A Systematic Scoping Review of Measures Used to Evaluate Treatment-Induced Changes in Depression, Anxiety, and Chronic Stress in People with Post-Stroke Aphasia.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Christie Carroll-Duhigg, Julian David, Richard M Arenas, Davin K Quinn, H Isabel Hubbard, Tyler B Smith, Jessica D Richardson
{"title":"A Systematic Scoping Review of Measures Used to Evaluate Treatment-Induced Changes in Depression, Anxiety, and Chronic Stress in People with Post-Stroke Aphasia.","authors":"Christie Carroll-Duhigg, Julian David, Richard M Arenas, Davin K Quinn, H Isabel Hubbard, Tyler B Smith, Jessica D Richardson","doi":"10.1080/02687038.2025.2467234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>People with aphasia have an increased risk of developing symptoms of depression, anxiety, and chronic stress - all of which interfere with rehabilitation and limit functional outcomes. Interventions addressing the mental health needs of people with aphasia are critically important and rapidly emerging. Most self-rated questionnaires are highly language-dependent. It is unclear how aphasia researchers are managing this potential study limitation.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To examine how treatment-induced changes in depression, anxiety, and chronic stress are currently being measured in people with stroke-induced aphasia and identify areas of concern and implications for future research.</p><p><strong>Methods & procedures: </strong>PsycINFO, CINAHL, PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched in February 2024. Key search terms included \"depression\", \"anxiety\", \"chronic stress\", \"measurement\", \"aphasia\", \"stroke\", and \"treatment\". Quantitative intervention studies reporting pre-post and/or group comparisons of depression, anxiety, or chronic stress, as either a primary or secondary outcome, with samples consisting of at least 50% of people with aphasia (or those reporting separate data for people with aphasia) were included in the review. Psychometric properties of the 10 most commonly used measures in the included studies were also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Outcomes & results: </strong>Thirty-six studies (out of 1518 screened) met inclusion criteria (13 randomized controlled trials; 23 non-randomized), from which 33 distinct measures were identified, including observer/clinician-rated (proxy), language-dependent self-rated, as well as visual scale/picture-supported measures. Most frequently used measures include the Stroke Aphasic Depression Questionnaire (SADQ-21 and SADQ-Hospital) and Visual Analog Mood Scale (VAMS) for depression; the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Anxiety subscale (HADS-A) for anxiety; the modified Perceived Stress Scale (mPSS) for chronic stress. Most significant treatment effects reported by studies were derived from measures with weak psychometric support for use with people with aphasia.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Measures used to evaluate treatment-induced changes in depression, anxiety, and chronic stress in people with aphasia varied widely across studies. This variability may stem from a lack of validated measures available for this population and/or the absence of best practice recommendations for measuring mental health outcomes in people with aphasia. Given these limitations, caution is urged when interpreting treatment studies using current measures, and there is an urgent need for valid and reliable self-report measures specifically designed with and tested for people with aphasia.</p>","PeriodicalId":50744,"journal":{"name":"Aphasiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12338240/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aphasiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2025.2467234","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: People with aphasia have an increased risk of developing symptoms of depression, anxiety, and chronic stress - all of which interfere with rehabilitation and limit functional outcomes. Interventions addressing the mental health needs of people with aphasia are critically important and rapidly emerging. Most self-rated questionnaires are highly language-dependent. It is unclear how aphasia researchers are managing this potential study limitation.

Aims: To examine how treatment-induced changes in depression, anxiety, and chronic stress are currently being measured in people with stroke-induced aphasia and identify areas of concern and implications for future research.

Methods & procedures: PsycINFO, CINAHL, PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched in February 2024. Key search terms included "depression", "anxiety", "chronic stress", "measurement", "aphasia", "stroke", and "treatment". Quantitative intervention studies reporting pre-post and/or group comparisons of depression, anxiety, or chronic stress, as either a primary or secondary outcome, with samples consisting of at least 50% of people with aphasia (or those reporting separate data for people with aphasia) were included in the review. Psychometric properties of the 10 most commonly used measures in the included studies were also evaluated.

Outcomes & results: Thirty-six studies (out of 1518 screened) met inclusion criteria (13 randomized controlled trials; 23 non-randomized), from which 33 distinct measures were identified, including observer/clinician-rated (proxy), language-dependent self-rated, as well as visual scale/picture-supported measures. Most frequently used measures include the Stroke Aphasic Depression Questionnaire (SADQ-21 and SADQ-Hospital) and Visual Analog Mood Scale (VAMS) for depression; the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Anxiety subscale (HADS-A) for anxiety; the modified Perceived Stress Scale (mPSS) for chronic stress. Most significant treatment effects reported by studies were derived from measures with weak psychometric support for use with people with aphasia.

Conclusions: Measures used to evaluate treatment-induced changes in depression, anxiety, and chronic stress in people with aphasia varied widely across studies. This variability may stem from a lack of validated measures available for this population and/or the absence of best practice recommendations for measuring mental health outcomes in people with aphasia. Given these limitations, caution is urged when interpreting treatment studies using current measures, and there is an urgent need for valid and reliable self-report measures specifically designed with and tested for people with aphasia.

卒中后失语症患者治疗引起的抑郁、焦虑和慢性应激变化的评估方法的系统范围综述。
背景:失语症患者出现抑郁、焦虑和慢性压力症状的风险增加,所有这些症状都会干扰康复并限制功能预后。针对失语症患者心理健康需求的干预措施至关重要,而且正在迅速涌现。大多数自评问卷都是高度依赖语言的。目前尚不清楚失语症研究人员如何处理这一潜在的研究限制。目的:研究治疗引起的抑郁、焦虑和慢性压力的变化是如何在中风引起的失语症患者中测量的,并确定未来研究的关注领域和意义。方法与程序:2024年2月检索PsycINFO、CINAHL、PubMed、Embase、谷歌Scholar。关键搜索词包括“抑郁”、“焦虑”、“慢性压力”、“测量”、“失语”、“中风”和“治疗”。定量干预研究报告了抑郁、焦虑或慢性压力的前后和/或组间比较,作为主要或次要结局,样本包含至少50%的失语症患者(或报告失语症患者的单独数据)。还对纳入研究的10种最常用测量方法的心理测量特性进行了评估。结果和结果:36项研究(在1518项筛选中)符合纳入标准(13项随机对照试验;23项非随机对照试验),从中确定了33种不同的测量方法,包括观察者/临床评定(代理),语言依赖自评定,以及视觉量表/图片支持的测量。最常用的测量方法包括卒中失语抑郁问卷(SADQ-21和SADQ-Hospital)和抑郁的视觉模拟情绪量表(VAMS);医院焦虑抑郁量表-焦虑子量表(HADS-A);改良的感知压力量表(mPSS)用于慢性压力。研究报告的大多数显著治疗效果来自于对失语症患者使用的弱心理测量支持措施。结论:用于评估治疗引起的失语症患者抑郁、焦虑和慢性应激变化的措施在不同的研究中差异很大。这种差异可能源于缺乏针对该人群的有效测量方法和/或缺乏衡量失语症患者心理健康结果的最佳实践建议。考虑到这些局限性,在使用当前的测量方法解释治疗研究时,需要谨慎,并且迫切需要为失语症患者专门设计和测试的有效可靠的自我报告测量方法。
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
Aphasiology
Aphasiology 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
15.00%
发文量
74
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Aphasiology is concerned with all aspects of language impairment and disability and related disorders resulting from brain damage. It provides a forum for the exchange of knowledge and the dissemination of current research and expertise in all aspects of aphasia and related topics, from all disciplinary perspectives. Aphasiology includes papers on clinical, psychological, linguistic, social and neurological perspectives of aphasia, and attracts contributions and readership from researchers and practitioners in speech and language pathology, neurology, neuropsychology and neurolinguistics. Studies using a wide range of empirical methods, including experimental, clinical and single case studies, surveys and physical investigations are published in addition to regular features including major reviews, clinical fora, case studies, and book reviews.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信