Comparison of the Beck Anxiety Inventory and the Geriatric Anxiety Scale in an Older Adult Neurology Clinic Sample.

IF 2.1 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY
Katie Stypulkowski, Jessica Rodrigues, Filippo Cieri, Shehroo B Pudumjee, Rachel M Butler Pagnotti, Christina G Wong
{"title":"Comparison of the Beck Anxiety Inventory and the Geriatric Anxiety Scale in an Older Adult Neurology Clinic Sample.","authors":"Katie Stypulkowski, Jessica Rodrigues, Filippo Cieri, Shehroo B Pudumjee, Rachel M Butler Pagnotti, Christina G Wong","doi":"10.1093/arclin/acaf006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) is a commonly used anxiety measure, but it was not specifically designed for use among older adults. Previous research has raised concern that it may inflate anxiety ratings among older adults because of its emphasis on physical symptoms. The Geriatric Anxiety Scale (GAS) is designed for older adults but has not been examined in a neurology clinic setting. This study sought to compare the psychometric properties of the BAI and the GAS in an older adult neurology clinic sample. An exploratory aim was to determine the influence of motor symptoms on anxiety scores.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Participants included 68 adults age 60+ referred for a neuropsychological evaluation in an outpatient neurology clinic. Measures included the BAI, GAS, and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Psychometric properties were determined. A McNemar test compared the proportion of anxiety classifications between the BAI and GAS. Referral source (cognitive disorder versus movement-oriented teams) was used as a proxy for grouping patients who were likely to have prominent motor symptoms versus those who were not. An independent t-test compared scale performance between these groups to examine the influence of motor symptoms on anxiety ratings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both scales had good internal consistency (GAS α = 0.93; BAI α = 0.88). Convergent validity (GAS and BAI: r = 0.81, p < .001) and discriminant validity (GAS and MoCA, r = 0.18, p = .20) were supported. The BAI detected anxiety among 40% of participants, while the GAS detected anxiety among 56%, which was a statistically significant difference (p = .002). Anxiety ratings did not differ based on referral source (t(66) = -1.59, p = .12).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both scales had good psychometric properties, though the GAS detected a higher rate of anxiety compared to the BAI despite having less focus on motor symptoms that could be attributed to age-related physical changes or movement disorders. The GAS may capture aspects of anxiety not assessed by the BAI among older adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":8176,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acaf006","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) is a commonly used anxiety measure, but it was not specifically designed for use among older adults. Previous research has raised concern that it may inflate anxiety ratings among older adults because of its emphasis on physical symptoms. The Geriatric Anxiety Scale (GAS) is designed for older adults but has not been examined in a neurology clinic setting. This study sought to compare the psychometric properties of the BAI and the GAS in an older adult neurology clinic sample. An exploratory aim was to determine the influence of motor symptoms on anxiety scores.

Method: Participants included 68 adults age 60+ referred for a neuropsychological evaluation in an outpatient neurology clinic. Measures included the BAI, GAS, and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Psychometric properties were determined. A McNemar test compared the proportion of anxiety classifications between the BAI and GAS. Referral source (cognitive disorder versus movement-oriented teams) was used as a proxy for grouping patients who were likely to have prominent motor symptoms versus those who were not. An independent t-test compared scale performance between these groups to examine the influence of motor symptoms on anxiety ratings.

Results: Both scales had good internal consistency (GAS α = 0.93; BAI α = 0.88). Convergent validity (GAS and BAI: r = 0.81, p < .001) and discriminant validity (GAS and MoCA, r = 0.18, p = .20) were supported. The BAI detected anxiety among 40% of participants, while the GAS detected anxiety among 56%, which was a statistically significant difference (p = .002). Anxiety ratings did not differ based on referral source (t(66) = -1.59, p = .12).

Conclusion: Both scales had good psychometric properties, though the GAS detected a higher rate of anxiety compared to the BAI despite having less focus on motor symptoms that could be attributed to age-related physical changes or movement disorders. The GAS may capture aspects of anxiety not assessed by the BAI among older adults.

贝克焦虑量表与老年焦虑量表在老年神经病学门诊样本中的比较。
目的:贝克焦虑量表(BAI)是一种常用的焦虑测量方法,但它并不是专门为老年人设计的。先前的研究引起了人们的担忧,即它可能会提高老年人的焦虑等级,因为它强调身体症状。老年焦虑量表(GAS)是为老年人设计的,但尚未在神经病学诊所进行过检查。本研究旨在比较老年神经病学临床样本中BAI和GAS的心理测量特性。一个探索性的目的是确定运动症状对焦虑评分的影响。方法:参与者包括68名60岁以上的成年人,在门诊神经病学诊所进行神经心理学评估。测量方法包括BAI、GAS和蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)。测定心理测量特性。McNemar测试比较了BAI和GAS之间焦虑分类的比例。转诊来源(认知障碍与运动导向团队)被用作分组可能有突出运动症状的患者与不可能有突出运动症状的患者的代理。一个独立的t检验比较了这些组之间的量表表现,以检验运动症状对焦虑评分的影响。结果:两种量表具有良好的内部一致性(GAS α = 0.93;Bai α = 0.88)。结论:两种量表都具有良好的心理测量特性,尽管GAS比BAI检测到更高的焦虑率,尽管它较少关注可能归因于年龄相关的身体变化或运动障碍的运动症状。在老年人中,GAS可能捕捉到BAI未评估的焦虑方面。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
358
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes original contributions dealing with psychological aspects of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of disorders arising out of dysfunction of the central nervous system. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology will also consider manuscripts involving the established principles of the profession of neuropsychology: (a) delivery and evaluation of services, (b) ethical and legal issues, and (c) approaches to education and training. Preference will be given to empirical reports and key reviews. Brief research reports, case studies, and commentaries on published articles (not exceeding two printed pages) will also be considered. At the discretion of the editor, rebuttals to commentaries may be invited. Occasional papers of a theoretical nature will be considered.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信