Alexithymia and Psychological Distress in Patients With Fibromyalgia and Rheumatic Disease

The 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) has been shown in previous research to measure a general dimension of alexithymia with three intercorrelated factors. This study evaluated the reliability and factorial validity of an Italian translation of the TAS-20 in a group of normal adults (N = 206) and in a mixed group of medical and psychiatric outpatients (N = 642). Using confirmatory factor analyses, the previously established three-factor model of the TAS-20 was found to be replicable in both groups. In addition, the Italian TAS-20 demonstrated adequate estimates of internal reliability and test-retest reliability. Although evaluation of the convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity of the TAS-20 is required in Italian populations, the present results support the use of the Italian translation of the scale for clinical and research purposes.

The psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and its utility as a screening instrument for anxiety and depression in a non-psychiatric setting were evaluated. The questionnaire was administered twice to 197 breast cancer patients randomised in a phase III adjuvant clinical trial: before the start of chemotherapy and at the first follow-up visit. The presence of psychiatric disorders was evaluated at the follow-up visit using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R in 132 patients. Factor analyses identified two strictly correlated factors. Crohnbach's alpha for the anxiety and depression scales ranged between 0.80 and 0.85. At follow-up, 50 patients (38%) were assigned a current DSM-III-R diagnosis, in most cases adjustment disorders (24%) or major depressive disorder (10%). Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was used to test the discriminant validity for both anxiety and depressive disorders. The comparison of the areas under the curve (AUC) between the two scales did not show any difference in identifying either anxiety (P = 0.855) or depressive disorders (P = 0.357). The 14-item total scale showed a high internal consistency (alpha = 0.89 and 0.88) and a high discriminating power for all the psychiatric disorders (AUC = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.83-0.94). The cut-off point that maximised sensitivity (84%) and specificity (79%) was 10. These results suggest that the total score is a valid measure of emotional distress, so that the Italian version of HADS can be used as a screening questionnaire for psychiatric disorders. The use of the two subscales as a 'case identifier' or as an outcome measure should be considered with caution.

The assessment of a measure of chronic pain, should be reliable, valid and sensitive to change. Our study evaluated the reliability of 3 pain scales, visual analogue scale (VAS), numerical rating scale (NRS) and verbal rating scale (VRS) in literate and illiterate patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Patients with RA attending an outpatient rheumatology clinic were interviewed and asked to score their pain levels on the 3 pain scales. The scales were presented in random order, twice, before and just after a regular medical consultation. Ninety-one patients were studied (25 illiterate and 66 literate). The Pearson product moment correlation between first and second assessment was 0.937 for VAS, 0.963 for NRS and 0.901 for VRS in the literate patient group and 0.712 for VAS, 0.947 for NRS and 0.820 for VRS in the illiterate patient group. These results indicate that the NRS has the higher reliability in both groups of patients.