4.5 Article

The prevalence of depression in hereditary spastic paraplegia

Journal

CLINICAL REHABILITATION
Volume 23, Issue 9, Pages 857-861

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0269215509337186

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of depression and sensitivity and specificity of the single-item interview 'Are you depressed?' for people with hereditary spastic paraplegia in Estonia. Design: Single-item interview 'Are you depressed?' was used as a screening question for depression; all participants then completed the Beck Depression Inventory. Setting: People with hereditary spastic paraplegia identified from the epidemiological database who agreed to participate in the study. Main measures: Beck Depression Inventory, clinical interview. Results: The epidemiological database consisted of 59 patients with clinically confirmed diagnosis of hereditary spastic paraplegia. Forty-eight of these consented to participate in the study. The Beck Depression Inventory score was higher than cut-off point in 58% (28/48) and lower in 42% (20/48). Of the study group, 44% (21/48) had mild, 13% (6/48) moderate and one person revealed severe depression. There was a statistically significant correlation between Beck Depression Inventory score and level of mobility; no other significant correlations with other measures were detected. Of the participants, 54% (26/48) had subjective complaints about depression and answered 'Yes' to the single-item interview 'Are you depressed?'. The sensitivity of the one-item interview in the hereditary spastic paraplegia group was 75% and specificity 75%. Conclusions: Our results show that mild depression is prevalent among people with hereditary spastic paraplegia. Although the single question may be helpful, it cannot be relied upon entirely when assessing a person for depression.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available