Abstract
The proportion of geriatric depression recorded in Vietnam was 66.9%. Depression in older people is a risk factor for problems related to dementia, poor quality of life, and suicide. To have a good Vietnamese questionnaire for assessing geriatric depression, we conducted the study to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Geriatric Depression Scale—long-form with 30 items (GDS-30). The study has two steps. Step 1 is a translation of the GDS-30 scale. We followed the guideline by Beaton et al., (2000 & 2007). Firstly, two translators (informed and uninformed) translated the questionnaires. Secondly, the translations were synthesized. Thirdly, back translation was performed by two translators fluent in both Vietnamese and English but completely unknown of the original version of the scale and did not have medical expertise. Finally, seven experts reached a consensus on the pre-final Vietnamese version (GDS-30). Step 2 is a field test of the questionnaires on people 60 years or older. Then, we determined the internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the questionnaire in 55 Vietnamese inpatients in a geriatric department. Construct validity was determined by examining the relationship between depressive scores and patient characteristics. The Vietnamese version of GDS-30 was built with the agreement of all experts on the semantic, idiomatic, experiential, and conceptual equivalences between the original and pre-final Vietnamese versions of the GDS-30. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value was 0.928, indicating the items’ adequate internal consistency. Spearman’s correlation coefficient value of total scores between the first and second interviews showed medium correlation (0.479, p < 0.001), and the stability is acceptable. The GDS-30 scale reached the construct validity because the proportion of geriatric depression according to GDS-30 was significantly different between characteristics groups, such as gender, employment, level of education, economic status, and sleep disturbance. The Vietnamese version of the GDS-30 scale had high consistency, satisfactory reliability, and understanding and can be used as a screening tool for depression in elderly patients in primary healthcare centers. This is the first depression rating scale for the elderly in Vietnam to be translated and validated. Non-psychiatric health professionals or patients can quickly self-assess and screen for the illness.
Keywords: adaptation, depression, geriatrics, questionnaire, translation, validation, Vietnamese
1. Introduction
In 2020, the proportion of people aged 65 and over accounted for 9.3% of the total population, equivalent to 727 million people in the world [1]. In Vietnam, the proportion of older people (aged 60 years and older) has increased quite rapidly since the beginning of the 20th century, rising from 8.1% (in 1999) to 8.6% (in 2009) and reaching 11.9% in 2019. This rate has been projected to increase to 28.3% by 2050 [2,3,4]. Aging is associated with a number of factors that result in the deterioration of physical and mental health.
Depression is one of the most common mental disorders in the elderly [5]. In 2018, the proportion of geriatric depression recorded in Vietnam was 66.9% [6]. Older people with depression are at risk for several additional problems, such as dementia, poor quality of life, and suicide [7,8,9]. However, a 2012–2013 survey of 33,653 physician–patient encounters found less than 5% of adults were screened for depression in primary care [10]. Depression is popular in older adults, especially those with multimorbidity, such as thyroid disease, diabetes, heart disease, and other chronic medical conditions [11,12,13]. Depression and hypertension have also been shown to have interaction effects in a physiological way. In addition, depression could seriously affect their attitude of medication adherence, thereby decreasing their blood pressure control and quality of life, further aggravating the situation and creating a pathological spiral [14].
In 1982, Yesavage et al. developed the self-rated Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) to screen for depression in the elderly [15]. A team of clinicians and researchers involved in geriatric psychiatry selected 100 questions believed to have the potential for distinguishing elderly depressives from normal subjects with various elements addressing cognitive complaints, motivation, future/past orientation, personal mood, etc. 30 questions with the highest correlation with the total score were chosen to create the GDS-30 scale [15]. The original version of this scale was written in English, and it has subsequently been translated and widely used in many Asian countries, such as India [16], Korea [17], and the Philippines [18].
The India version of this scale was conducted in the rural community of Ballabgarh in northern India with 1554 samples, mostly illiterate Hindi-speaking residents of Ballabgarh aged 55+. Although the large sample was selected, it was just distributed in a rural area, so the difference of depression in non-illiterate and illiterate people was unreliable [16]. The Korean version provided valid and reliable case-finding tools for screening major depression among the elderly psychiatric patients in Korea; however, the sample size of this study was not big enough to represent the Korean population [17]. The Philippines version of the GDS was performed in 505 elderly respondents who gave informed consent to participate in the study. Participants were required to be age 60 or older to comprehend both written and verbal English and Filipino and to exhibit no evidence of cognitive impairment. Respondents were required to complete all items from the English and the Filipino versions of the GDS. However, the result of this study was the GDS-15 (the short form of the original version), so it cannot fully evaluate different aspects of depression in the elderly [18].
Many popular depression rating scales have been translated into Vietnamese, such as the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) [19], Patient Health Questionnaire—9 (PHQ-9) [20], and Zung Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (Zung SAS) [21]. However, these scales were not designed specifically for the elderly, so this study aims to translate and validate a Vietnamese version of the GDS-30 scale to screen for depression in the elderly.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Translation of the GDS-30 Scale
The GDS-30 scale was translated from the original English version of Yesavage et al. (1982) into a Vietnamese version [15]. It had 30 questions, including content related to depression of the elderly; the interviewees answered with two options (yes or no); depending on each question, the answer “yes” or “no” was counted as 1 point. Geriatric depression was assessed based on cumulative scores in two ways: (1) depression rating scores were divided into 2 groups, identified a depression (≥10 points) and no depression (<10 points); (2) depression rating scores were divided into 3 groups, identified as no depression (0–9 points), mild depression (10–19 points), and severe depression (20–30 points).
The GDS-30 scale was translated according to Beaton et al. (Figure 1) [22,23].
Figure 1.
Translation and cross-cultural adaptation.
2.2. Validation of the GDS-30 Scale
2.2.1. Study Design
The Vietnamese version of the GDS-30 scale was validated among elderly hypertensive inpatients (aged 60 years and above) at the Department of Geriatrics, Can Tho Central General Hospital, from May 2020 until March 2021. Sampling criteria included patients diagnosed with hypertension with systolic blood pressure ≥ 140 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥ 90 mmHg [24] or were being treated for hypertension and agreed to participate in this study. Regarding the subject exclusion criteria in our study: any participant who has an acute illness, hearing impairment, language barrier, poor communication, a serious life problem within two weeks, and severe dementia were not included in our study.
2.2.2. Data Collection
Participants were invited to a face-to-face interview through prepared questionnaires. We also conducted a second face-to-face interview on previously interviewed patients to assess the test-retest reliability, excluding patients discharged from the hospital. The length between the two interviews ranged from 2 weeks to a month [25]. This study conducted second interviews after 7–14 days (2 weeks) because of the limited time.
2.2.3. Sample Size
The response rate of 1:10 (i.e., each question required 10 patients) was chosen to calculate the required sample size using established methods [26,27]. The GDS-30 scale had 30 questions, so the estimated sample size was 300 patients. An additional 10% were selected to accommodate lost participants during research time; the required sample size was 330 patients.
2.2.4. Validation Criteria
Reliability
Internal consistency was estimated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. The scale was considered adequate internal consistency when the Cronbach’s alpha value was > 0.5 [28].
Test-retest was based on the repetition between results of the first and second interviews and evaluated using Spearman’s correlation coefficient. The Spearman’s coefficient value > 0.3 and p-value < 0.05 was considered good test-retest reliability [29,30].
2.2.5. Validity
Content validity was based on the expert committee’s review and the equivalence score between the source and target version of the scale. Content validity was accepted when all questions received the consensus of more than half of the expert committee members.
Construct validity was evaluated by assessing the relationship between results of the first response and depression-related characteristics, such as age, gender, current occupation, education level, marital status, economic status, sleep disorder according to the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). The outcomes were considered statistically significant if the p-values were < 0.05.
2.2.6. Data Analysis
Data were entered using Epidata 3.0 and were processed using SPSS version 18.0 (IBM Corp., New York, NY, USA). Descriptive statistics describe the proportions, frequencies of categorical variables, and the mean, standard deviation (SD) of continuous variables. The scale’s reliability was assessed by internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient) and test-pretest (Spearman’s correlation coefficient). The chi-squared test with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was applied to assess the relationship between depression and depression-related characteristics. The principal component analysis method (PCA) with varimax rotation was used to determine the factor structure of the GDS-30 scale.
2.2.7. Ethics Approval
The Institutional Review Board approved this study for Ethics in Biomedical Research—Hanoi Medical University on 10 April 2020 (approval number: 72/GCN—HĐĐĐNCYSH—ĐHYHN). The purpose and content of the study were explained clearly and specifically to the participants, who signed a consent form. Participants also had the right to refuse to participate in the study without affecting treatment.
3. Results
The table showed the geriatric depression scale in the original English version and Vietnamese version after translation according to the above process (Table 1).
Table 1.
The original English version and the Vietnamese version of the GDS.
| Item | The Original English Version | Vietnamese Version |
|---|---|---|
| 1 * | Are you basically satisfied with your life? | Về cơ bản Ông/Bà hài lòng với cuộc sống của mình? |
| 2 | Have you dropped many of your activities and interests? | Ông/Bà đã từ bỏ nhiều hoạt động và thú vui? |
| 3 | Do you feel that your life is empty? | Ông/Bà cảm thấy cuộc sống của mình thật trống rỗng? |
| 4 | Do you often get bored? | Ông/Bà thường cảm thấy buồn chán? |
| 5 * | Are you hopeful about your future? | Ông/Bà thấy hy vọng vào tương lai của mình? |
| 6 | Are you bothered by thoughts you can’t get out of your head? | Ông/Bà có phiền muộn bởi những suy nghĩ trong đầu không thể bỏ được? |
| 7 * | Are you good in spirits most of the time? | Tinh thần của ông bà tốt trong hầu hết thời gian? |
| 8 | Are you afraid that something bad is going to happen to you? | Ông/Bà có sợ điều gì đó không hay sắp xảy đến với mình? |
| 9 * | Do you feel happy most of the time? | Hầu hết thời gian Ông/Bà cảm thấy hạnh phúc? |
| 10 | Do you often feel helpless? | Ông/Bà thường cảm thấy bất lực? |
| 11 | Do you often get restless and fidgety? | Ông/Bà thường cảm thấy bồn chồn, đứng ngồi không yên? |
| 12 | Do you prefer to stay at home, rather than going out and doing new things? | Ông/Bà thích ở nhà hơn ra ngoài và làm những điều mới mẻ? |
| 13 | Do you frequently worry about your future? | Ông/Bà thường xuyên lo lắng về tương lai? |
| 14 | Do you feel you have more problems with memory than most? | Ông/Bà cảm thấy mình có nhiều vấn đề về trí nhớ hơn hết? |
| 15 * | Do you think it is wonderful to be alive now? | Ông/Bà nghĩ hiện tại được sống là tuyệt vời? |
| 16 | Do you often feel downhearted and blue? | Ông/Bà thường cảm thấy buồn và nản chí? |
| 17 | Do you feel pretty worthless the way you are now? | Theo tình trạng hiện giờ, Ông/Bà cảm thấy khá vô ích? |
| 18 | Do you worry a lot about the past? | Ông/Bà lo lắng nhiều về quá khứ? |
| 19 * | Do you find life very exciting? | Ông/Bà nhận thấy cuộc sống rất hào hứng? |
| 20 | Is it hard for you to get started on new projects? | Ông/Bà thấy khó khăn để bắt đầu những dự định mới? |
| 21 * | Do you feel full of energy? | Ông/Bà cảm thấy tràn đầy năng lượng? |
| 22 | Do you feel that your situation is hopeless? | Ông/Bà cảm thấy tình trạng của mình là không có hy vọng? |
| 23 | Do you think that most people are better off than you are? | Ông/Bà nghĩ hầu hết mọi người đều sung sướng hơn mình? |
| 24 | Do you frequently get upset over little things? | Ông/Bà thường thấy bực bội với những việc nhỏ nhặt? |
| 25 | Do you frequently feel like crying? | Ông/Bà thường cảm thấy muốn khóc? |
| 26 | Do you have trouble concentrating? | Ông/Bà có khó tập trung? |
| 27 * | Do you enjoy getting up in the morning? | Ông /Bà có hào hứng thức dậy vào buổi sáng? |
| 28 | Do you prefer to avoid social gatherings? | Ông/Bà muốn tránh các tụ họp đông người? |
| 29 * | Is it easy for you to make decisions? | Có dễ dàng để Ông/Bà đưa ra các quyết định? |
| 30 * | Is your mind as clear as it used to be? | Ông/Bà vẫn minh mẫn như trước kia? |
Scoring method: 1 point for the answer “Yes”, only for items marked with (*), 1 point for the answer “No”. The total score for all items would be converted to the GDS30 depressive cut-off points. No depression: 0–9 points, Depression: >9 points.
A total of 330 patients were selected (mean age = 75.2 ± 8.5, female = 229, 69.4%). Most patients were not employed (76.4%) and had primary school or lower (75.2%). There were 63.6% of the patients currently living with their spouses. Most of the patients were not poor (91.8%). Based on the PSQI scale, with a cut-off point of 5, patients’ percentage of sleep disturbance was 82.7%. Mean GDS point: 9.34, SD: 7.65. The proportion of participants with depression according to the GDS scale (score ≥10) was 41.5% (Table 2).
Table 2.
Study population characteristics (n = 330).
| Frequency (n) | Percentage (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | Mean ± SD | 75.24 ± 8.46 | |
| Age group | 60–69 years old | 93 | 28.2 |
| 70–79 years old | 126 | 38.2 | |
| ≥ 80 years old | 111 | 33.6 | |
| Gender | Female | 101 | 30.6 |
| Males | 229 | 69.4 | |
| Employment | Trade | 13 | 3.9 |
| Farmer | 41 | 12.4 | |
| Housewife | 21 | 6.4 | |
| Stop working | 252 | 76.4 | |
| Other | 3 | 0.9 | |
| Level of education | ≤ Primary | 248 | 75.2 |
| Secondary school | 50 | 15.2 | |
| High school | 18 | 5.5 | |
| > High school | 14 | 4.2 | |
| Marital status | Married | 210 | 63.6 |
| Single | 6 | 1.8 | |
| Divorced/separated/widowed | 114 | 34.5 | |
| Economic status | Poor | 27 | 8.2 |
| No poor | 303 | 91.8 | |
| Sleep disturbance | Yes | 273 | 82.7 |
| No | 57 | 17.3 | |
3.1. Reliability Test
3.1.1. Consistency
The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value was 0.928, indicating the items’ adequate internal consistency (Table 3).
Table 3.
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the GDS-30 scale (n = 330).
| Item | Corrected Item-Total Correlation | Cronbach’s Alpha If the Item Was Deleted | Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.601 | 0.925 | 0.928 |
| 2 | 0.502 | 0.926 | |
| 3 | 0.585 | 0.925 | |
| 4 | 0.722 | 0.923 | |
| 5 | 0.480 | 0.926 | |
| 6 | 0.512 | 0.926 | |
| 7 | 0.645 | 0.924 | |
| 8 | 0.503 | 0.926 | |
| 9 | 0.641 | 0.924 | |
| 10 | 0.641 | 0.924 | |
| 11 | 0.555 | 0.925 | |
| 12 | 0.319 | 0.929 | |
| 13 | 0.558 | 0.925 | |
| 14 | 0.336 | 0.928 | |
| 15 | 0.526 | 0.926 | |
| 16 | 0.713 | 0.923 | |
| 17 | 0.536 | 0.925 | |
| 18 | 0.350 | 0.928 | |
| 19 | 0.636 | 0.924 | |
| 20 | 0.579 | 0.925 | |
| 21 | 0.592 | 0.925 | |
| 22 | 0.415 | 0.927 | |
| 23 | 0.474 | 0.926 | |
| 24 | 0.466 | 0.926 | |
| 25 | 0.519 | 0.926 | |
| 26 | 0.501 | 0.926 | |
| 27 | 0.528 | 0.926 | |
| 28 | 0.556 | 0.925 | |
| 29 | 0.569 | 0.925 | |
| 30 | 0.317 | 0.928 |
3.1.2. Stability
Spearman’s correlation coefficient value of total score between the first and second interviews after 2 weeks showed a satisfactory correlation (0.479, p < 0.001). In the GDS-30 scale, 6 items had no correlation (p > 0.05), 11 items had weak correlation (<0.4) and 13 items had medium correlation (0.4–0.6). (Table 4).
Table 4.
Spearman’s correlation coefficient of the GDS-30 scale (n = 55).
| Item | Spearman’s Correlation Coefficient | p |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.152 | 0.268 |
| 2 | 0.386 | 0.004 |
| 3 | 0.126 | 0.359 |
| 4 | 0.439 | 0.001 |
| 5 | 0.297 | 0.028 |
| 6 | 0.458 | <0.001 |
| 7 | 0.429 | <0.001 |
| 8 | 0.421 | 0.001 |
| 9 | 0.443 | 0.001 |
| 10 | 0.452 | 0.001 |
| 11 | 0.331 | 0.014 |
| 12 | 0.603 | <0.001 |
| 13 | 0.608 | <0.001 |
| 14 | 0.346 | 0.01 |
| 15 | −0.098 | 0.477 |
| 16 | 0.363 | 0.007 |
| 17 | 0.270 | 0.046 |
| 18 | 0.444 | 0.001 |
| 19 | 0.102 | 0.458 |
| 20 | 0.336 | 0.012 |
| 21 | 0.495 | <0.001 |
| 22 | 0.313 | 0.02 |
| 23 | 0.179 | 0.191 |
| 24 | 0.373 | 0.005 |
| 25 | 0.530 | <0.001 |
| 26 | 0.149 | 0.279 |
| 27 | 0.39 | 0.003 |
| 28 | 0.288 | 0.033 |
| 29 | 0.535 | <0.001 |
| 30 | 0.542 | <0.001 |
| Total | 0.479 | <0.001 |
3.2. Validity
3.2.1. Content Validity
Between the source and target version of the GDS-30 scale, the expert committee assessed the average score of 0.84 points for experience equivalence. The other criteria (semantic, idiomatic, and conceptual equivalence) achieved an average score of 0.88 (Table 5).
Table 5.
Expert committee assessment score for GDS-30 scale.
| Item | Semantic Equivalence | Idiomatic Equivalence | Experience Equivalence | Conceptual Equivalence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scale title | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 1 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2 | 6/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 3 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 6/7 | 7/7 |
| 4 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 5 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 5/7 |
| 6 | 6/7 | 6/7 | 5/7 | 6/7 |
| 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 6/7 | 7/7 |
| 8 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 5/7 |
| 9 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 10 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 5/7 |
| 11 | 4/7 | 4/7 | 4/7 | 4/7 |
| 12 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 13 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 14 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 4/7 | 5/7 |
| 15 | 6/7 | 6/7 | 6/7 | 6/7 |
| 16 | 6/7 | 6/7 | 6/7 | 6/7 |
| 17 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 4/7 | 5/7 |
| 18 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 19 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 5/7 |
| 20 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 21 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 22 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 23 | 4/7 | 4/7 | 4/7 | 4/7 |
| 24 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 25 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 26 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 27 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 5/7 |
| 28 | 5/7 | 5/7 | 4/7 | 5/7 |
| 29 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 6/7 | 7/7 |
| 30 | 7/7 | 7/7 | 6/7 | 7/7 |
| Average score | 184/210 (0.88) | 185/210 (0.88) | 177/210 (0.84) | 185/210 (0.88) |
3.2.2. Construct Validity
There was a significant difference in the rates of depression between gender, employment, education level, economic status, depression diagnosed according to ICD-10 and sleep disturbance according to PSQI (Table 6).
Table 6.
The relationship between the general characteristics and depression.
| Characteristics | Depression | Non-Depression | p | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | |||
| Age group | 60–69 years | 30 | 32.3 | 63 | 67.7 | 0.102 |
| 70–79 years | 57 | 45.2 | 69 | 54.8 | ||
| ≥ 80 years | 50 | 45.0 | 61 | 55.0 | ||
| Gender | Female | 112 | 48.9 | 117 | 51.1 | <0.001 |
| Male | 25 | 24.8 | 76 | 75.2 | ||
| Employment | No | 115 | 45.6 | 137 | 54.4 | 0.006 |
| Yes | 22 | 28.2 | 56 | 71.8 | ||
| Level of education | Lower high school | 132 | 44.3 | 166 | 55.7 | 0.002 |
| High school or higher | 5 | 15.6 | 27 | 84.4 | ||
| Marital status | Other | 52 | 43.3 | 68 | 56.7 | 0.612 |
| Marital | 85 | 40.5 | 125 | 59.5 | ||
| Economic status | Poor | 19 | 70.4 | 8 | 29.6 | 0.001 |
| No poor | 118 | 38.9 | 185 | 61.1 | ||
| Sleep disturbance | Yes | 131 | 48.0 | 142 | 52.0 | <0.001 |
| No | 6 | 10.5 | 51 | 89.5 | ||
The factor loadings ranged from 0.40 to 0.8. The factorial analysis produced 5 factors for the GDS that represents 52.874% of the variance (Table 7).
Table 7.
Factor analysis of the GDS-30 scale.
| Item | Factor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| 7. Are you in good spirits most of the time? | 0.748 | ||||
| 8. Are you afraid that something bad is going to happen to you? | 0.671 | ||||
| 6. Are you bothered by thoughts you can’t get out of your head? | 0.664 | ||||
| 13. Do you frequently worry about the future? | 0.658 | ||||
| 9. Do you feel happy most of the time? | 0.653 | ||||
| 4. Do you often get bored? | 0.542 | ||||
| 16. Do you feel downhearted and blue? | 0.531 | ||||
| 15. Do you think it is wonderful to be alive now? | 0.687 | ||||
| 5. Are you hopeful about the future? | 0.667 | ||||
| 19. Do you find life very exciting? | 0.653 | ||||
| 21. Do you feel full of energy? | 0.615 | ||||
| 23. Do you think that most people are better off than you are? | 0.708 | ||||
| 24. Do you frequently get upset over little things? | 0.664 | ||||
| 18. Do you worry a lot about the past? | 0.556 | ||||
| 25. Do you frequently feel like crying? | 0.526 | ||||
| 17. Do you feel pretty worthless the way you are now? | 0.510 | ||||
| 12. Do you prefer to stay at home, rather than going out and doing new things? | 0.746 | ||||
| 28. Do you prefer to avoid social gatherings? | 0.698 | ||||
| 2. Have you dropped many of your activities and interests? | 0.562 | ||||
| 30. Is your mind as clear as it used to be? | 0.795 | ||||
| 14. Do you feel you have more problems with memory than most? | 0.792 | ||||
| Percent Variance (%) | 33.57 | 5.73 | 5.07 | 4.62 | 3.88 |
The first factor was composed of 7 items: 7, 8, 6, 13, 9, 4, 16. This contributed to 33.57% of the total variance. This factor was called “sad mood”.
The second factor was composed of 4 items: 15, 5, 19, 21. This contributed to 5.73% of the total variance. This factor was called “positive mood”.
The third factor was composed of 5 items: 23, 24, 18, 25, 17. This contributed to 4.62% of the total variance. This factor was called “agitation and pessimistic”
The fourth factor was composed of 3 items: 12, 28, 2. This contributed to 4.62% of the total variance. This factor was called “social withdrawal”.
The fifth factor was composed of 2 items: 14, 30. This contributed to 3.88% of the total variance. This factor was called “cognitive inefficiency”.
4. Discussion
This study aimed to translate and validate the first Vietnamese version of the GDS-30 scale for people over 60 years of age. The results showed that this scale could be a reliable screening tool for geriatric depression in Vietnam. Our findings are consistent with previous studies that have demonstrated that this scale can be used effectively to screen for depression in the elderly in many countries worldwide with different versions of the number of items [31,32].
Early diagnosis of depression in the elderly is essential. In our study, the proportion of elderly participants identified with depression was 41.5% according to the GDS-30 scale (≥10 points), a finding that is consistent with rates of depression in the elderly in many studies worldwide, which vary from 20.7 to 53.8% [33,34,35,36] among different countries and using varying diagnostic approaches
In our study, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value was 0.928, which showed very good internal consistency of the items [28]. All items had a suitable composite coefficient of correlation (≥0.3). “Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value if items were deleted” of all items was lower or equal to Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value of this scale, so no item was excluded from the scale. Spearman’s correlation coefficient between the two interviews showed a medium correlation (0.479 with p < 0.001) regarding scale stability. After the first and second interviews, there were 6 items with no stability, including 3 positive items (1, 15, 19) and 3 negative items (3, 23, 26). Therefore, the patient’s emotions were not affected by their response. This study also determined the efficacy of the Vietnamese version of the GDS-30 scale compared with the ICD-10 (gold-standard) in diagnosing depression in older adults. The GDS-30 scale reached construct validity because the proportion of geriatric depression according to GDS-30 was significantly different between characteristics groups.
Previous validation studies also illustrated the high consistency of the GDS-30 scale. In the Netherlands version, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value was 0.88 [37] and showed a good level of consistency [28]. For other language versions, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient values ranged from 0.839 to 0.91 [38,39]. These data showed that the Vietnamese version of the GDS-30 scale was reliable and had adequate internal consistency.
In the Korean version, the test-retest reliability (Pearson correlation) was 0.91 (p < 0.01), indicating that the performance of the GDS-30 is highly stable over time [40]. In the Italian version, the reliability of scale after re-testing (ICC) was 0.91 [39]. Period conducted a re-test in the two studies mentioned above ranged from 1–7 days, while our study conducted a re-test in 7–14 days. The older patients could not remember exactly what happened in the past. Therefore, Spearman’s correlation coefficient value in this study was average.
In this study, the Vietnamese version of the GDS-30 scale produced 5 factors (sad mood, positive mood, agitation and pessimism, social withdrawal, cognitive inefficiency). This was similar to the original English version of the GDS, including sad mood (8, 6, 23, 13, 16, 18, 10. 24, 22), lack of energy (29, 20. 21, 30, 25, 2), positive mood (15, 27, 9, 5, 7, 19), agitation (24, 11, 4) and social withdrawal (12, 28) [41]. In the original version, 4 items (1, 3, 14, 17) were absent. The Korean version included 5 factors: sad mood and agitation (6, 18, 11, 8, 13, 24, 16, 25, 10. 3), positive mood (1, 9, 7, 15, 19, 22, 27, 5, 23), lack of energy (2, 21, 20, 17), cognitive inefficiency (14, 26, 30), and social withdrawal (12, 28) [40]. In the Italian version, the scale was divided into 5 factors: sad mood and agitation (6, 8, 10. 11, 16, 22, 24, 25), cognitive inefficiency (1, 3, 15, 17, 19, 23), lack of energy (2, 20. 21, 29), positive mood (5, 7, 9, 27), social withdrawal (4, 12, 13, 14, 18, 26, 28) [39]. The different versions were similar in most factors, such as sad mood, agitation, social withdrawal, positive mood, cognitive inefficiency. In addition, because of a factor score of less than 0.5, nine items (1, 3, 10, 11, 20, 22, 26, 27, 29) did not belong to any factors in this study that was different from the English, Korean, or Italian versions. This was a new finding in our study.
Our study proved that the Vietnamese version of the GDS-30 scale had high consistency, satisfactory reliability, understanding. It can be used as a screening tool for depression in elderly patients in primary healthcare centers. Non-psychiatric health professionals or patients can quickly self-assess and screen for depressive symptoms. However, because of time limitation, our study could not be conducted in the community. Assessing the sensitivity and specificity of the Vietnamese version of the GDS-30 also needs to be considered.
5. Conclusions
This is the first depression rating scale for the elderly in Vietnam to be translated and validated. The Vietnamese version of the GDS-30 scale had high consistency, satisfactory reliability, and clarity. This study was conducted in a hospital and given the complexities of the population in this setting; future studies conducted among outpatients would be useful in further clarifying the factor analysis aspects of the Vietnamese translated GDS-30 items. Future studies will also be needed to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the Vietnamese version of the GDS-30. Still, it appears that the Vietnamese version of the GDS-30 can be used as a screening tool for depression in elderly patients in primary healthcare centers by non-psychiatric health professionals or patients to quickly self-assess and screen for depressive illness.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, T.V.N. (Thong Van Nguyen) and T.V.N. (Tuan Van Nguyen); methodology, T.V.N. (Thong Van Nguyen), T.N., M.T.T.N., and T.V.N. (Tuan Van Nguyen); software, X.T.K.N. and N.H.P.D.; validation, R.C.V., T.N. and T.V.N. (Tuan Van Nguyen); formal analysis, X.T.K.N. and N.H.P.D.; investigation, T.V.N. (Thong Van Nguyen), N.M.N., H.M.L. and C.L.L.; resources, T.V.N. (Thong Van Nguyen), N.M.N. and C.L.L.; data curation, X.T.K.N. and N.H.P.D.; writing—original draft preparation, T.V.N. (Thong Van Nguyen), X.T.K.N. and N.H.P.D.; writing—review and editing, R.C.V., M.T.T.N., T.N. and T.V.N. (Tuan Van Nguyen); supervision, T.V.N. (Tuan Van Nguyen); project administration, K.T.N. and P.M.N.; funding acquisition, K.T.N. and P.M.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
We thank the financial support from Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy with the grant number 1888/QD-DHYDCT.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement
Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- 1.United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs . World Population Ageing 2020 Highlights: Living Arrangements of Older Persons. Population Division, United Nations; Fertility, NY, USA: 2020. [Google Scholar]
- 2.General Statistics Office of Vietnam . Completed Results of the 2019 Viet Nam Population and Housing Census. Statistical Publishing House; Ha Noi, Vietnam: 2019. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Vietnam National Committee on Aging . Towards a Comprehensive National Policy for An Ageing in Viet Nam. Vietnam National Committee on Aging; Ha Noi, Vietnam: 2019. [Google Scholar]
- 4.United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs . World Population Ageing 2017-Highlights. Population Division, United Nations; Fertility, NY, USA: 2017. [Google Scholar]
- 5.GBD 2019 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396:1204–1222. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30925-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Dao A.T.M., Nguyen V.T., Nguyen H.V., Nguyen L.T.K. Factors Associated with Depression among the Elderly Living in Urban Vietnam. Biomed. Res. Int. 2018;2018:2370284. doi: 10.1155/2018/2370284. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Borza T., Engedal K., Bergh S., Selbæk G. Older people with depression-a three-year follow-up. Tidsskr. Nor. Laegeforen. 2019;139:01–10. doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.18.0968. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Han K., Yang S., Jia W., Wang S., Song Y., Cao W., Wang J., Liu M., He Y. Health-Related Quality of Life and Its Correlation With Depression Among Chinese Centenarians. Front. Public Health. 2020;8:580757. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.580757. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Frénisy M.C., Plassard C. Suicide in the elderly. Soins. 2017;62:39–41. doi: 10.1016/j.soin.2017.02.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Kincigil A., Matthews B.E. National Rates and Patterns of Depression Screening in Primary Care: Results From 2012 and 2013. Psychiatr. Serv. 2017;68:660–666. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201600096. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Kozela M., Bobak M., Besala A., Micek A., Kubinova R., Malyutina S., Denisova D., Richards M., Pikhart H., Peasey A., et al. The association of depressive symptoms with cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in Central and Eastern Europe: Prospective results of the HAPIEE study. Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol. 2016;23:2047–4881. doi: 10.1177/2047487316649493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Ashok V.G., Ghosh S.S. Prevalence of Depression among Hypertensive Patients Attending a Rural Health Centre in Kanyakumari. Natl. J. Community Med. 2019;10:172–175. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Li Z., Li L., Fau-Chen Y., Chen P., Fau-Chen L., Chen Y., Fau-Hu P., Hu Y. Prevalence of Depression in Patients With Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Medicine. 2015;94:e1317. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Son Y.J., Won M.H. Depression and medication adherence among older Korean patients with hypertension: Mediating role of self-efficacy. Int. J. Nurs. Pr. 2017;23:e12525. doi: 10.1111/ijn.12525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Yesavage J.A., Brink T.L., Rose T.L., Lum O., Huang V., Adey M., Leirer V.O. Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: A preliminary report. J. Psychiatr. Res. 1982;17:37–49. doi: 10.1016/0022-3956(82)90033-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Ganguli M., Dube S., Johnston J.M., Pandav R., Chandra V., Dodge H.H. Depressive symptoms, cognitive impairment and functional impairment in a rural elderly population in India: A Hindi version of the geriatric depression scale (GDS-H) Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry. 1999;14:807–820. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1166(199910)14:10<807::AID-GPS31>3.0.CO;2-#. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Bae J.N., Cho M. Development of the Korean version of the Geriatric Depression Scale and its short form among elderly psychiatric patients. J. Psychosom. Res. 2004;57:297–305. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2004.01.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Ty W.E., Davis R.D., Melgar M.I., Ramos M. A Validation Study on the Filipino Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) using Rasch Analysis. J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2019;15:125–129. [Google Scholar]
- 19.Thanh N.D., Quyen B.T., Tien T.Q. Validation of a Brief CES-D Scale for Measuring Depression and Its Associated Predictors among Adolescents in Chi Linh, Hai Duong, Vietnam. AIMS Public Health. 2016;3:448–459. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2016.3.448. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Nguyen T.Q., Bandeen-Roche K., Bass J.K., German D., Nguyen N.T., Knowlton A.R. A tool for sexual minority mental health research: The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) as a depressive symptom severity measure for sexual minority women in Viet Nam. J. Gay Lesbian Ment. Health. 2016;20:173–191. doi: 10.1080/19359705.2015.1080204. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Tran T.D., Tran T., Fisher J. Validation of three psychometric instruments for screening for perinatal common mental disorders in men in the north of Vietnam. J. Affect. Disord. 2012;136:104–109. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2011.08.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Beaton D.E., Bombardier C., Guillemin F., Ferraz M.B. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:3186–3191. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Beaton D., Bombardier C., Guillemin F., Ferraz M. Recommendations for the Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the DASH & QuickDASH Outcome Measures Contributors to this Document. Inst. Work. Health. 2007;1:1–45. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Vietnam National Heart Association Vietnam . Guidelines for Diagnosis and Treatment of Hypertension in Adults. National Heart Association; Hanoi, Vietnam: 2018. [Google Scholar]
- 25.DeVon H.A., Block M.E., Moyle-Wright P., Ernst D.M., Hayden S.J., Lazzara D.J., Savoy S.M., Kostas-Polston E. A psychometric toolbox for testing validity and reliability. J. Nurs. Scholarsh. 2007;39:155–164. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2007.00161.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Tsang S., Royse C.F., Terkawi A.S. Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. Saudi J. Anaesth. 2017;11:S80–S89. doi: 10.4103/sja.SJA_203_17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Nunnally J.C. Psychometric Theory 3E. Tata McGraw-Hill Education; Uttar Pradesh, India: 1994. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Taber K.S. The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Res. Sci. Educ. 2018;48:1273–1296. doi: 10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Dancey C.P., Reidy J. Statistics Without Maths for Psychology. Taylor & Francis Ltd.; London, UK: 2011. [Google Scholar]
- 30.Akoglu H. User’s guide to correlation coefficients. Turk. J. Emerg. Med. 2018;18:91–93. doi: 10.1016/j.tjem.2018.08.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Erazo M., Fors M., Mullo S., González P., Viada C. Internal Consistency of Yesavage Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS 15-Item Version) in Ecuadorian Older Adults. INQUIRY J. Health Care Organ. Provis. Financ. 2020;57:0046958020971184. doi: 10.1177/0046958020971184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Lopez F.V., Split M., Filoteo J.V., Litvan I., Moore R.C., Pirogovsky-Turk E., Liu L., Lessig S., Schiehser D.M. Does the Geriatric Depression Scale measure depression in Parkinson’s disease? Int J. Geriatr. Psychiatry. 2018;33:1662–1670. doi: 10.1002/gps.4970. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Vaughan L., Corbin A.L., Goveas J.S. Depression and frailty in later life: A systematic review. Clin. Interv. Aging. 2015;10:1947–1958. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S69632. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.AThomas M., Cherian V., Antony A. Translation, validation and cross-cultural adaptation of the geriatric depression scale (GDS-30) for utilization amongst speakers of Malayalam; the regional language of the South Indian State of Kerala. J. Fam. Med. Prim. Care. 2021;10:1863–1867. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1813_20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Durmaz B., Soysal P., Ellidokuz H., Isik A.T. Validity and reliability of geriatric depression scale-15 (short form) in Turkish older adults. North. Clin. Istanb. 2018;5:216–220. doi: 10.14744/nci.2017.85047. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Laudisio A., Incalzi R.A., Gemma A., Marzetti E., Pozzi G., Padua L., Bernabei R., Zuccalà G. Definition of a Geriatric Depression Scale cutoff based upon quality of life: A population-based study. Int J. Geriatr. Psychiatry. 2018;33:e58–e64. doi: 10.1002/gps.4715. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Jongenelis K., Pot A.M., Eisses A.M.H., Gerritsen D.L., Derksen M., Beekman A.T.F., Kluiter H., Ribbe M.W. Diagnostic accuracy of the original 30-item and shortened versions of the Geriatric Depression Scale in nursing home patients. Int J. Geriatr. Psychiatry. 2005;20:1067–1074. doi: 10.1002/gps.1398. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Ertan T., Eker E. Reliability, validity, and factor structure of the geriatric depression scale in Turkish elderly: Are there different factor structures for different cultures? Int. Psychogeriatr. 2000;12:163–172. doi: 10.1017/S1041610200006293. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Galeoto G., Sansoni J., Scuccimarri M., Bruni V., De Santis R., Colucci M., Valente D., Tofani M. A Psychometric Properties Evaluation of the Italian Version of the Geriatric Depression Scale. Depress. Res. Treat. 2018;2018:1797536. doi: 10.1155/2018/1797536. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Kim J.Y., Park J.H., Lee J.J., Huh Y., Lee S.B., Han S.K., Choi S.W., Lee N.Y., Kim K.W., Woo J.I. Standardization of the korean version of the geriatric depression scale: Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Psychiatry Investig. 2008;5:232–238. doi: 10.4306/pi.2008.5.4.232. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Sheikh J.I., Yesavage J.A., Brooks J.O., Friedman L., Gratzinger P., Hill R.D., Zadeik A., Crook T. Proposed factor structure of the Geriatric Depression Scale. Int. Psychogeriatr. 1991;3:23–28. doi: 10.1017/S1041610291000480. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Not applicable.