Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Is the beck anxiety inventory a good tool to assess the severity of anxiety? A primary care study in The Netherlands study of depression and anxiety (NESDA)

Is the beck anxiety inventory a good tool to assess the severity of anxiety? A primary care study... Background: Appropriate management of anxiety disorders in primary care requires clinical assessment and monitoring of the severity of the anxiety. This study focuses on the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) as a severity indicator for anxiety in primary care patients with different anxiety disorders (social phobia, panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, agoraphobia or generalized anxiety disorder), depressive disorders or no disorder (controls). Methods: Participants were 1601 primary care patients participating in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA). Regression analyses were used to compare the mean BAI scores of the different diagnostic groups and to correct for age and gender. Results: Patients with any anxiety disorder had a significantly higher mean score than the controls. A significantly higher score was found for patients with panic disorder and agoraphobia compared to patients with agoraphobia only or social phobia only. BAI scores in patients with an anxiety disorder with a co-morbid anxiety disorder and in patients with an anxiety disorder with a co-morbid depressive disorder were significantly higher than BAI scores in patients with an anxiety disorder alone or patients with a depressive disorder alone. Depressed and anxious patients did not differ significantly in their mean scores. Conclusions: The results suggest that the BAI may be used as a severity indicator of anxiety in primary care patients with different anxiety disorders. However, because the instrument seems to reflect the severity of depression as well, it is not a suitable instrument to discriminate between anxiety and depression in a primary care population. Background supplement to the diagnosis made by their general practi- In primary care, many patients present with anxiety symp- tioner and as evidence that their problems are taken ser- toms but these are seldom systematically assessed [1]. To iously [5]. Furthermore, when questionnaires to assess improve anxiety management, assessment of the severity severity are used, higher severity scores are related to bet- of the anxiety (and subsequent monitoring) is recom- ter care (i.e. higher prescription rates of antidepressant mended by researchers and also in clinical guidelines medication and increased referral to secondary care) [6]. [2-4]. With regard to depression, the use of severity indica- Moreover, in some countries incentives are offered when a tors in primary care is supported by the results of studies validated instrument is used at the start of and during the showing that patients value the use of questionnaires as a treatment of patients diagnosed with depression [7]. For similar reasons the use of severity scales to assess anxiety symptoms in primary care might be advocated. However, * Correspondence: amuntingh@trimbos.nl we first have to determine which questionnaires can be Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction (Trimbos Institute), PO Box 725, Utrecht, 3500 AS, The Netherlands Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © 2011 Muntingh et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Muntingh et al. BMC Family Practice 2011, 12:66 Page 2 of 6 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66 used as severity indicators in primary care and what their higher than the BAI scores of healthy controls or characteristics are. depressed patients. Patients with a panic disorder were As anxiety disorders differ in type and symptoms, expected to score higher than patients in the other anxiety assessing the severity of anxiety in general may be more disorder groups. We also expected patients with co- difficult than assessing the severity of depression. General morbid disorders to score higher than patients with no rating scales may not be specific enough to assess the co-morbidity. severity of a specific anxiety disorder (i.e. panic disorder or generalized anxiety disorder). However, extensive test- Methods ing for different forms of anxiety is also not feasible dur- Participants ing the short consultations in primary care. Considering The participants in this study were recruited for a large its brevity, simplicity, and presumed ability to measure cohort study: the Netherlands Study of Depression and general anxiety, the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) [8] Anxiety (NESDA) [20]. From the baseline sub-sample of might be a good candidate for use as a severity indicator. 1601 primary care patients in the NESDA cohort we Since its development, the BAI has been widely used in selected all patients with a current anxiety or depressive clinical research in mental health care, mainly as a mea- disorder according to the WHO Composite Interview sure of general anxiety [9]. Diagnostic Instrument (CIDI lifetime version 2.1) and However, the BAI has been disputed for its focus on patients with no history of anxiety or depression. DSM- psychophysiological symptoms linked to panic. The IV classifications of diagnoses within the past month results of several studies have found that patients with were used to assure present symptomatology. Patients panic disorder score higher on the BAI than patients with a history of anxiety or depression, but no current with for example generalized anxiety disorder [10-13]. diagnosis, were excluded from the analysis. The mean Either way, patients with panic disorder and patients with BAI scores of patients with an anxiety disorder (N = other anxiety disorders have been found to score signifi- 276) and patients with a depressive disorder (N = 155), cantly higher than patients with no anxiety disorder were compared to the mean BAI scores of a control [14-16]. Remarkably, no study has specifically investi- group of patients with no history of anxiety or depres- gated the co-morbidity of anxiety disorders and how this sive disorders (N= 513). The NESDA study protocol was influences BAI scores, even though co-morbidity occurs approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the VU frequently [17]. Furthermore, none of the previous BAI University Medical Centre. studies have focused on primary care populations. Another presumed quality of the BAI is its ability to dis- Procedures criminate anxiety from depression [8]. Even though in pri- The primary care sample in the NESDA study was mary care this might be of less importance than in recruited between September 2004 and February 2007 research settings, it is important to know whether the BAI through 65 general practitioners situated in different only measures anxiety or whether it is also sensitive to parts of the Netherlands (Amsterdam, Groningen, and depressive symptomatology. The results of earlier studies Leiden). A screening questionnaire was sent to 23750 suggest a substantial overlap of the BAI with depressive patients between 18 and 65 years of age who had con- symptoms, illustrated by a moderate correlation between sulted their general practitioner in the past four months. the BAI and depression scales [18]. In terms of differences This questionnaire consisted of the Kessler-10 (K-10) in the BAI scores of anxious and depressed patients, a [21], which screens for affective disorders, supplemented large difference was found in the original validation study with five questions about anxiety (Extended K-10, or [8], but in two later studies no difference was found. How- EK-10). The EK-10 showed adequate psychometric ever, in these studies the authors questioned the results properties, with a sensitivity of .90 and a specificity of because of limitations in the methodology [15,19]. .75 to detect anxiety or depressive disorders [22]. Parti- In the present study, we investigated whether the BAI cipants who returned the EK-10 (N = 10706, 45.9%), reflects the severity of anxiety in primary care patients scored positively (N = 4592, 43%), gave informed con- with different anxiety disorders. The mean scores of sev- sent (N = 3420, 74%) and could be contacted (N = 2995, eral patient groups were compared: healthy controls, 88%) had a telephone screening interview based on patients with one anxiety disorder, patients with multiple short-form sections of the CIDI (major depression, dys- anxiety disorders, patients with one depressive disorder, thymia, social phobia, panic disorder, agoraphobia, and and patients with co-morbid anxiety-depression. The diag- generalized anxiety disorder). nostic groups were separated into patients with no co- Patients who were unwilling to be interviewed (N = morbidity and patients with co-morbidity, to ensure 267, 9%), were not fluent in Dutch (N = 86, 3%) or were homogeneity of the groups. It was hypothesized that the being treated in a mental health organization (N =155, BAI scores of patients with an anxiety disorder would be 5%), were excluded. All other patients who screened Muntingh et al. BMC Family Practice 2011, 12:66 Page 3 of 6 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66 positive on the telephone screening (N = 1162, 47%) and Results a random sample of patients who screened negative Descriptive statistics (N = 924) were contacted for a face-to-face interview. The average age of the participants was 45.9 years and As 437 (24%) participants were unwilling to participate the majority of the patients were female (68.8%). Almost and39(2%)could notbecontacted or were notfluent one third of the participants had been diagnosed with in Dutch, 1610 primary care patients were finally an anxiety disorder in the past month (N = 493, 30.8%). included in the NESDA study and completed the base- Table 1 shows the age, gender and DSM-IV diagnosis of line assessment. More details about the recruitment pro- the participants. cess are described elsewhere [20]. Of the 1610 NESDA Many patients with a diagnosis of an anxiety disorder participants, 9 patients who did not complete the BAI had at least one co-morbid anxiety disorder. The per- were excluded from the analysis. The present sample centage of patients with a co-morbid anxiety disorder therefore consisted of 1601 patients, 617 of whom had varied over the diagnostic groups: anxiety co-morbidity at least one current diagnosis of anxiety or depression, was highest in patients with panic disorder or general- 471 had a history of anxiety or depression, and 513 ized anxiety disorder (54%) followed by patients with were controls with no history of anxiety or depression. social phobia (51%) and patients with agoraphobia alone (35%). Almost half (41%) of the patients with an anxiety Assessment disorder also suffered from a depressive disorder, while Composite Interview Diagnostic Instrument (CIDI) 62% of the patients with a depressive disorder were also The CIDI (version 2.1) is an interview that classifies psy- diagnosed with an anxiety disorder. chiatric diagnoses according to the DSM-IV [23]. It is a widely used interview, which has good interrater reliability Anxiety disorders [24], high test-retest reliability [25], and high validity for Table 2 shows the mean BAI scores of the control the classification of depressive and anxiety disorders group (no history of anxiety or depression), patients [26,27]. CIDI interviews were conducted by specifically with one anxiety disorder and patients with multiple trained research assistants. The CIDI classifies diagnoses that were present at some point in the patients’ life (life- Table 1 Age, gender and current DSM-IV diagnoses of time diagnoses), in the past half year and in the past participants (N = 1601) month. N% Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) All participants 1601 The BAI is a short list describing 21 anxiety symptoms Age [range] 45.8 [18-65] such as “wobbliness in legs”, “scared” and “fear of losing Female gender 1102 68.8% control” [8]. Respondents are asked to rate how much Any anxiety disorder 493 each of these symptoms bothered them in the past week, Age [range] 45.7 [18-65] on a scale ranging from 0 (not at all) tot 3 (severely, I Female gender 346 70.2% could barely stand it). The total score has a minimum of 0 Social phobia* 68 13.8% and a maximum of 63. The scale was validated in a sample Panic disorder with agoraphobia* 42 8.5% of 160 psychiatric outpatients with various anxiety and Panic without agoraphobia* 28 5.7% depressive disorders, diagnosed with the Structured Clini- Agoraphobia* 42 8.5% cal Interview for DSM-III [28]. The BAI has a high inter- Generalized anxiety disorder* 34 6.9% nal consistency (Cronbachs a = .92) and a test-retest >1 anxiety disorder 76 15.4% reliability over one week of .75 [8]. Co-morbid anxiety & depression 203 41.2% Any depressive disorder 327 Statistical analysis Age [Range] 46.2 [18-64] All analyses were conducted in SPSS version 15.0 [29]. Female gender 223 68.2% Regression analysis was performed to examine differ- Dysthymia* 8 2.4% ences between group scores. The analyses were corrected Major depression* 101 30.9% for age and gender, because age was differentially distrib- >1 depressive disorder 15 4.6% uted over the diagnostic groups and because female Co-morbid depression & anxiety 203 62.1% patients scored significantly higher than male patients in the total sample. All variables were entered simulta- Patients with a history of anxiety or depression 471 29.4% neously into the analysis. The analyses were repeated Controls (no history of anxiety or depression) 513 32.0% with different groups as the reference group to be able to *Disorder with no co-morbid anxiety disorder or co-morbid depressive disorder compare all groups. Muntingh et al. BMC Family Practice 2011, 12:66 Page 4 of 6 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66 Table 2 Mean BAI scores of patients with different high scores of patients with a panic disorder and agora- anxiety disorders (with no co-morbid depression) and phobia might thus be explained by the severity of this controls specific disorder. In other studies in which the BAI was used, greater differences were found between the group Diagnosis (past month) N M SD of patients with a panic disorder and other diagnostic Controls 513 4.09 5.06 groups [11-13,30,31]. One reason for this discrepancy in Social phobia* 68 12.97 9.03 findings might be the setting in which studies took Panic disorder with agoraphobia* 42 16.00 11.02 place. Most of the previous studies were conducted in Panic disorder without agoraphobia* 28 13.04 6.61 treatment centres for anxiety disorders, while the parti- cipants in the present study were actively recruited in Agoraphobia* 42 11.62 8.51 primary care, also including patients with previously Generalized anxiety disorder* 34 13.15 5.67 undiagnosed anxiety or depression. It is likely that more Multiple anxiety disorders 76 18.54 8.54 primary care patients present with less severe forms of *Single anxiety disorder diagnosis panic disorder. Indeed, the mean score of patients with panic disorder in the present study seems to be substan- anxiety disorders. Patients with a co-morbid depression tially lower than the scores reported in studies with sec- were excluded from this analysis (n = 203). ondary care patients [11,13,30,31] coming closer to the Patients with an anxiety disorder scored significantly scores of patients with a panic disorder in an epidemio- higher than the controls (p < 0.001) and patients with logical sample [32]. Furthermore, in the analysis of the multiple anxiety disorders scored considerably higher than present study, patient groups were specifically selected all other groups (p < .05). The mean BAI score of patients on the basis of (the absence of) co-morbidity, thus with a panic disorder and agoraphobia was significantly resulting in pure diagnostic groups. This may have pro- higher than the mean score of patients with social phobia vided a more accurate estimate of the mean scores of (p = 0.03) or agoraphobia alone (p < 0.001). specific patient groups. Beck and colleagues [8] claimed that the BAI measures Anxiety and depressive disorders anxiety while minimizing its overlap with depression but Table 3 shows that the score of depressed patients this was not sustained by the results of the present study. approximates the score of anxious patients (p = .41). For practical purposes, this is a two-sided finding. The Patients with co-morbid anxiety-depression scored sig- BAI appears to be robust for depression, but not entirely nificantly higher than patients with either an anxiety dis- specific for anxiety in a primary care population. These order or a depressive disorder alone (p < 0.001). findings are consistent with the results of earlier studies that compared the total BAI scores of depressed and Discussion anxious patients [15,19]. Steer and colleagues relate their The results of our study show that primary care patients findings to the low co-morbidity rate in their sample, but with different anxiety disorders score significantly higher this argument does notholdupinthe presentstudy. than patients with no anxiety or depressive disorder. There could be several explanations why depressed These results suggest that the BAI does reflect general patients score almost as high as anxiety patients. First of anxiety in primary care patients. With regard to the dif- all, sub-threshold anxiety experienced by patients with a ferent diagnostic groups of anxiety disorders, we did depressive disorder may have increased their anxiety partly confirm the strong focus of the BAI on panic scores. Sub-threshold anxiety was not assessed in the pre- symptoms [10,11]. Patients with a panic disorder and sent study, but previous research has shown that a sub- agoraphobia scored significantly higher than patients stantial number of depressed patients also experience with agoraphobia alone or social phobia. However, some form of (sub-threshold) anxiety [33,34]. Secondly, patients with a panic disorder without agoraphobia did somatoform disorders were not classified with the CIDI not score significantly higher than the other groups. The interview, while these disorders are prevalent in primary care patients with a depressive disorder, and can also Table 3 Mean BAI scores of patients with a depressive cause the physiological symptoms described in the BAI disorder, an anxiety disorder and co-morbid anxiety- [35].Athirdexplanation mightbethatanxiety and depression depression share a common underlying factor, often referred to as ‘negative affect’ [34,36]. There is longstand- Diagnosis (past month) N M SD ing debate about this question, growing stronger due to Depressive disorder 109 13.34 8.72 the pressure of the upcoming publication of the DSM-V Anxiety disorder 214 13.94 8.69 and fuelled by the considerable prevalence of co-morbidity Co-morbid anxiety-depression 203 21.89 10.95 between anxiety and depression and the symptom overlap Muntingh et al. BMC Family Practice 2011, 12:66 Page 5 of 6 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66 Author details on anxiety and depression scales. With regard to this third Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction (Trimbos Institute), PO hypothesis, the sensitivity of the BAI for shared sympto- Box 725, Utrecht, 3500 AS, The Netherlands. EMGO Institute for Health and matology would be more of a quality than a deficiency. Care Research (EMGO+), PO Box 7057, Amsterdam, 1007 MB, The Netherlands. Department of General Practice, VU University Medical Centre, Fourthly, total scores for self-report questionnaires, in gen- Van der Boechorststraat 7, Amsterdam, 1081 BT, The Netherlands. eral, might not be precise enough to measure difficult con- Department of Developmental, Clinical and Cross-cultural Psychology, structs such as anxiety and depression. There is some Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, Tilburg, 5000 LE, The Netherlands. Academic Psychiatry Department GGZ Breburg, Lage Witsiebaan 4, Tilburg, evidence that the BAI is able to discriminate between anxi- 5042 DA, The Netherlands. Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, PO ety and depression when items are weighted, as happens in Box 9555 Leiden, 2300 RB, The Netherlands. Department of Psychiatry, factor analysis [19]. However, weighting the items would Leiden University Medical Centre, PO Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands. Department of Psychiatry, VU University Medical Centre, A.J. complicate the use of the BAI to such an extent that its Ernststraat 1187 Amsterdam, 1081 HL, The Netherlands. Department of use would not be feasible in primary care. Psychiatry, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30.001 Groningen, A strength of this study is the large size of this pri- 9700 RB, The Netherlands. mary care sample, diagnosed with a valid interview iden- Authors’ contributions tifying five different anxiety disorders and two AM participated in the design of the study, performed the statistical analyses depressive disorders. Because of the high prevalence of and drafted the manuscript. CFC, HvM, PS and AvB participated in the design of the study, helped drafting the manuscript and critically co-morbidity in patients with anxiety and depressive dis- commented on the manuscript. BP obtained funding for and designed the orders, such a large sample is needed to compare (sub-) NESDA study, supervised data collection and critically commented on the groups of patients with a specific anxiety or depressive manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. disorder. However, even in this large sample, patients Authors’ information with onespecificanxiety disorder arescarce, limiting AM is a PhD student working on a dissertation about collaborative care the power of the analyses. Another limitation of the for anxiety disorders in primary care. CFC is full professor of Social Psychiatry and Principal Investigator of several randomized clinical trials on analysis was the skewed distribution of the scores. collaborative care. HvM is associate professor of general practice, he Although we considered performing a log transforma- participated in several national guideline committees on mental health, tion, we decided to use raw scores to facilitate the inter- and is a practising GP. PS is professor in Clinical Psychology and was chairman of the Dutch Committee Multidisciplinary Guidelines for Anxiety pretability of the scores in clinical practice. Disorders in Mental Health Care. BP is Principal Investigator of the NESDA study, and professor of Psychiatric Epidemiology. AvB is professor Conclusions Evidence-based Psychiatry. He performed meta-analyses, systematic (Cochrane) reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCT’s) in patients The results indicate that the BAI reflects the severity of with anxiety disorders. anxiety in primary care patients with different anxiety disorders. The use of questionnaires such as the BAI may Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. improve the care that is provided and is desirable from the viewpoint of primary care patients [5]. However, as Received: 23 March 2011 Accepted: 4 July 2011 Published: 4 July 2011 the use of questionnaires in primary care is not common practice, this should be stimulated by means of guide- References 1. Bakker IM, van Marwijk HW, Terluin B, Anema JR, van MW, Stalman WA: lines, training and education. Further research will be Training GP’s to use a minimal intervention for stress-related mental needed to evaluate the usefulness of the BAI in monitor- disorders with sick leave (MISS): Effects on performance Results of the MISS ing the severity of anxiety during treatment and over project; a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Patient Education Counseling 2010, 78:206-2011. time. In addition, researchers should establish criteria for 2. Roy-Byrne PP, Wagner AW, Schraufnagel TJ: Understanding and treating improvement and remission according to the BAI score, panic disorder in the primary care setting. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry in primary care patients. When questionnaires such as 2005, 66(Suppl 4):16-22. 3. Muntingh ADT, van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, Van Marwijk HWJ, Spinhoven P, the BAI are used within a framework of care, such as Assendelft WJJ, de Waal MW, Hakkaart-van RL, Ader HJ, Van Balkom AJLM: case management or collaborative care, they will opti- Collaborative stepped care for anxiety disorders in primary care: aims mally help to improve the treatment of primary care and design of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Health Services Research 2009, 9:159. patients with anxiety disorders [3,37,38]. 4. McIntosh A, Cohen A, Turnbull N, Esmonde L, Dennis P, Eatock J, Feetam C, Hague J, Hughes I, Kelly J, Kosky N, Lear G, Owens L, Ratcliffe J, Salkovskis P: Clinical guidelines and evidence review for panic disorder and Acknowledgements generalised anxiety disorder. Sheffield, University of Sheffield/London: The infrastructure for the NESDA study (http://www.nesda.nl) is funded National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care; 2010. through the Geestkracht programme of the Netherlands Organization for 5. Dowrick C, Leydon GM, McBride A, Howe A, Burgess H, Clarke P, Maisey S, Health Research and Development (Zon-Mw, grant number 10-000-1002), Kendrick T: Patients’ and doctors’ views on depression severity and is supported by participating universities and mental health care questionnaires incentivised in UK quality and outcomes framework: organizations (VU University Medical Centre, GGZ inGeest, Arkin, Leiden qualitative study. Br Med J 2009, 338:b663. University Medical Centre, GGZ Rivierduinen, University Medical Centre 6. Kendrick T, Dowrick C, McBride A, Howe A, Clarke P, Maisey S, Moore M, Groningen, Lentis, GGZ Friesland, GGZ Drenthe, Scientific Institute for Quality Smith PW: Management of depression in UK general practice in relation of Healthcare (IQ healthcare), Netherlands Institute for Health Services to scores on depression severity questionnaires: analysis of medical Research (NIVEL) and Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction record data. Br Med J 2009, 338:b750. (Trimbos Institute). Muntingh et al. BMC Family Practice 2011, 12:66 Page 6 of 6 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66 7. British Medical Association, NHS Employers: Quality and Outcomes 28. Spitzer RL, Williams JBW: Instruction manual for the Structured Clinical framework guidance for GMS contract 2009/10. Delivering investment in Interview for the DSM-III (SCID) New York: New York State Psychiatric general practice. 2009, 3rd revision. Institute, Biometrics Research Department; 1983. 8. Beck AT, Epstein N, Brown G, Steer RA: An inventory for measuring clinical 29. SPSS Inc.: SPSS 15.0 for Windows. Chicago; 2006. anxiety: psychometric properties. Journal of Consulting and Clinical 30. Steer RA, Beck AT: Generalized anxiety and panic disorders: Response to Psychology 1988, 56:893-897. Cox, Cohen, Direnfeld, and Swinson (1996). Behaviour Research and 9. Piotrowski C: The status of the Beck Anxiety Inventory in contemporary Therapy 1996, 34:955-957. research. Psychol Rep 1999, 85:261-262. 31. Beck AT, Steer RA: Relationship between the Beck Anxiety Inventory and 10. Cox BJ, Cohen E, Direnfeld DM, Swinson RP: Does the Beck Anxiety the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale with anxious outpatients. J Anxiety Inventory measure anything beyond panic attack symptoms? Behaviour Disord 1991, 5:213-223. Research and Therapy 1996, 34(11-12):949-954. 32. Hoyer J, Becker ES, Neumer S, Soeder U, Margraf J: Screening for anxiety in 11. Leyfer OT, Ruberg JL, Woodruff-Borden J: Examination of the utility of the an epidemiological sample: predictive accuracy of questionnaires. Beck Anxiety Inventory and its factors as a screener for anxiety J Anxiety Disord 2002, 16:113-134. disorders. J Anxiety Disord 2006, 20:444-458. 33. Roy-Byrne PP, Stang P, Wittchen HU, Ustun B, Walters EE, Kessler RC: 12. Beck AT, Steer RA: Relationship between the Beck Anxiety Inventory and Lifetime panic-depression comorbidity in the National Comorbidity the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale with anxious outpatients. J Anxiety Survey. Association with symptoms, impairment, course and help- Disord 1991, 213-223. seeking. British Journal of Psychiatry 2000, 176:229-235. 13. Fydrich T, Dowdall D, Chambless DL: Reliability and validity of the Beck 34. Lowe B, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Mussell M, Schellberg D, Kroenke K: Anxiety Inventory. J Anxiety Disord 1992, 6:55-61. Depression, anxiety and somatization in primary care: syndrome overlap 14. Kabacoff RI, Segal DL, Hersen M, Van Hasselt VB: Psychometric properties and functional impairment. General Hospital Psychiatry 2008, 30:191-199. and diagnostic utility of the Beck Anxiety Inventory and the State-Trait 35. Mergl R, Seidscheck I, Allgaier AK, Moller HJ, Hegerl U, Henkel V: Anxiety Inventory with older adult psychiatric outpatients. J Anxiety Depressive, anxiety, and somatoform disorders in primary care: Disord 1997, 11:33-47. prevalence and recognition. Depression Anxiety 2007, 24:185-195. 15. Steer RA, Ranieri WF, Beck AT, Clark DA: Further evidence for the validity 36. Brown TA, Barlow DH: A proposal for a dimensional classification system of the Beck Anxiety Inventory with psychiatric outpatients. J Anxiety based on the shared features of the DSM-IV anxiety and mood Disord 1993, 195-205. disorders: implications for assessment and treatment. Psychological 16. Wetherell JL, Gatz M: The Beck Anxiety Inventory in Older Adults With Assessment 2009, 21:256-271. Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral 37. Gilbody S, Sheldon T, Wessely S: Should we screen for depression? Br Med Assessment 2005, 27:17-24. J 2006, 332:1027-1030. 17. De Graaf R, Bijl RV, Smit F, Vollebergh WA, Spijker J: Risk factors for 12- 38. Roy-Byrne P, Craske MG, Sullivan G, Rose RD, Edlund MJ, Lang AJ, month comorbidity of mood, anxiety, and substance use disorders: Bystritsky A, Welch SS, Chavira DA, Golinelli D, Campbell-Sills L, findings from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Sherbourne CD, Stein MB: Delivery of evidence-based treatment for Study. American Journal of Psychiatry 2002, 159:620-629. multiple anxiety disorders in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. 18. Ferguson RJ: Using the Beck Anxiety Inventory in Primary Care. In Journal of the American Medical Association 2010, 303:1921-1928. Handbook of psychological assessments in primary care settings. Edited by: Maruish ME. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2000:509-535. Pre-publication history 19. Hewitt PL, Norton GR: The Beck Anxiety Inventory: A psychometric The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: analysis. Psychological Assessment 1993, 5:408-412. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66/prepub 20. Penninx BW, Beekman AT, Smit JH, Zitman FG, Nolen WA, Spinhoven P, doi:10.1186/1471-2296-12-66 Cuijpers P, de Jong PJ, van Marwijk HW, Assendelft WJ, van der MK, Cite this article as: Muntingh et al.: Is the beck anxiety inventory a good Verhaak P, Wensing M, de Graaf R, Hoogendijk WJ, Ormel J, van Dyck R: tool to assess the severity of anxiety? A primary care study in The The Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA): rationale, Netherlands study of depression and anxiety (NESDA). BMC Family objectives and methods. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Practice 2011 12:66. Research 2008, 17:121-140. 21. Kessler RC, Andrews G, Colpe LJ, Hiripi E, Mroczek DK, Normand SL, Walters EE, Zaslavsky AM: Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychological Medicine 2002, 32:959-976. 22. Donker T, Comijs H, Cuijpers P, Terluin B, Nolen W, Zitman F, Penninx B: The validity of the Dutch K10 and extended K10 screening scales for depressive and anxiety disorders. Psychiatry Research 2010. 23. American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV). Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Publishing; 2001, 1-3. 24. Wittchen HU, Robins LN, Cottler LB, Sartorius N, Burke JD, Regier D: Cross- cultural feasibility, reliability and sources of variance of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). The Multicentre WHO/ADAMHA Field Trials. British Journal of Psychiatry 1991, 159:645-53, 658. 25. Wacker HR, Battegay R, Mullejans R, Schlosser C: Using the CIDI-C in the Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central general population. In Psychiatry: A world perspective. Edited by: Stefanis and take full advantage of: CN, Rabavilas AD, Soldatos CR. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers; 2006:138-143. • Convenient online submission 26. Wittchen HU: Reliability and validity studies of the WHO–Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI): a critical review. Journal of • Thorough peer review Psychiatric Research 1994, 28:57-84. • No space constraints or color figure charges 27. Wittchen HU, Burke JD, Semler G, Pfister H, Von CM, Zaudig M: Recall and • Immediate publication on acceptance dating of psychiatric symptoms. Test-retest reliability of time-related symptom questions in a standardized psychiatric interview. Archives of • Inclusion in PubMed, CAS, Scopus and Google Scholar General Psychiatry 1989, 46:437-443. • Research which is freely available for redistribution Submit your manuscript at www.biomedcentral.com/submit http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png BMC Family Practice Springer Journals

Is the beck anxiety inventory a good tool to assess the severity of anxiety? A primary care study in The Netherlands study of depression and anxiety (NESDA)

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/is-the-beck-anxiety-inventory-a-good-tool-to-assess-the-severity-of-XiElmIDAhW

References (52)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 by Muntingh et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; General Practice / Family Medicine; Primary Care Medicine
eISSN
1471-2296
DOI
10.1186/1471-2296-12-66
pmid
21726443
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Background: Appropriate management of anxiety disorders in primary care requires clinical assessment and monitoring of the severity of the anxiety. This study focuses on the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) as a severity indicator for anxiety in primary care patients with different anxiety disorders (social phobia, panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, agoraphobia or generalized anxiety disorder), depressive disorders or no disorder (controls). Methods: Participants were 1601 primary care patients participating in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA). Regression analyses were used to compare the mean BAI scores of the different diagnostic groups and to correct for age and gender. Results: Patients with any anxiety disorder had a significantly higher mean score than the controls. A significantly higher score was found for patients with panic disorder and agoraphobia compared to patients with agoraphobia only or social phobia only. BAI scores in patients with an anxiety disorder with a co-morbid anxiety disorder and in patients with an anxiety disorder with a co-morbid depressive disorder were significantly higher than BAI scores in patients with an anxiety disorder alone or patients with a depressive disorder alone. Depressed and anxious patients did not differ significantly in their mean scores. Conclusions: The results suggest that the BAI may be used as a severity indicator of anxiety in primary care patients with different anxiety disorders. However, because the instrument seems to reflect the severity of depression as well, it is not a suitable instrument to discriminate between anxiety and depression in a primary care population. Background supplement to the diagnosis made by their general practi- In primary care, many patients present with anxiety symp- tioner and as evidence that their problems are taken ser- toms but these are seldom systematically assessed [1]. To iously [5]. Furthermore, when questionnaires to assess improve anxiety management, assessment of the severity severity are used, higher severity scores are related to bet- of the anxiety (and subsequent monitoring) is recom- ter care (i.e. higher prescription rates of antidepressant mended by researchers and also in clinical guidelines medication and increased referral to secondary care) [6]. [2-4]. With regard to depression, the use of severity indica- Moreover, in some countries incentives are offered when a tors in primary care is supported by the results of studies validated instrument is used at the start of and during the showing that patients value the use of questionnaires as a treatment of patients diagnosed with depression [7]. For similar reasons the use of severity scales to assess anxiety symptoms in primary care might be advocated. However, * Correspondence: amuntingh@trimbos.nl we first have to determine which questionnaires can be Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction (Trimbos Institute), PO Box 725, Utrecht, 3500 AS, The Netherlands Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © 2011 Muntingh et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Muntingh et al. BMC Family Practice 2011, 12:66 Page 2 of 6 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66 used as severity indicators in primary care and what their higher than the BAI scores of healthy controls or characteristics are. depressed patients. Patients with a panic disorder were As anxiety disorders differ in type and symptoms, expected to score higher than patients in the other anxiety assessing the severity of anxiety in general may be more disorder groups. We also expected patients with co- difficult than assessing the severity of depression. General morbid disorders to score higher than patients with no rating scales may not be specific enough to assess the co-morbidity. severity of a specific anxiety disorder (i.e. panic disorder or generalized anxiety disorder). However, extensive test- Methods ing for different forms of anxiety is also not feasible dur- Participants ing the short consultations in primary care. Considering The participants in this study were recruited for a large its brevity, simplicity, and presumed ability to measure cohort study: the Netherlands Study of Depression and general anxiety, the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) [8] Anxiety (NESDA) [20]. From the baseline sub-sample of might be a good candidate for use as a severity indicator. 1601 primary care patients in the NESDA cohort we Since its development, the BAI has been widely used in selected all patients with a current anxiety or depressive clinical research in mental health care, mainly as a mea- disorder according to the WHO Composite Interview sure of general anxiety [9]. Diagnostic Instrument (CIDI lifetime version 2.1) and However, the BAI has been disputed for its focus on patients with no history of anxiety or depression. DSM- psychophysiological symptoms linked to panic. The IV classifications of diagnoses within the past month results of several studies have found that patients with were used to assure present symptomatology. Patients panic disorder score higher on the BAI than patients with a history of anxiety or depression, but no current with for example generalized anxiety disorder [10-13]. diagnosis, were excluded from the analysis. The mean Either way, patients with panic disorder and patients with BAI scores of patients with an anxiety disorder (N = other anxiety disorders have been found to score signifi- 276) and patients with a depressive disorder (N = 155), cantly higher than patients with no anxiety disorder were compared to the mean BAI scores of a control [14-16]. Remarkably, no study has specifically investi- group of patients with no history of anxiety or depres- gated the co-morbidity of anxiety disorders and how this sive disorders (N= 513). The NESDA study protocol was influences BAI scores, even though co-morbidity occurs approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the VU frequently [17]. Furthermore, none of the previous BAI University Medical Centre. studies have focused on primary care populations. Another presumed quality of the BAI is its ability to dis- Procedures criminate anxiety from depression [8]. Even though in pri- The primary care sample in the NESDA study was mary care this might be of less importance than in recruited between September 2004 and February 2007 research settings, it is important to know whether the BAI through 65 general practitioners situated in different only measures anxiety or whether it is also sensitive to parts of the Netherlands (Amsterdam, Groningen, and depressive symptomatology. The results of earlier studies Leiden). A screening questionnaire was sent to 23750 suggest a substantial overlap of the BAI with depressive patients between 18 and 65 years of age who had con- symptoms, illustrated by a moderate correlation between sulted their general practitioner in the past four months. the BAI and depression scales [18]. In terms of differences This questionnaire consisted of the Kessler-10 (K-10) in the BAI scores of anxious and depressed patients, a [21], which screens for affective disorders, supplemented large difference was found in the original validation study with five questions about anxiety (Extended K-10, or [8], but in two later studies no difference was found. How- EK-10). The EK-10 showed adequate psychometric ever, in these studies the authors questioned the results properties, with a sensitivity of .90 and a specificity of because of limitations in the methodology [15,19]. .75 to detect anxiety or depressive disorders [22]. Parti- In the present study, we investigated whether the BAI cipants who returned the EK-10 (N = 10706, 45.9%), reflects the severity of anxiety in primary care patients scored positively (N = 4592, 43%), gave informed con- with different anxiety disorders. The mean scores of sev- sent (N = 3420, 74%) and could be contacted (N = 2995, eral patient groups were compared: healthy controls, 88%) had a telephone screening interview based on patients with one anxiety disorder, patients with multiple short-form sections of the CIDI (major depression, dys- anxiety disorders, patients with one depressive disorder, thymia, social phobia, panic disorder, agoraphobia, and and patients with co-morbid anxiety-depression. The diag- generalized anxiety disorder). nostic groups were separated into patients with no co- Patients who were unwilling to be interviewed (N = morbidity and patients with co-morbidity, to ensure 267, 9%), were not fluent in Dutch (N = 86, 3%) or were homogeneity of the groups. It was hypothesized that the being treated in a mental health organization (N =155, BAI scores of patients with an anxiety disorder would be 5%), were excluded. All other patients who screened Muntingh et al. BMC Family Practice 2011, 12:66 Page 3 of 6 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66 positive on the telephone screening (N = 1162, 47%) and Results a random sample of patients who screened negative Descriptive statistics (N = 924) were contacted for a face-to-face interview. The average age of the participants was 45.9 years and As 437 (24%) participants were unwilling to participate the majority of the patients were female (68.8%). Almost and39(2%)could notbecontacted or were notfluent one third of the participants had been diagnosed with in Dutch, 1610 primary care patients were finally an anxiety disorder in the past month (N = 493, 30.8%). included in the NESDA study and completed the base- Table 1 shows the age, gender and DSM-IV diagnosis of line assessment. More details about the recruitment pro- the participants. cess are described elsewhere [20]. Of the 1610 NESDA Many patients with a diagnosis of an anxiety disorder participants, 9 patients who did not complete the BAI had at least one co-morbid anxiety disorder. The per- were excluded from the analysis. The present sample centage of patients with a co-morbid anxiety disorder therefore consisted of 1601 patients, 617 of whom had varied over the diagnostic groups: anxiety co-morbidity at least one current diagnosis of anxiety or depression, was highest in patients with panic disorder or general- 471 had a history of anxiety or depression, and 513 ized anxiety disorder (54%) followed by patients with were controls with no history of anxiety or depression. social phobia (51%) and patients with agoraphobia alone (35%). Almost half (41%) of the patients with an anxiety Assessment disorder also suffered from a depressive disorder, while Composite Interview Diagnostic Instrument (CIDI) 62% of the patients with a depressive disorder were also The CIDI (version 2.1) is an interview that classifies psy- diagnosed with an anxiety disorder. chiatric diagnoses according to the DSM-IV [23]. It is a widely used interview, which has good interrater reliability Anxiety disorders [24], high test-retest reliability [25], and high validity for Table 2 shows the mean BAI scores of the control the classification of depressive and anxiety disorders group (no history of anxiety or depression), patients [26,27]. CIDI interviews were conducted by specifically with one anxiety disorder and patients with multiple trained research assistants. The CIDI classifies diagnoses that were present at some point in the patients’ life (life- Table 1 Age, gender and current DSM-IV diagnoses of time diagnoses), in the past half year and in the past participants (N = 1601) month. N% Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) All participants 1601 The BAI is a short list describing 21 anxiety symptoms Age [range] 45.8 [18-65] such as “wobbliness in legs”, “scared” and “fear of losing Female gender 1102 68.8% control” [8]. Respondents are asked to rate how much Any anxiety disorder 493 each of these symptoms bothered them in the past week, Age [range] 45.7 [18-65] on a scale ranging from 0 (not at all) tot 3 (severely, I Female gender 346 70.2% could barely stand it). The total score has a minimum of 0 Social phobia* 68 13.8% and a maximum of 63. The scale was validated in a sample Panic disorder with agoraphobia* 42 8.5% of 160 psychiatric outpatients with various anxiety and Panic without agoraphobia* 28 5.7% depressive disorders, diagnosed with the Structured Clini- Agoraphobia* 42 8.5% cal Interview for DSM-III [28]. The BAI has a high inter- Generalized anxiety disorder* 34 6.9% nal consistency (Cronbachs a = .92) and a test-retest >1 anxiety disorder 76 15.4% reliability over one week of .75 [8]. Co-morbid anxiety & depression 203 41.2% Any depressive disorder 327 Statistical analysis Age [Range] 46.2 [18-64] All analyses were conducted in SPSS version 15.0 [29]. Female gender 223 68.2% Regression analysis was performed to examine differ- Dysthymia* 8 2.4% ences between group scores. The analyses were corrected Major depression* 101 30.9% for age and gender, because age was differentially distrib- >1 depressive disorder 15 4.6% uted over the diagnostic groups and because female Co-morbid depression & anxiety 203 62.1% patients scored significantly higher than male patients in the total sample. All variables were entered simulta- Patients with a history of anxiety or depression 471 29.4% neously into the analysis. The analyses were repeated Controls (no history of anxiety or depression) 513 32.0% with different groups as the reference group to be able to *Disorder with no co-morbid anxiety disorder or co-morbid depressive disorder compare all groups. Muntingh et al. BMC Family Practice 2011, 12:66 Page 4 of 6 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66 Table 2 Mean BAI scores of patients with different high scores of patients with a panic disorder and agora- anxiety disorders (with no co-morbid depression) and phobia might thus be explained by the severity of this controls specific disorder. In other studies in which the BAI was used, greater differences were found between the group Diagnosis (past month) N M SD of patients with a panic disorder and other diagnostic Controls 513 4.09 5.06 groups [11-13,30,31]. One reason for this discrepancy in Social phobia* 68 12.97 9.03 findings might be the setting in which studies took Panic disorder with agoraphobia* 42 16.00 11.02 place. Most of the previous studies were conducted in Panic disorder without agoraphobia* 28 13.04 6.61 treatment centres for anxiety disorders, while the parti- cipants in the present study were actively recruited in Agoraphobia* 42 11.62 8.51 primary care, also including patients with previously Generalized anxiety disorder* 34 13.15 5.67 undiagnosed anxiety or depression. It is likely that more Multiple anxiety disorders 76 18.54 8.54 primary care patients present with less severe forms of *Single anxiety disorder diagnosis panic disorder. Indeed, the mean score of patients with panic disorder in the present study seems to be substan- anxiety disorders. Patients with a co-morbid depression tially lower than the scores reported in studies with sec- were excluded from this analysis (n = 203). ondary care patients [11,13,30,31] coming closer to the Patients with an anxiety disorder scored significantly scores of patients with a panic disorder in an epidemio- higher than the controls (p < 0.001) and patients with logical sample [32]. Furthermore, in the analysis of the multiple anxiety disorders scored considerably higher than present study, patient groups were specifically selected all other groups (p < .05). The mean BAI score of patients on the basis of (the absence of) co-morbidity, thus with a panic disorder and agoraphobia was significantly resulting in pure diagnostic groups. This may have pro- higher than the mean score of patients with social phobia vided a more accurate estimate of the mean scores of (p = 0.03) or agoraphobia alone (p < 0.001). specific patient groups. Beck and colleagues [8] claimed that the BAI measures Anxiety and depressive disorders anxiety while minimizing its overlap with depression but Table 3 shows that the score of depressed patients this was not sustained by the results of the present study. approximates the score of anxious patients (p = .41). For practical purposes, this is a two-sided finding. The Patients with co-morbid anxiety-depression scored sig- BAI appears to be robust for depression, but not entirely nificantly higher than patients with either an anxiety dis- specific for anxiety in a primary care population. These order or a depressive disorder alone (p < 0.001). findings are consistent with the results of earlier studies that compared the total BAI scores of depressed and Discussion anxious patients [15,19]. Steer and colleagues relate their The results of our study show that primary care patients findings to the low co-morbidity rate in their sample, but with different anxiety disorders score significantly higher this argument does notholdupinthe presentstudy. than patients with no anxiety or depressive disorder. There could be several explanations why depressed These results suggest that the BAI does reflect general patients score almost as high as anxiety patients. First of anxiety in primary care patients. With regard to the dif- all, sub-threshold anxiety experienced by patients with a ferent diagnostic groups of anxiety disorders, we did depressive disorder may have increased their anxiety partly confirm the strong focus of the BAI on panic scores. Sub-threshold anxiety was not assessed in the pre- symptoms [10,11]. Patients with a panic disorder and sent study, but previous research has shown that a sub- agoraphobia scored significantly higher than patients stantial number of depressed patients also experience with agoraphobia alone or social phobia. However, some form of (sub-threshold) anxiety [33,34]. Secondly, patients with a panic disorder without agoraphobia did somatoform disorders were not classified with the CIDI not score significantly higher than the other groups. The interview, while these disorders are prevalent in primary care patients with a depressive disorder, and can also Table 3 Mean BAI scores of patients with a depressive cause the physiological symptoms described in the BAI disorder, an anxiety disorder and co-morbid anxiety- [35].Athirdexplanation mightbethatanxiety and depression depression share a common underlying factor, often referred to as ‘negative affect’ [34,36]. There is longstand- Diagnosis (past month) N M SD ing debate about this question, growing stronger due to Depressive disorder 109 13.34 8.72 the pressure of the upcoming publication of the DSM-V Anxiety disorder 214 13.94 8.69 and fuelled by the considerable prevalence of co-morbidity Co-morbid anxiety-depression 203 21.89 10.95 between anxiety and depression and the symptom overlap Muntingh et al. BMC Family Practice 2011, 12:66 Page 5 of 6 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66 Author details on anxiety and depression scales. With regard to this third Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction (Trimbos Institute), PO hypothesis, the sensitivity of the BAI for shared sympto- Box 725, Utrecht, 3500 AS, The Netherlands. EMGO Institute for Health and matology would be more of a quality than a deficiency. Care Research (EMGO+), PO Box 7057, Amsterdam, 1007 MB, The Netherlands. Department of General Practice, VU University Medical Centre, Fourthly, total scores for self-report questionnaires, in gen- Van der Boechorststraat 7, Amsterdam, 1081 BT, The Netherlands. eral, might not be precise enough to measure difficult con- Department of Developmental, Clinical and Cross-cultural Psychology, structs such as anxiety and depression. There is some Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, Tilburg, 5000 LE, The Netherlands. Academic Psychiatry Department GGZ Breburg, Lage Witsiebaan 4, Tilburg, evidence that the BAI is able to discriminate between anxi- 5042 DA, The Netherlands. Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, PO ety and depression when items are weighted, as happens in Box 9555 Leiden, 2300 RB, The Netherlands. Department of Psychiatry, factor analysis [19]. However, weighting the items would Leiden University Medical Centre, PO Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands. Department of Psychiatry, VU University Medical Centre, A.J. complicate the use of the BAI to such an extent that its Ernststraat 1187 Amsterdam, 1081 HL, The Netherlands. Department of use would not be feasible in primary care. Psychiatry, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30.001 Groningen, A strength of this study is the large size of this pri- 9700 RB, The Netherlands. mary care sample, diagnosed with a valid interview iden- Authors’ contributions tifying five different anxiety disorders and two AM participated in the design of the study, performed the statistical analyses depressive disorders. Because of the high prevalence of and drafted the manuscript. CFC, HvM, PS and AvB participated in the design of the study, helped drafting the manuscript and critically co-morbidity in patients with anxiety and depressive dis- commented on the manuscript. BP obtained funding for and designed the orders, such a large sample is needed to compare (sub-) NESDA study, supervised data collection and critically commented on the groups of patients with a specific anxiety or depressive manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. disorder. However, even in this large sample, patients Authors’ information with onespecificanxiety disorder arescarce, limiting AM is a PhD student working on a dissertation about collaborative care the power of the analyses. Another limitation of the for anxiety disorders in primary care. CFC is full professor of Social Psychiatry and Principal Investigator of several randomized clinical trials on analysis was the skewed distribution of the scores. collaborative care. HvM is associate professor of general practice, he Although we considered performing a log transforma- participated in several national guideline committees on mental health, tion, we decided to use raw scores to facilitate the inter- and is a practising GP. PS is professor in Clinical Psychology and was chairman of the Dutch Committee Multidisciplinary Guidelines for Anxiety pretability of the scores in clinical practice. Disorders in Mental Health Care. BP is Principal Investigator of the NESDA study, and professor of Psychiatric Epidemiology. AvB is professor Conclusions Evidence-based Psychiatry. He performed meta-analyses, systematic (Cochrane) reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCT’s) in patients The results indicate that the BAI reflects the severity of with anxiety disorders. anxiety in primary care patients with different anxiety disorders. The use of questionnaires such as the BAI may Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. improve the care that is provided and is desirable from the viewpoint of primary care patients [5]. However, as Received: 23 March 2011 Accepted: 4 July 2011 Published: 4 July 2011 the use of questionnaires in primary care is not common practice, this should be stimulated by means of guide- References 1. Bakker IM, van Marwijk HW, Terluin B, Anema JR, van MW, Stalman WA: lines, training and education. Further research will be Training GP’s to use a minimal intervention for stress-related mental needed to evaluate the usefulness of the BAI in monitor- disorders with sick leave (MISS): Effects on performance Results of the MISS ing the severity of anxiety during treatment and over project; a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Patient Education Counseling 2010, 78:206-2011. time. In addition, researchers should establish criteria for 2. Roy-Byrne PP, Wagner AW, Schraufnagel TJ: Understanding and treating improvement and remission according to the BAI score, panic disorder in the primary care setting. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry in primary care patients. When questionnaires such as 2005, 66(Suppl 4):16-22. 3. Muntingh ADT, van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, Van Marwijk HWJ, Spinhoven P, the BAI are used within a framework of care, such as Assendelft WJJ, de Waal MW, Hakkaart-van RL, Ader HJ, Van Balkom AJLM: case management or collaborative care, they will opti- Collaborative stepped care for anxiety disorders in primary care: aims mally help to improve the treatment of primary care and design of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Health Services Research 2009, 9:159. patients with anxiety disorders [3,37,38]. 4. McIntosh A, Cohen A, Turnbull N, Esmonde L, Dennis P, Eatock J, Feetam C, Hague J, Hughes I, Kelly J, Kosky N, Lear G, Owens L, Ratcliffe J, Salkovskis P: Clinical guidelines and evidence review for panic disorder and Acknowledgements generalised anxiety disorder. Sheffield, University of Sheffield/London: The infrastructure for the NESDA study (http://www.nesda.nl) is funded National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care; 2010. through the Geestkracht programme of the Netherlands Organization for 5. Dowrick C, Leydon GM, McBride A, Howe A, Burgess H, Clarke P, Maisey S, Health Research and Development (Zon-Mw, grant number 10-000-1002), Kendrick T: Patients’ and doctors’ views on depression severity and is supported by participating universities and mental health care questionnaires incentivised in UK quality and outcomes framework: organizations (VU University Medical Centre, GGZ inGeest, Arkin, Leiden qualitative study. Br Med J 2009, 338:b663. University Medical Centre, GGZ Rivierduinen, University Medical Centre 6. Kendrick T, Dowrick C, McBride A, Howe A, Clarke P, Maisey S, Moore M, Groningen, Lentis, GGZ Friesland, GGZ Drenthe, Scientific Institute for Quality Smith PW: Management of depression in UK general practice in relation of Healthcare (IQ healthcare), Netherlands Institute for Health Services to scores on depression severity questionnaires: analysis of medical Research (NIVEL) and Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction record data. Br Med J 2009, 338:b750. (Trimbos Institute). Muntingh et al. BMC Family Practice 2011, 12:66 Page 6 of 6 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66 7. British Medical Association, NHS Employers: Quality and Outcomes 28. Spitzer RL, Williams JBW: Instruction manual for the Structured Clinical framework guidance for GMS contract 2009/10. Delivering investment in Interview for the DSM-III (SCID) New York: New York State Psychiatric general practice. 2009, 3rd revision. Institute, Biometrics Research Department; 1983. 8. Beck AT, Epstein N, Brown G, Steer RA: An inventory for measuring clinical 29. SPSS Inc.: SPSS 15.0 for Windows. Chicago; 2006. anxiety: psychometric properties. Journal of Consulting and Clinical 30. Steer RA, Beck AT: Generalized anxiety and panic disorders: Response to Psychology 1988, 56:893-897. Cox, Cohen, Direnfeld, and Swinson (1996). Behaviour Research and 9. Piotrowski C: The status of the Beck Anxiety Inventory in contemporary Therapy 1996, 34:955-957. research. Psychol Rep 1999, 85:261-262. 31. Beck AT, Steer RA: Relationship between the Beck Anxiety Inventory and 10. Cox BJ, Cohen E, Direnfeld DM, Swinson RP: Does the Beck Anxiety the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale with anxious outpatients. J Anxiety Inventory measure anything beyond panic attack symptoms? Behaviour Disord 1991, 5:213-223. Research and Therapy 1996, 34(11-12):949-954. 32. Hoyer J, Becker ES, Neumer S, Soeder U, Margraf J: Screening for anxiety in 11. Leyfer OT, Ruberg JL, Woodruff-Borden J: Examination of the utility of the an epidemiological sample: predictive accuracy of questionnaires. Beck Anxiety Inventory and its factors as a screener for anxiety J Anxiety Disord 2002, 16:113-134. disorders. J Anxiety Disord 2006, 20:444-458. 33. Roy-Byrne PP, Stang P, Wittchen HU, Ustun B, Walters EE, Kessler RC: 12. Beck AT, Steer RA: Relationship between the Beck Anxiety Inventory and Lifetime panic-depression comorbidity in the National Comorbidity the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale with anxious outpatients. J Anxiety Survey. Association with symptoms, impairment, course and help- Disord 1991, 213-223. seeking. British Journal of Psychiatry 2000, 176:229-235. 13. Fydrich T, Dowdall D, Chambless DL: Reliability and validity of the Beck 34. Lowe B, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Mussell M, Schellberg D, Kroenke K: Anxiety Inventory. J Anxiety Disord 1992, 6:55-61. Depression, anxiety and somatization in primary care: syndrome overlap 14. Kabacoff RI, Segal DL, Hersen M, Van Hasselt VB: Psychometric properties and functional impairment. General Hospital Psychiatry 2008, 30:191-199. and diagnostic utility of the Beck Anxiety Inventory and the State-Trait 35. Mergl R, Seidscheck I, Allgaier AK, Moller HJ, Hegerl U, Henkel V: Anxiety Inventory with older adult psychiatric outpatients. J Anxiety Depressive, anxiety, and somatoform disorders in primary care: Disord 1997, 11:33-47. prevalence and recognition. Depression Anxiety 2007, 24:185-195. 15. Steer RA, Ranieri WF, Beck AT, Clark DA: Further evidence for the validity 36. Brown TA, Barlow DH: A proposal for a dimensional classification system of the Beck Anxiety Inventory with psychiatric outpatients. J Anxiety based on the shared features of the DSM-IV anxiety and mood Disord 1993, 195-205. disorders: implications for assessment and treatment. Psychological 16. Wetherell JL, Gatz M: The Beck Anxiety Inventory in Older Adults With Assessment 2009, 21:256-271. Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral 37. Gilbody S, Sheldon T, Wessely S: Should we screen for depression? Br Med Assessment 2005, 27:17-24. J 2006, 332:1027-1030. 17. De Graaf R, Bijl RV, Smit F, Vollebergh WA, Spijker J: Risk factors for 12- 38. Roy-Byrne P, Craske MG, Sullivan G, Rose RD, Edlund MJ, Lang AJ, month comorbidity of mood, anxiety, and substance use disorders: Bystritsky A, Welch SS, Chavira DA, Golinelli D, Campbell-Sills L, findings from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Sherbourne CD, Stein MB: Delivery of evidence-based treatment for Study. American Journal of Psychiatry 2002, 159:620-629. multiple anxiety disorders in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. 18. Ferguson RJ: Using the Beck Anxiety Inventory in Primary Care. In Journal of the American Medical Association 2010, 303:1921-1928. Handbook of psychological assessments in primary care settings. Edited by: Maruish ME. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2000:509-535. Pre-publication history 19. Hewitt PL, Norton GR: The Beck Anxiety Inventory: A psychometric The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: analysis. Psychological Assessment 1993, 5:408-412. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/12/66/prepub 20. Penninx BW, Beekman AT, Smit JH, Zitman FG, Nolen WA, Spinhoven P, doi:10.1186/1471-2296-12-66 Cuijpers P, de Jong PJ, van Marwijk HW, Assendelft WJ, van der MK, Cite this article as: Muntingh et al.: Is the beck anxiety inventory a good Verhaak P, Wensing M, de Graaf R, Hoogendijk WJ, Ormel J, van Dyck R: tool to assess the severity of anxiety? A primary care study in The The Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA): rationale, Netherlands study of depression and anxiety (NESDA). BMC Family objectives and methods. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Practice 2011 12:66. Research 2008, 17:121-140. 21. Kessler RC, Andrews G, Colpe LJ, Hiripi E, Mroczek DK, Normand SL, Walters EE, Zaslavsky AM: Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychological Medicine 2002, 32:959-976. 22. Donker T, Comijs H, Cuijpers P, Terluin B, Nolen W, Zitman F, Penninx B: The validity of the Dutch K10 and extended K10 screening scales for depressive and anxiety disorders. Psychiatry Research 2010. 23. American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV). Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Publishing; 2001, 1-3. 24. Wittchen HU, Robins LN, Cottler LB, Sartorius N, Burke JD, Regier D: Cross- cultural feasibility, reliability and sources of variance of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). The Multicentre WHO/ADAMHA Field Trials. British Journal of Psychiatry 1991, 159:645-53, 658. 25. Wacker HR, Battegay R, Mullejans R, Schlosser C: Using the CIDI-C in the Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central general population. In Psychiatry: A world perspective. Edited by: Stefanis and take full advantage of: CN, Rabavilas AD, Soldatos CR. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers; 2006:138-143. • Convenient online submission 26. Wittchen HU: Reliability and validity studies of the WHO–Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI): a critical review. Journal of • Thorough peer review Psychiatric Research 1994, 28:57-84. • No space constraints or color figure charges 27. Wittchen HU, Burke JD, Semler G, Pfister H, Von CM, Zaudig M: Recall and • Immediate publication on acceptance dating of psychiatric symptoms. Test-retest reliability of time-related symptom questions in a standardized psychiatric interview. Archives of • Inclusion in PubMed, CAS, Scopus and Google Scholar General Psychiatry 1989, 46:437-443. • Research which is freely available for redistribution Submit your manuscript at www.biomedcentral.com/submit

Journal

BMC Family PracticeSpringer Journals

Published: Jul 4, 2011

There are no references for this article.