The Arabic Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: validation in a sample of Lebanese patients with cancer

IF 1.5 Q3 PSYCHIATRY Middle East Current Psychiatry Pub Date : 2023-10-30 DOI:10.1186/s43045-023-00357-7
Nour Ibrahim, Dahlia Yamout, Maya Bizri, Ali Taher
{"title":"The Arabic Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: validation in a sample of Lebanese patients with cancer","authors":"Nour Ibrahim, Dahlia Yamout, Maya Bizri, Ali Taher","doi":"10.1186/s43045-023-00357-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background Depression and anxiety are common comorbid psychological disorders among patients with cancer. Despite the wide use of the Arabic Hospital and Anxiety Scale (HADS) in oncological settings, it has not been yet validated among Lebanese patients with cancer. We aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the HADS in a sample of Lebanese patients with cancer. One-hundred one Lebanese patients diagnosed with cancer presenting to the Ambulatory Care Center in the Hematology Oncology Department at the American University of Beirut Medial Center filled the Arabic version of the HADS. The Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item Scale (GAD-7) and the Patient Health Questionnaire 9-Item Scale (PHQ-9) were used to assess its concurrent validity in capturing anxiety and depression, respectively. Results Reliability analysis using Cronbach’s alpha (α) coefficient revealed good internal consistency for the Arabic HADS ( α = 0.89) and both subscales ( α = 0.86 for depression and α = 0.78 for anxiety). Correlations between HADS with both GAD-7 and PHQ-9 were statistically significant and strong for both depression ( r = 0.795; p < 0.0001) and anxiety ( r = 0.727; p < 0.0001). Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the observed data fits the two-factor model of depression and anxiety (Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin = 0.86; Tucker Lewis Index = 0.879; root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.08). Depression and anxiety rates were approximately 52% and 25%, respectively. Conclusion We conclude that the Arabic version of the HADS is a credible and valid tool for clinical assessment of psychological distress (anxious and depressive states) among Lebanese patients with cancer.","PeriodicalId":38653,"journal":{"name":"Middle East Current Psychiatry","volume":"30 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Middle East Current Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43045-023-00357-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Background Depression and anxiety are common comorbid psychological disorders among patients with cancer. Despite the wide use of the Arabic Hospital and Anxiety Scale (HADS) in oncological settings, it has not been yet validated among Lebanese patients with cancer. We aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the HADS in a sample of Lebanese patients with cancer. One-hundred one Lebanese patients diagnosed with cancer presenting to the Ambulatory Care Center in the Hematology Oncology Department at the American University of Beirut Medial Center filled the Arabic version of the HADS. The Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item Scale (GAD-7) and the Patient Health Questionnaire 9-Item Scale (PHQ-9) were used to assess its concurrent validity in capturing anxiety and depression, respectively. Results Reliability analysis using Cronbach’s alpha (α) coefficient revealed good internal consistency for the Arabic HADS ( α = 0.89) and both subscales ( α = 0.86 for depression and α = 0.78 for anxiety). Correlations between HADS with both GAD-7 and PHQ-9 were statistically significant and strong for both depression ( r = 0.795; p < 0.0001) and anxiety ( r = 0.727; p < 0.0001). Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the observed data fits the two-factor model of depression and anxiety (Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin = 0.86; Tucker Lewis Index = 0.879; root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.08). Depression and anxiety rates were approximately 52% and 25%, respectively. Conclusion We conclude that the Arabic version of the HADS is a credible and valid tool for clinical assessment of psychological distress (anxious and depressive states) among Lebanese patients with cancer.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
阿拉伯医院焦虑和抑郁量表:黎巴嫩癌症患者样本的验证
摘要背景抑郁和焦虑是癌症患者常见的共病性心理障碍。尽管在肿瘤学环境中广泛使用阿拉伯医院和焦虑量表(HADS),但尚未在黎巴嫩癌症患者中得到验证。我们的目的是评估HADS在黎巴嫩癌症患者样本中的可靠性和有效性。贝鲁特美国大学医疗中心血液肿瘤科门诊护理中心的101名黎巴嫩确诊癌症患者填写了阿拉伯版的HADS。采用广泛性焦虑障碍7项量表(GAD-7)和患者健康问卷9项量表(PHQ-9)分别评估其在捕获焦虑和抑郁方面的并发效度。结果采用Cronbach 's α (α)系数进行信度分析,结果显示阿拉伯语HADS量表与抑郁量表(α = 0.86)和焦虑量表(α = 0.78)具有良好的内部一致性(α = 0.89)。HADS与GAD-7和PHQ-9的相关性均有统计学意义,且两种抑郁症的相关性均较强(r = 0.795;p & lt;0.0001)和焦虑(r = 0.727;p & lt;0.0001)。验证性因子分析显示,观察到的数据符合抑郁和焦虑的双因素模型(Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin = 0.86;Tucker Lewis指数= 0.879;均方根近似误差= 0.08)。抑郁和焦虑的比例分别约为52%和25%。结论:阿拉伯语版本的HADS是黎巴嫩癌症患者心理困扰(焦虑和抑郁状态)临床评估的可靠和有效的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Middle East Current Psychiatry
Middle East Current Psychiatry Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
89
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊最新文献
Virtual reality in telepsychiatry is a new horizon for immersive mental health therapy Status and sociodemographic correlates of pathological internet use among adolescents in Jordan: a cross-sectional study Post-traumatic stress disorder among nursing students at Palestine Polytechnique University during the Gaza war and the attack on the health care system Psychological assessment of violent behaviors in schizophrenic patients followed up in My EL Hassan health center of Kenitra, Morocco Burnout syndrome, anxiety, and depression symptoms among workers in radiation field
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1