IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0097183.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Screening Instruments to Predict Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

Author

Listed:
  • Joanne Mouthaan
  • Marit Sijbrandij
  • Johannes B Reitsma
  • Berthold P R Gersons
  • Miranda Olff

Abstract

Background: Following traumatic exposure, a proportion of trauma victims develops posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Early PTSD risk screening requires sensitive instruments to identify everyone at risk for developing PTSD in need of diagnostic follow-up. Aims: This study compares the accuracy of the 4-item SPAN, 10-item Trauma Screening Questionnaire (TSQ) and 22-item Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) in predicting chronic PTSD at a minimum sensitivity of 80%. Method: Injury patients admitted to a level-I trauma centre (N = 311) completed the instruments at a median of 23 days and were clinically assessed for PTSD at 6 months. Areas under the curve and specificities at 80% sensitivity were compared between instruments. Results: Areas under the curve in all instruments were adequate (SPAN: 0.83; TSQ: 0.82; IES-R: 0.83) with no significant differences. At 80% sensitivity, specificities were 64% for SPAN, 59% for TSQ and 72% for IES-R. Conclusion: The SPAN, TSQ and IES-R show similar accuracy in early detection of individuals at risk for PTSD, despite differences in number of items. The modest specificities and low positive predictive values found for all instruments could lead to relatively many false positive cases, when applied in clinical practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Joanne Mouthaan & Marit Sijbrandij & Johannes B Reitsma & Berthold P R Gersons & Miranda Olff, 2014. "Comparing Screening Instruments to Predict Posttraumatic Stress Disorder," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-8, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0097183
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097183
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0097183
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0097183&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0097183?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0097183. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.