Psychometric comparison of PHQ-9 and HADS for measuring depression severity in primary care

Authors: Cameron, Isobel M1; Crawford, John R2; Lawton, Kenneth3; Reid, Ian C1

Source: British Journal of General Practice, Volume 58, Number 546, January 2008 , pp. 32-36(5)

Publisher: Royal College of General Practitioners

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content

Abstract:

Background

The 2004 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines highlight the importance of assessing severity of depression in primary care.

Aim

To assess the psychometric properties of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D) for measuring depression severity in primary care.

Design of study

Psychometric assessment.

Setting

Thirty-two general practices in Grampian, Scotland.

Method

Consecutive patients referred to a primary care mental health worker completed the PHQ-9 and HADS at baseline (n = 1063) and at the end of treatment (n = 544). Data were analysed to assess reliability, robustness of factor structure, convergent/discriminant validity, convergence of severity banding, and responsiveness to change.

Results

Both scales demonstrated high internal consistency at baseline and end of treatment (PHQ-9 α = 0.83 and 0.92; HADS-D α = 0.84 and 0.89). One factor emerged each for the PHQ-9 (explaining 42% of variance) and HADS-D (explaining 52% of variance). Both scales converged more with each other than with the HADS anxiety (HADS-A) subscale at baseline (P<0.001) and at end of treatment (P = 0.01). Responsiveness to change was similar: effect size for PHQ-9 = 0.99 and for the HADS-D = 1. The HADS-D and PHQ-9 differed significantly in categorising severity of depression, with the PHQ-9 categorising a greater proportion of patients with moderate/severe depression (P<0.001).

Conclusion

The HADS-D and PHQ-9 demonstrated reliability, convergent/discriminant validity, and responsiveness to change. However, they differed considerably in how they catergorised severity. Given that treatment decisions are made on the basis of severity, further work is needed to assess the validity of the scales' severity cut-off bands.

Keywords: depression; measurement; primary care; severity

Document Type: Research article

DOI: 10.3399/bjgp08X263794

Affiliations: 1: Department of Mental Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen 2: School of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen 3: Department of General Practice and Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen

The full text electronic article is available for purchase. You will be able to download the full text electronic article after payment.

$31.15 plus tax      Refund Policy

 

OR

Back to top

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content
Share this item with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Page Help Click here for Page Help
Shopping cart
Tools
Sign in






Need to register?
Sign up here
Text size: A | A | A | A