Patient-reported impact of symptoms in schizophrenia scale (PRISS): Development and validation

BACKGROUND

We report the psychometric properties of the Patient-Reported Impact of Symptoms in Schizophrenia Scale (PRISS), which assesses the impact of subjective experiences or qualia in outpatients with this condition.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was carried out in 162 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia in Spain. The PRISS measures the presence, frequency, concern and interference with daily life of self-reported experiences related to the main symptoms observed in these patients. The psychometric analysis included test-retest reliability, internal consistency and structural and convergent validity.

RESULTS

The 28-item PRISS showed good test-retest reliability as 64.3% of the intraclass correlation coefficient values were between 0.40 and 0.79, which were statistically significant (p < 0.01). Analysis of the structural validity revealed a three-factor structure, (1) productive subjective experiences, (2) affective-negative subjective experiences and (3) excitation, which accounted for 56.11% of the variance. Of the Pearson's correlation coefficients analysed between the PRISS and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Scale for Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS) and World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHO-DAS), 72.2% were statistically significant (p < 0.05) and ranged from 0.38-0.42, 0.32-0.42 and 0.40-0.42, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that the PRISS appears to be a brief, reliable and valid scale to measure subjective experiences in schizophrenia and provides valuable information complementary to clinical evaluation.

Validity of Self-rating Screening Scales for the Diagnosis of Depression and Anxiety in Adult Patients With Bronchiectasis

BACKGROUND

There are no previous studies aimed at assessing the validity of the screening scales for depression and anxiety in adult patients with bronchiectasis.

AIMS

To analyze the psychometric properties of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and Hamilton Anxiety Scale and to evaluate the concordance for the diagnosis of depression and anxiety between these screening scales and the structured clinical interview in adult patients with bronchiectasis.

METHOD

Cross sectional study. 52 patients with bronchiectasis completed HADS, BDI and Hamilton Anxiety Scale; afterwards, were individually interviewed by a mental health care professional using the structured Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), which evaluates for depression and anxiety according to DSM-IV criteria.

RESULTS

Based on MINI, 18 subjects (34.6%) had a diagnosis of depression and 25 (48.1%) had anxiety. Optimal cut-off values to detect depression were ≥9 for the HADS-D (sensitivity 0.833, specificity 0.971, AUC 0.962 [95% CI 0.918-1]), and 17 for BDI (sensitivity 0.889, specificity 0.912, AUC 0.978 [95% CI 0.945-1]). Optimal cut-off values to detect anxiety were ≥4 for the HADS-A (sensitivity 0.960, specificity 0.593, AUC 0.833 [95% CI 0.723-0.943]), and 17 for Hamilton Anxiety Scale (sensitivity 0.800, specificity 0.852, AUC 0.876 [95% CI 0.781-0.970]).

CONCLUSION

The self-rating screening scales HADS, BDI and Hamilton Anxiety Scale are reliable tools to screen for depression and anxiety in adult patients with bronchiectasis. However, the use of specific cut-off values may improve the diagnostic accuracy of the previous scales in this specific group of patients.