Why the study?
Accurate identification of athletes requiring mental health services is essential, prompting evaluation of the clinical utility of the PHQ-9 during pre-participation concussion baseline assessments.
Does the PHQ-9 provide better clinical utility for identifying depression compared to ImPACT symptom clusters in college athletes?
Does the PHQ-9 provide better clinical utility for identifying depression compared to ImPACT symptom clusters in college athletes?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
ImPACT sleep cluster may flag depression risk in athletes; hypothesis-generating, prospective validation needed before changing screening practice.
Accurate identification of athletes in need of mental health services is essential. The clinical utility of the Patient Health Questionnaire − 9 (PHQ-9), a stand-alone measure of depression, was explored among Division II college athletes (n = 1,209) completing pre-participation concussion baseline assessments (mean age = 19.28), which also included Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT). ImPACT’s symptom inventory can be divided into four clusters: affective, cognitive, physical/somatic, and sleep. Most athletes (81.9%) did not endorse any items on the affective symptom cluster; however, 90 athletes (7.4%) fell above the cutoff of 5 for depression on the PHQ-9, and approximately half of all athletes endorsed one or more PHQ-9 items. Simple linear regressions revealed ImPACT’s sleep symptom cluster as the best predictor of PHQ-9 total score; however, affective, cognitive, and physical symptom clusters significantly predicted PHQ-9 total score as well. Due to relative under-endorsement of items on ImPACT’s affective symptom cluster compared to the PHQ-9, the clinical utility of incorporating a stand-alone measure of depression such as the PHQ-9 during baseline testing is supported.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
LoGalbo et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: