serve to overestimate the prevalence of depression in this, by definition, symptomatic sample.
Additionally, the SF-36 used by the researchers as an index of quality of life is, like the BDI, comprised of both mood and somatic items. The investigators report a significant correlation between the BDI and the SF-36; thus, they conclude that depression is associated with lower quality of life in HF patients. The overlapping domain items in the BDI and SF-36, however, may potentially confound this correlation, as the statistical association might, at least in part, reflect the degree to which the scales themselves correlate.
Depression and quality of life in patients with HF are significant public health issues that clearly warrant further investigation. As scientists, we must successfully grapple with the thorny issues of construct and scale validity within this population (e.g., "what is the nature of depression in HF?" "what is a validated measure of depression in HF?") if our research is to advance both the science and the standard of care for HF.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Related Article
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | SUBSCRIPTIONS | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | CARDIOSOURCE | SEARCH | HELP | FEEDBACK |