Original article
Cardiac depression scale: Validation of a new depression scale for cardiac patients

https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3999(95)00612-5Get rights and content

Abstract

Assessing the effect of interventions on quality of life in cardiac patients lacks sensitivity because there is no specifically validated scale for measuring depression in cardiac patients. A questionnaire of 35 items (selected for face validity) was given to 246 cardiac outpatients (age 59.3 ± 14.1 years, 159 male, 87 female). The Beck Depression Scale was then administered, followed by blinded clinical rating of depression. The item scores were subjected to common factor analysis. Internal consistency was assessed using a reliability coefficients and clinical validity using Spearman correlation coefficients. The final scale consisted of 26 items (α reliability coefficient 0.90) in 2 robust dimensions and 7 subscales. The scale correlated well with clinical rating and with the Beck Depression Scale, but without the marked skewness of the latter. The behavior of the new Cardiac Depression Scale suggests that it will be an excellent measure for studies of outcome in cardiac patients.

References (16)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (167)

  • Effectiveness of nurse-led clinics in the early discharge period after percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review

    2021, Australian Critical Care
    Citation Excerpt :

    One pilot study22 reported patients' psychological symptoms at 2 weeks and identified that most patients had self-reported levels of emotional distress requiring support and reassurance; however, reporting was unclear, limiting confidence in this finding. The other study25 reported moderate reductions in trait anxiety, as measured using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory,29 in the intervention group (d = 0.50) and in depressive symptoms, as measured using the Cardiac Depression Scale,30 although not statistically significantly different. The RCT23 reported on readmission rates at 6 weeks after discharge, with no significant differences between the intervention and control groups (8% vs. 4%; p = 0.56).

View all citing articles on Scopus

This work has been presented in part at the V World Congress of Cardiac Rehabilitation 1992 and at the 39th Annual Scientific Meeting of The Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand 1993.

View full text