Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T23:35:01.197Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The 21-item Depression Anxiety Stress Scales as a valid routine clinical outcome measure in the private in-patient setting

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2014

F Ng
Affiliation:
Barwon Health The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
M Berk
Affiliation:
The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
S Campbell
Affiliation:
Healthscope, Melbourne, Australia
T Callaly
Affiliation:
Barwon Health
S Dodd
Affiliation:
The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
T Trauer
Affiliation:
The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Abstracts from ‘Brainwaves’— The Australasian Society for Psychiatric Research Annual Meeting 2006, 6–8 December, Sydney, Australia
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 Blackwell Munksgaard

Background:

The self-reported 21-item Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21) measure and differentiate negative affective states, which is especially meaningful in the acute psychiatric treatment setting. This study aimed to test the validity of DASS-21 as a routine clinical outcome measure in the private psychiatric in-patient setting.

Methods:

The sample consisted of all admissions to a private psychiatric hospital from January 2004 to December 2005. Scores of four routine measures administered at admission and discharge were retrospectively collected. These measures were the clinician-rated Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) and Health of the Nation Outcome Scales in its adult or older persons format (HoNOS or HoNOS65+), and the self-reported Mental Health Questionnaire (MHQ-14) and DASS-21. The four measures were compared using correlation statistics, and differences in measure scores from admission to discharge were analyzed by t test.

Results:

Of 786 total admissions, there were 337, 328 and 347 fully completed (ie paired admission and discharge) data sets for the DASS-21 depression, anxiety and stress subscales, respectively. All subscales showed significant reductions in mean scores, in the order of 50%, at discharge compared with baseline (P < 0.001). All subscales were correlated with the MHQ-14 subscales (P < 0.0001). They also related to partially collapsed CGI categories (P = 0.006), except for the baseline stress subscale. The total DASS-21 correlated with the total HoNOS scores (r = 0.31, P < 0.0001).

Conclusion:

The results support the validity of DASS-21 as a routine clinical outcome measure in the private in-patient setting.