Abstract
Resilience to affective disorders in rehabilitating patients or in individuals with a severe disability is of special research interest. However, there is no gold standard for measuring resilience. We aimed to test the accuracy of the Dutch translation of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRSnl) and of the Resilience Scale (RSnl) in recognizing rehabilitating patients without anxiety and depression, and to determine the reliability and construct validity of both scales.
Methods
A within-subjects longitudinal study with six assessments, each one week apart. Forty residents of a nursing home rehabilitating unit were interviewed to assess resilience (BRSnl and RSnl), optimism and pessimism (LOT-R), depression and anxiety (HADS), positive and negative affect (PANAS), and pain (VAS).
Results
Receiver operating characteristic analyses for recognizing the absence of depression and anxiety (HADS-score≤7) revealed better accuracy (P=0.038) for the BRSnl (AUC=0.84; p<0.0001) than for the RSnl (AUC=0.68; P=0.017). The scales correlated moderately at baseline (rs=0.35; p=0.026), and at four-week follow-up (rs=0.50; p=0.004). The RSnl was positively associated with positive outcomes (optimism and positive affect), and the BRSnl positively with positive outcomes, and negatively with negative outcomes (pessimism, anxiety and negative affect). The RSnl showed a better four-week test–retest reliability (ICC, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.87 to 0.97) than the BRSnl (0.66; 95% CI, 0.29 to.83).
Limitations
Short study duration, a relatively small sample.
Conclusion
The BRSnl showed better performance in detecting people without depression and anxiety than the RSnl, and performed better on construct validity.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 262-268 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Journal of Affective Disorders |
| Volume | 168 |
| Early online date | 17 Jul 2014 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 15 Oct 2014 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Anxiety/anxiety disorders
- Assessment/diagnosis
- depression
- Rehabilitation
- Resilience
Cite this
}
Resilience to affective disorders: A comparative validation of two resilience scales. / Leontjevas, Ruslan; de Beek, Wendie Op; Lataster, Johan; Jacobs, Nele.
In: Journal of Affective Disorders, Vol. 168, 15.10.2014, p. 262-268.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Resilience to affective disorders: A comparative validation of two resilience scales
AU - Leontjevas, Ruslan
AU - de Beek, Wendie Op
AU - Lataster, Johan
AU - Jacobs, Nele
PY - 2014/10/15
Y1 - 2014/10/15
N2 - BackgroundResilience to affective disorders in rehabilitating patients or in individuals with a severe disability is of special research interest. However, there is no gold standard for measuring resilience. We aimed to test the accuracy of the Dutch translation of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRSnl) and of the Resilience Scale (RSnl) in recognizing rehabilitating patients without anxiety and depression, and to determine the reliability and construct validity of both scales.MethodsA within-subjects longitudinal study with six assessments, each one week apart. Forty residents of a nursing home rehabilitating unit were interviewed to assess resilience (BRSnl and RSnl), optimism and pessimism (LOT-R), depression and anxiety (HADS), positive and negative affect (PANAS), and pain (VAS).ResultsReceiver operating characteristic analyses for recognizing the absence of depression and anxiety (HADS-score≤7) revealed better accuracy (P=0.038) for the BRSnl (AUC=0.84; p<0.0001) than for the RSnl (AUC=0.68; P=0.017). The scales correlated moderately at baseline (rs=0.35; p=0.026), and at four-week follow-up (rs=0.50; p=0.004). The RSnl was positively associated with positive outcomes (optimism and positive affect), and the BRSnl positively with positive outcomes, and negatively with negative outcomes (pessimism, anxiety and negative affect). The RSnl showed a better four-week test–retest reliability (ICC, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.87 to 0.97) than the BRSnl (0.66; 95% CI, 0.29 to.83).LimitationsShort study duration, a relatively small sample.ConclusionThe BRSnl showed better performance in detecting people without depression and anxiety than the RSnl, and performed better on construct validity.
AB - BackgroundResilience to affective disorders in rehabilitating patients or in individuals with a severe disability is of special research interest. However, there is no gold standard for measuring resilience. We aimed to test the accuracy of the Dutch translation of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRSnl) and of the Resilience Scale (RSnl) in recognizing rehabilitating patients without anxiety and depression, and to determine the reliability and construct validity of both scales.MethodsA within-subjects longitudinal study with six assessments, each one week apart. Forty residents of a nursing home rehabilitating unit were interviewed to assess resilience (BRSnl and RSnl), optimism and pessimism (LOT-R), depression and anxiety (HADS), positive and negative affect (PANAS), and pain (VAS).ResultsReceiver operating characteristic analyses for recognizing the absence of depression and anxiety (HADS-score≤7) revealed better accuracy (P=0.038) for the BRSnl (AUC=0.84; p<0.0001) than for the RSnl (AUC=0.68; P=0.017). The scales correlated moderately at baseline (rs=0.35; p=0.026), and at four-week follow-up (rs=0.50; p=0.004). The RSnl was positively associated with positive outcomes (optimism and positive affect), and the BRSnl positively with positive outcomes, and negatively with negative outcomes (pessimism, anxiety and negative affect). The RSnl showed a better four-week test–retest reliability (ICC, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.87 to 0.97) than the BRSnl (0.66; 95% CI, 0.29 to.83).LimitationsShort study duration, a relatively small sample.ConclusionThe BRSnl showed better performance in detecting people without depression and anxiety than the RSnl, and performed better on construct validity.
KW - Anxiety/anxiety disorders
KW - Assessment/diagnosis
KW - depression
KW - Rehabilitation
KW - Resilience
U2 - 10.1016/j.jad.2014.07.010
DO - 10.1016/j.jad.2014.07.010
M3 - Article
VL - 168
SP - 262
EP - 268
JO - Journal of Affective Disorders
JF - Journal of Affective Disorders
SN - 0165-0327
ER -