See attached. Thanks
espond to two people, Kindra and Gabriel by comparing your assessment tool to theirs. 2 citations 2, references.
Kindra’s post : Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomology
Assessment tools are used frequently in mental health for a variety of reasons. These important tools can be used to screen for the presence of mental health disorders, aid in formulating diagnoses, and to assess for severity of mental health symptoms (Psychological Assessment Tools for Mental Health, 2020).
I found this to be an interesting and useful assessment tool used to essentially evaluate the severity of depressive symptoms (“Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology”, 2020). There is a 30-item inventory, and the one in which this discussion post will focus on is the 16-item inventory, or otherwise known as the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology. This assessment tool can also be used to screen for depression, but the main purpose is to assess severity according to criteria put forth by the American Psychiatry Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders –5th edition to aid in diagnosis of major depressive disorder (“Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology”, 2020). This inventory assesses nine different criteria for depression.
When measuring validity and reliability, the QIDS proves reliable in comparison to other widely used assessment tools. To demonstrate efficacy, out of 434 participants that were issued the QIDS, the scores obtained were comparable in relation to other reliable testing scales such as the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (“Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology”, 2020). Many randomized controlled testing trials have been conducted in relation to the QIDS, and the results continue to prove that the QIDS features higher sensitivity, particularly when examining the lower range of scoring. This assessment tool continues to prove reliability and consistency compared to other screening tools with patients in settings such as outpatient, new inpatient admissions, and in those with chronic depression according to the Cronbach’s alpha; thus, showing high internal consistency (“Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology”, 2020). The psychometric properties are very good and comparable to the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (Carmody et al., 2006).
The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomology is a reliable scale currently used in research and to manage patients suffering from depression. This assessment tool can be appropriately used to evaluate and monitor the severity of depression before a patient begins treatment, during and post-treatment. In looking at particular age groups in which the test can be effectively utilized, the adult population has been extensively researched. The psychometric properties are very good, and the tool is proven reliable for this particular age group. I came upon an article during my research that discussed utilizing this inventory in the adolescent population, which is not as well researched as other assessment tools such as the Children’s Depressive Rating Scale. According to a sample of 140 adolescents in outpatient treatment, the QIDS proved to be reasonably effective, and was most discriminating at moderate levels of depression; compared the CDRS‐R, which was the most discriminating at very high and low levels of depression (Bernstein et al., 2010).
Assessment tools with good psychometric properties can be sensitive enough to discriminate between placebo effects and antidepressants (Alarcon & Preskorn, 2004), and should therefor be considered in research trials of psychopharmacologic medications.
Assessment inventories and other screening tools can be helpful to aid in diagnosis of mental health disorders, and have been proven useful in measuring the level of severity in various mental health disorders. In order for a test to be reliable, it must have psychometric properties proving the screening tool not only reliable, but a valid measuring tool as well. There are many different assessment screening tools that measure diagnostic criteria for major depressive symptoms. Research has shown that the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology is a reliable tool in comparison to the widely used Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology is primarily used in the adult population, although it has been shown effective according to several studies in the adolescent age range as well, and is potentially another good option to the Children’s Depressive Rating Scale. These tools can be utilized prior to treatment, during and after to measure the severity of symptoms. No matter which tool is chosen by the provider, it must be reliable and valid.
Alarcon, R.D., & Preskorn, S.H. (2004). Antidepressants: Past, present and future. Berlin: Springer.
Bernstein, I. H., Rush, A. J., Trivedi, M. H., Hughes, C. W., Macleod, L., Witte, B. P., Jain, S., Mayes, T. L., & Emslie, G. J. (2010). Psychometric properties of the quick inventory of depressive symptomatology in adolescents. International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 19(4), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.321
Carmody, T. J., Rush, A. J., Bernstein, I. H., Brannan, S., Husain, M. M., & Trivedi, M. H. (2006). Making clinicians lives easier: guidance on use of the QIDS self-report in place of the MADRS. Journal of affective disorders, 95(1-3), 115–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2006.03.024
Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS) and Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS). (2020). http://ids-qids.org/
Psychological Assessment Tools for Mental Health. (2020). https://www.psychologytools.com/download-scales-and-measures/
The quality of well-being scale (QWS) is an assessment tool or instrument designed to be used and applied to measure the quality of life by calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALY) as it pertains to the expression of health outcomes (Wingler & Hector, 2015). It consists of two main subcategories: (1) function scales and (2) table of symptoms and problem complexes. There are also two versions of the QWS, which are quality well-being (interview) and quality of well-being self-administered (QWB-SA). The most commonly used is the QWB-SA, as it replaces the shortcomings of the QWS. The QWB-SA consists of 71 items, which yield a utility score between 0.0, representing death, and 1.0 representing perfect health (Torvinen et al., 2016).
QWS can be used when there is a need to determine whether environments built have impacted the quality of life for those who may benefit from federally qualified health centers (Wingler & Hector, 2015). If these centers have not helped individuals in terms of good quality life, then there is a need for adjustments to realize positive health outcomes.
It is worth noting that QWS can also track responses to treatment in individuals who struggle with depression (Dickerson, Feeny, Clarke, MacMillan, & Lynch, 2018). The results of the QWS can enlighten providers as to whether treatment regimens need to be altered or maintained. In unstable schizophrenics, QWB-SA was used to assess their quality of life after receiving treatment (Montemagni, Frieri, & Rocca, 2016).
Assessment tools are vital in the initial phase of treatment, as it identifies problem areas for psychotherapeutic focus and also contributes to the determination of differential diagnoses or contribute to case formulation (Wheeler, 2014). Providers need to utilize them for appropriate care in the treatment of patients.
Dickerson, J. F., Feeny, D. H., Clarke, G. N., MacMillan, A. L., & Lynch, F. L. (2018). Evidence on the longitudinal construct validity of major generic and utility measures of health-related quality of life in teens with depression. Quality of Life Research, 27(2), 447-454. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1728-9
Montemagni, C., Frieri, T., & Rocca, P. (2016). Second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics in schizophrenia: Patient functioning and quality of life. Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 12, 917-929. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.2147/NDT.S88632
Torvinen, S., Bergius, S., Roine, R., Lodenius, L., Sintonen, H., & Taari, K. (2016). USE OF PATIENT ASSESSED HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE INSTRUMENTS IN PROSTATE CANCER RESEARCH: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 2002-15. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 32(3), 97-106. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1017/S0266462316000118
Wheeler, K. (Ed.). (2014). Psychotherapy for the advanced practice psychiatric nurse: A how-to guide for evidence-based practice. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.
Wingler, D., & Hector, R. (2015). Demonstrating the effect of the built environment on staff health-related quality of life in ambulatory care environments. HERD : Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 8(4), 25-40. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1177/1937586715573745