Measurement Properties of the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 and Somatic Symptom Scale-8: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Autor:	Hybelius J; Division of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden.; Liljeholmen University Primary Health Care Centre, Academic Primary Health Care Centre, Region Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden., Kosic A; School of Law, Psychology and Social Work, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden., Salomonsson S; Centre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden., Wachtler C; Division of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden.; Liljeholmen University Primary Health Care Centre, Academic Primary Health Care Centre, Region Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden., Wallert J; Centre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden., Nordin S; Department of Psychology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden., Axelsson E; Division of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden.; Liljeholmen University Primary Health Care Centre, Academic Primary Health Care Centre, Region Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	JAMA network open [JAMA Netw Open] 2024 Nov 04; Vol. 7 (11), pp. e2446603. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Nov 04.
DOI:	10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.46603
Abstrakt:	Importance: The subjective experience of somatic symptoms is a key concern throughout the health care system. Valid and clinically useful instruments are needed. Objective: To evaluate the measurement properties of 2 widespread patient-reported outcomes: the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15) and Somatic Symptom Scale-8 (SSS-8). Data Sources: Medline, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were last searched February 1, 2024. Study Selection: English-language studies reporting estimates pertaining to factor analysis, taxometric analysis, internal consistency, construct validity, mean scores in relevant groups, cutoffs, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs), minimal clinically important difference, test-retest reliability, or sensitivity to change. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Search hits were reviewed by independent raters. Cronbach α, Pearson r, means, and between-group effect sizes indicative of sensitivity to change were pooled in random-effects meta-analysis. Study quality was assessed using 3 instruments. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 reporting guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures: Comprehensive overview of evidence pertaining to the measurement properties of the PHQ-15 and SSS-8. Results: A total of 305 studies with 361 243 participants were included. Most concerned routine care (178 studies) and the general population (27 studies). In factor analyses, both scales reflected a combination of domain-specific factors (cardiopulmonary, fatigue, gastrointestinal, pain) and a general symptom burden factor. The pooled PHQ-15 α was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.80-0.82), but with low item-total correlations for items concerning menstrual problems, fainting spells, and sexual problems (item-total correlations <0.40), and the SSS-8 α was 0.80 (0.77-0.83). Pooled correlations with other measures of somatic symptom burden were 0.71 (95% CI, 0.64-0.78) for the PHQ-15 and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.72-0.92) for the SSS-8. Reported AUROCs for identification of somatoform disorders ranged from 0.63 (95% CI, 0.50-0.76) to 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73-0.85) for the PHQ-15 and from 0.71 (95% CI, 0.66-0.77) to 0.73 (95% CI, 0.69-0.76) for the SSS-8. The minimal clinically important difference on both scales was 3 points. Test-retest reliability could not be pooled and was inconsistent for the PHQ-15 (PHQ-15: r = 0.65-0.93; ICC, 0.87; SSS-8: r = 0.996, ICC = 0.89). The PHQ-15 showed tentative sensitivity to change (g = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.08-0.56), but data for the SSS-8 were lacking. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, findings supported use of the PHQ-15 and SSS-8 for the assessment of symptom burden, but users should be aware of the complex, multifactorial structures of these scales. More evidence is needed concerning longitudinal measurement properties.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu