Anxiety and depression in Chinese patients with glaucoma: Sociodemographic, clinical, and self-reported correlates

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

ObjectivesTo assess the prevalence of anxiety and depression in Chinese glaucoma patients, and explore their predictive factors. MethodsThis cross-sectional study included 506 Chinese glaucoma patients. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scales (HADS) and the Chinese-version Glaucoma Quality of Life-15 questionnaire (CHI-GQL-15) were administered to all participants to evaluate their psychological distresses and quality of life (QoL). Visual functions (habitual-corrected visual acuity (HCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), and mean defect (MD) of visual field) were assessed through clinical examinations by professionals. Sociodemographic information and other treatment histories were collected via interviews and chart review. Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of anxiety and depression. To evaluate the impact of anxiety or depression on patients QoL, the CHI-GQL-15 summary and subscores of patients with and without psychological disturbances were compared using covariate-adjusted regression analyses. ResultsThe prevalence of anxiety and depression in Chinese glaucoma patients was 22.92% and 16.40%, respectively. A younger age (β=−0.058, p<0.001), female gender (β=1.219, p=0.001), moderate and heavy economic burden (β=1.186, p=0.009; β=2.705, p<0.001, respectively) and the CHI-GQL-15 summary score (β=0.101, p<0.001) were independent predictors of anxiety. Significant independent predictors of depression included the duration of glaucoma (β=−0.065, p=0.019) and the CHI-GQL-15 summary score (β=0.147, p<0.001). Difference in the CHI-GQL-15 summary and its subscores of patients with and without psychological disturbance were statistically significant (p<0.001). ConclusionsPrevalence of anxiety and depression among Chinese glaucoma patients is relatively high. Self-reported measures were informative in evaluating patients' psychological disturbances, whereas objective measures of visual function were not.