ABSTRACT
Recovery from a critical illness can be delayed by persistent anxiety and depression. To identify such patients, a new self-report questionnaire (the Depression, Anxiety and Stress scale, DASS) was used alongside an established instrument (the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale, HADS) in those who had spent a minimum of 3 days (median 9 days) in a general intensive care unit. Fifty-one patients were studied 3 months later, and 45 survivors were reviewed at 9 months. High Cronbach alpha values (0.92-0.95) for each subscale of DASS confirmed its internal consistency, and likewise for HADS (0.82-0.86). HADS and DASS correlated strongly at each time point both for anxiety (r = 0.88) and depression (r = 0.93), with few discrepant values on a Bland and Altman plot. DASS performs as consistently as HADS in screening for anxiety and depression, and its psychometric properties support its use in an intensive care setting.
Subject(s)
Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Critical Care/psychology , Depressive Disorder/diagnosis , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Survivors/psychology , Adult , Aged , Anxiety Disorders/etiology , Critical Illness/psychology , Critical Illness/rehabilitation , Depressive Disorder/etiology , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , PsychometricsABSTRACT
A prospective study using neuropsychological testing explored cognitive performance, and specifically executive function, in survivors of critical illness during the first year of recovery. Fifty-one patients who had survived 3 days or more in the intensive care unit were studied approximately 3 months after discharge; 45 of them were studied again 6 months later. General health was assessed using the Short-Form 36. Cognitive and executive functions were measured using Raven's Progressive Matrices, the Hayling Sentence completion test and the Six-Element Test. Three months after discharge from intensive care, all eight domains of Short-Form 36 were impaired among survivors; by 9 months, four of the eight domains showed significant improvement. At 3 months, 35% of patients scored at or below a level equivalent to the lowest performing 5% of a normal population (i.e. the fifth percentile) on two or more tests of cognitive function; by 9 months only 4% of patients were impaired to this extent. Although cognitive performance improved with time, it remained below normal.
