Diagnostic accuracy and psychometric performance of two self-report measures of posttraumatic stress disorder in older veterans.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Joan M Cook, Robert H Pietrzak, Rachel Kimerling, Paula P Schnurr, Michelle J Bovin
{"title":"Diagnostic accuracy and psychometric performance of two self-report measures of posttraumatic stress disorder in older veterans.","authors":"Joan M Cook, Robert H Pietrzak, Rachel Kimerling, Paula P Schnurr, Michelle J Bovin","doi":"10.1002/jts.23154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) and PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) have demonstrated high levels of diagnostic accuracy and strong psychometric properties across various samples and settings. However, the impact of age on these measures has been underinvestigated. This is problematic, as without accurate measurement, older adults with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) may be vulnerable to misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment planning. This study examined the diagnostic accuracy of these measures in older (≥ 65 years; n = 192) versus younger (< 65 years; n = 188) veterans to determine whether precision in identifying PTSD was equally strong between groups in a sample of veterans receiving primary care services in a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs setting. Results indicated that, despite a lower PTSD prevalence among older veterans (9.3% vs. 25.5%), the PC-PTSD-5 performed better among older veterans, AUC = .960, 95% CI [.928, .992], than younger veterans, AUC = .897, 95% CI [.846, .949], z = 2.04, p = .042. A PC-PTSD-5 cutoff score of 4 was optimal for both groups. PCL-5 performance was excellent for both older, AUC = .925, 95% CI [.880, .970], and younger veterans, AUC = .894, 95% CI [.847, .942], z = 0.92, p = .358. Although different optimal cutoff scores were found for older (36) versus younger (34) veterans, these cutoffs were not significantly different from each other or the standard cutoff (33), McNemar tests ps = .125-1.00. Both measures maintain their robust psychometric properties in veterans across the lifespan.</p>","PeriodicalId":17519,"journal":{"name":"Journal of traumatic stress","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of traumatic stress","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.23154","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) and PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) have demonstrated high levels of diagnostic accuracy and strong psychometric properties across various samples and settings. However, the impact of age on these measures has been underinvestigated. This is problematic, as without accurate measurement, older adults with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) may be vulnerable to misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment planning. This study examined the diagnostic accuracy of these measures in older (≥ 65 years; n = 192) versus younger (< 65 years; n = 188) veterans to determine whether precision in identifying PTSD was equally strong between groups in a sample of veterans receiving primary care services in a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs setting. Results indicated that, despite a lower PTSD prevalence among older veterans (9.3% vs. 25.5%), the PC-PTSD-5 performed better among older veterans, AUC = .960, 95% CI [.928, .992], than younger veterans, AUC = .897, 95% CI [.846, .949], z = 2.04, p = .042. A PC-PTSD-5 cutoff score of 4 was optimal for both groups. PCL-5 performance was excellent for both older, AUC = .925, 95% CI [.880, .970], and younger veterans, AUC = .894, 95% CI [.847, .942], z = 0.92, p = .358. Although different optimal cutoff scores were found for older (36) versus younger (34) veterans, these cutoffs were not significantly different from each other or the standard cutoff (33), McNemar tests ps = .125-1.00. Both measures maintain their robust psychometric properties in veterans across the lifespan.

老年退伍军人创伤后应激障碍两种自我报告方法的诊断准确性和心理测量学表现。
DSM-5的初级保健PTSD筛查(PC-PTSD-5)和DSM-5的PTSD检查表(PCL-5)在不同的样本和环境中显示出高水平的诊断准确性和强大的心理测量特性。然而,年龄对这些措施的影响尚未得到充分调查。这是有问题的,因为如果没有准确的测量,患有创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的老年人可能容易被误诊和不适当的治疗计划。本研究检验了这些指标在老年人(≥65岁;N = 192)与年轻(< 65岁;n = 188)的退伍军人,以确定在美国退伍军人事务部接受初级保健服务的退伍军人样本中,两组之间识别PTSD的精确度是否相同。结果显示,尽管老年退伍军人的PTSD患病率较低(9.3%比25.5%),但PC-PTSD-5在老年退伍军人中的表现更好,AUC = 0.960, 95% CI[。]928, .992],较年轻退伍军人,AUC = .897, 95% CI[。[846, 0.949], z = 2.04, p = 0.042。两组的PC-PTSD-5分值均为4分。两名老年人的PCL-5表现都很好,AUC = 0.925, 95% CI[。880, 0.970],较年轻的退伍军人,AUC = 0.894, 95% CI[。[47, .942], z = 0.92, p = .358。虽然年龄较大的退伍军人(36)和年龄较小的退伍军人(34)的最佳分值不同,但这些分值彼此之间或标准分值(33)之间没有显著差异,McNemar检验ps = 0.125 -1.00。这两种测量方法在退伍军人的整个生命周期中都保持着强大的心理测量特性。
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
5.80
自引率
6.10%
发文量
125
期刊介绍: Journal of Traumatic Stress (JTS) is published for the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies. Journal of Traumatic Stress , the official publication for the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, is an interdisciplinary forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers on biopsychosocial aspects of trauma. Papers focus on theoretical formulations, research, treatment, prevention education/training, and legal and policy concerns. Journal of Traumatic Stress serves as a primary reference for professionals who study and treat people exposed to highly stressful and traumatic events (directly or through their occupational roles), such as war, disaster, accident, violence or abuse (criminal or familial), hostage-taking, or life-threatening illness. The journal publishes original articles, brief reports, review papers, commentaries, and, from time to time, special issues devoted to a single topic.
×
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