Psychometric analysis of the Swedish panic disorder severity scale and its self-report version.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Psychometric analysis of the Swedish panic disorder severity scale and its self-report version.
Authors:	Svensson, Martin, Nilsson, Thomas, Johansson, Håkan, Viborg, Gardar, Perrin, Sean, Sandell, Rolf
Source:	Nordic Journal of Psychiatry. Jan2019, Vol. 73 Issue 1, p58-63. 6p.
Subjects:	Panic disorders, Brief psychotherapy, Psychodynamic psychotherapy, Factor structure, Therapeutics, Randomized controlled trials
Abstract:	Background: Panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia (PDA or PD, respectively), is a major public health problem. After having established a PD diagnosis based on the DSM or the ICD systems, the Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) is the most widely used interview-based instrument for assessing disorder severity. There is also a self-report version of the instrument (PDSS-SR); both exist in a Swedish translation but their psychometric properties remain untested. Methods: We studied 221 patients with PD/PDA recruited to a randomized controlled preference trial of cognitive-behavioral and brief panic-focused psychodynamic psychotherapy. In addition to PDSS and PDSS-SR the participants completed self-reports including the Clinical Outcome in Routine Evaluation -- Outcome Measure, Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Sheehan Disability Scale, Bodily Sensations Questionnaire and the Mobility Inventory for Agoraphobia. Results: PDSS and PDSS-SR possessed excellent psychometric properties (internal consistency, test--retest reliability) and convergent validity. A single factor structure for both versions was not confirmed. In terms of clinical utility, the PDSS had very high inter-rater reliability and correspondence with PD assessed via structured diagnostic interview. Both versions were sensitive to the effects of PD-focused treatment, although subjects scored systematically lower on the self-report version. Conclusions: The study confirmed the reliability and validity of the Swedish versions of PDSS and PDSS-SR. Both versions were highly sensitive to the effects of two PD-focused treatments and can be used both in clinical and research settings. However, further investigation of the factor structures of both the PDSS and PDSS-SR is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Nordic Journal of Psychiatry is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection

Description
Abstract:	Background: Panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia (PDA or PD, respectively), is a major public health problem. After having established a PD diagnosis based on the DSM or the ICD systems, the Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) is the most widely used interview-based instrument for assessing disorder severity. There is also a self-report version of the instrument (PDSS-SR); both exist in a Swedish translation but their psychometric properties remain untested. Methods: We studied 221 patients with PD/PDA recruited to a randomized controlled preference trial of cognitive-behavioral and brief panic-focused psychodynamic psychotherapy. In addition to PDSS and PDSS-SR the participants completed self-reports including the Clinical Outcome in Routine Evaluation -- Outcome Measure, Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Sheehan Disability Scale, Bodily Sensations Questionnaire and the Mobility Inventory for Agoraphobia. Results: PDSS and PDSS-SR possessed excellent psychometric properties (internal consistency, test--retest reliability) and convergent validity. A single factor structure for both versions was not confirmed. In terms of clinical utility, the PDSS had very high inter-rater reliability and correspondence with PD assessed via structured diagnostic interview. Both versions were sensitive to the effects of PD-focused treatment, although subjects scored systematically lower on the self-report version. Conclusions: The study confirmed the reliability and validity of the Swedish versions of PDSS and PDSS-SR. Both versions were highly sensitive to the effects of two PD-focused treatments and can be used both in clinical and research settings. However, further investigation of the factor structures of both the PDSS and PDSS-SR is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	08039488
DOI:	10.1080/08039488.2018.1554699