Validation of the 4DSQ Somatization Subscale in the Occupational Health Care Setting as a Screener
- 225 Downloads
Purpose Somatoform disorders (physical symptoms without medical explanation that cause dysfunction) are prevalent in the occupational health (OH) care setting and are associated with functional impairment and absenteeism. Availability of psychometric instruments aimed at assessing somatoform disorders is limited. In the OH setting, so far only the Patient-Health-Questionnaire 15 has been validated as screener for somatoform disorder, and has been shown to have moderate validity. The Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ) is frequently used in the OH setting but the Somatization subscale is not validated yet. The aim of this study is to validate the 4DSQ Somatization subscale as screener for DSM-IV somatoform disorder in the OH setting by using the MINI interview as gold standard. Methods Employees absent from work due to physical symptoms, for a period longer than 6 weeks and shorter than 2 years, were asked to participate in this study. They filled out the 4DSQ and underwent a MINI interview by telephone for DSM-IV classification. Specificity and sensitivity scores were calculated for all possible cut-off scores and a receiver operator curve was computed for the Somatization subscale. 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CIs) were calculated for sensitivity and specificity. Results The Somatization subscale of the 4DSQ has an optimal cut point of 9, with specificity and sensitivity equal to 64.3 % [95 % CI (53.6; 73.7 %)] and 60.9 % [95 % CI (40.8; 77.8 %)], respectively. Receiver operator curves showed an area under the curve equal to 0.61 [SE = 0.07; 95 % CI (0.48; 0.75)] for the Somatization subscale of the 4DSQ. Conclusion The 4DSQ Somatization subscale is a questionnaire of moderate sensitivity and specificity.
KeywordsFour-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire Somatoform disorders Occupational health setting Sensitivity Specificity
The authors of this article would like to thank Melanie de Ruiter for doing the MINI interviews on this project, and Jasper Nuijen for his assistance in data management.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorder. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.Google Scholar
- 6.van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, Hoedeman R, de Jong FJ, Meeuwissen JA, Drewes HW, van der Laan NC, Adèr HJ. Faster return to work after psychiatric consultation for sicklisted employees with common mental disorders compared to care as usual. A randomized clinical trial. J Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2010;6:375–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Terluin B, van Marwijk HW, Adèr HJ, Penninx BW, Hermens ML, van Boeijen CA, van Balkom AJ, van der Klink JJ, Stalman WA. The Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ): a validation study of a multidimensional self-report questionnaire to assess distress, depression, anxiety and somatization. BMC Psychiatr. 2006;6:34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Sheehan DV, Lecrubier Y, Sheehan KH, Amorim P, Janavs J, Weiller E, Hergueta T, Baker R, Dunbar GC. The mini-international neuropsychiatric interview (M.I.N.I.): the development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59(20):22–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Terluin B. De vierdimensionale klachtenlijst (4DKL). Een vragenlijst voor het meten van distress, depressie, angst en somatisatie [The four-dimensional symptom questionnaire (4DSQ). A questionnaire to measure distress, depression, anxiety, and somatization]. Huisarts & Wetenschap 1996;39(12):538–47.Google Scholar
- 13.DeVellis RF. Scale development: theory and applications. 2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 2003.Google Scholar
- 14.Offringa M, Assendelft WJJ, Scholten RJPM. Inleiding in evidence-based medicine [Introduction in evidence-based medicine]. Bohn Stafleu van Loghum; 2008.Google Scholar
- 15.Agresti A, Coull BA. Approximate is better than “Exact” for interval estimation of binomial proportions. Am Stat. 1998;52(2):119–26.Google Scholar
- 16.IBM Corp. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (version 19.0). Armonk, NY: IBM Corp; 2010.Google Scholar
- 25.van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, Hoedeman R, Keuter EJ, Swinkels JA. Presentation of the multidisciplinary guideline medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) and somatoform disorder in the Netherlands: disease management according to risk profiles. J Psychosom Res. 2012;72(2):168–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar