Search

Medical Education 2011; : 578-584 Training in and assessment of consultation skills are high on the agenda of vocational training institutes for postgraduate training. There is a need to establish valid and reliable instruments to assess consultation skills in authentic settings. We investigated the number of assessors and observations needed to achieve reliable assessments of the consultation skills of general practice trainees (GPTs) using a communication instrument (MAAS-Global) and either standardised patient (SP) encounters or videotaped real patient (RP) encounters. Eight teachers at the Vrije Universiteit (VU) University Medical Centre in Amsterdam attended a training course on the use of the MAAS-Global instrument, which they subsequently used to assess the consultation skills of 53 GPTs in 176 videotaped consultations (102 with SPs, 74 with RPs). All consultations were randomly allocated and assessed by two teachers independently. The reliability of the ratings was estimated using generalisability theory. It was easier to obtain acceptable reliability using RP consultations than SP consultations. Two assessors and five consultations were required to achieve minimal reliability (generalisability coefficient 0.7) with RPs, whereas three assessors and 30 consultations were needed to achieve minimal reliability with SPs. Inter-observer and context variability in the assessment of the consultation skills of GPTs remains high. To achieve acceptable levels of reliability, large samples of observations are required in both formats, but, interestingly, RP encounters require a smaller sample than SP encounters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The CES-D is an instrument that is commonly used to screen for depression in community based studies of the elderly, but the characteristics of the CES-D in a residential home population have not yet been studied. The aim of this study was to investigate the criterion validity and the predictive power of the CES-D for both depressive and anxiety disorders in a vulnerable, very old population living in residential homes. Methods: Two hundred seventy seven residents were screened with the CES-D, and subsequently interviewed with a diagnostic instrument, the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Instrument (MINI). The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of the CES-D were calculated by cross-tabulation at different cut-off scores. Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves were used to assess the optimal cut-off point for each disorder and to asses the predictive power of the instrument. Results: In a residential home population the CES-D had satisfactory criterion validity for depressive disorders and for any combination of depressive and/or anxiety disorders. With a desired sensitivity of at least 80%, the optimal cut-off scores varied between 18 and 22. The predictive power of the CES-D in this population was best for major depression and dysthymia (Area Under the Curve, AUC 0.87), closely followed by the score for any combination of depressive and/or anxiety disorder (AUC 0.86). Conclusion: The use of one single instrument to screen for both depression and anxiety disorders at the same time has obvious advantages in this very old population. The CES-D seems to be a suitable instrument for this purpose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Little is known about the prevalence of depression in older patients consulting their general practitioner. Aim To estimate the prevalence of major and minor depression in older GP attendees. Design Cross sectional two-stage screening design. Setting Seventeen GPs in urban and 41 GPs in rural settings. Methods Data of The West Friesland Study were used. Five thousand, six hundered and eight-six GP attendees of 55 years and older filled in the Geriatric Depression Scale—15 items as a screening instrument for depression (response 62%). Of those screened positive on the GDS-15, 846 (77.5%) were interviewed using the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD). A random sample (n = 102) scoring below the threshold of the GDS-15 was interviewed to estimate the proportion of false negatives. Results Major depression was prevalent in 13.7% and minor depression in 10.2% of the patients. Depressed patients were older (mean difference 0.7 years; p = 0.037), more often female (OR 1.3; p < 0.001) and lived more often in urban districts (OR 1.5; p < 0.001). Patients with major depression were younger (mean difference 1.9 years; p < 0.001) and more often female (OR 1.4; p = 0.026) than those with a minor depression. Only 22.9% of the patients with a major depression were treated with antidepressants. Conclusion Depression in older GP attendees is a very common health problem. Further research should focus on identifying those groups of patients with high risk of persistence of depression. This could help to focus the limited resources available in general practice to those patients in whom treatment is most urgently needed. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]