Psychometrische Eigenschaften der deutschen Version des Suicide Behaviors Questionnaire Revised (SBQ-R)

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Einleitung Zur ökonomischen Erfassung suizidaler Erlebens- und Verhaltensweisen findet der Suicide Behaviors Questionnaire – Revised (SBQ-R) von Osman und Kollegen breiten Einsatz. Dieser Fragebogen umfasst 4 Items, die verschiedene Facetten von Suizidalität erfassen und weist einige Einschränkungen auf. So sind die 4 Items nicht gleich skaliert und haben z. T. einen unterschiedlichen zeitlichen Bezug. Einige Antwortalternativen zu Item 1 und 3 sind mit dem gleichen Score belegt – es wird somit keine klare Schweregraddifferenzierung bezüglich verschiedener Aspekte von Suizidalität vorgenommen. Bislang liegen weder Daten zu den psychometrischen Eigenschaften der deutschen Version vor, noch wurde die postulierte Eindimensionalität des SBQ-R bislang international eingehender untersucht.

Material und Methode In einer bevölkerungsrepräsentativen Stichprobe (N=2497) wurden der SBQ-R sowie der PHQ-4 (zur Erfassung von Depressivität und Ängstlichkeit), der INQ sowie der ACSS-FAD (erfassen Konstrukte der Interpersonalen Theorie suizidalen Verhaltens) eingesetzt. Die Dimensionalität des SBQ-R wurde mit einer konfirmatorischen Faktorenanalyse geprüft, Interkorrelationen mit dem PHQ-4, dem INQ und dem ACSS-FAD wurden zur Bestimmung der konvergenten Validität ermittelt.

Ergebnisse Während die initiale Modellgüte für das eindimensionale Modell nicht zufriedenstellend war, konnte diese nach Einführung einer Residualkorrelation deutlich verbessert werden. Die interne Konsistenz ist mit Cronbach’s α=0,72 ausreichend. Es fanden sich theoriekonforme Zusammenhänge mit den konvergenten Maßen, mit Ausnahme des ACSS-FAD.

Schlussfolgerung Die psychometrischen Befunde der deutschen Übersetzung des SBQ-R sprechen grundsätzlich für den Einsatz des Fragebogens, wenngleich die Skalierung der Items und die notwendige Zulassung von Residualkorrelationen im eindimensionalen Modell kritisch zu betrachten sind. Da suizidale Erlebens- und Verhaltensweisen in der Suizidforschung sowie als Ausschlusskriterium in klinischen Studien häufig zeitökonomisch erfasst werden müssen, wäre es perspektivisch lohnenswert, ein gut einsetzbares und im Hinblick auf Itemkonstruktion und -skalierung schlüssigeres Instrument als Alternative zu entwickeln.

Abstract

Objectives The Suicide Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised (SBQ-R) was developed by Osman et al. (2001) to economically assess different aspects of suicidality. It consists of 4 items. There are several critical points concerning item construction: (1) temporal frame (e. g. retrospective vs. prospective) and (2) response labels of item 1 and 3 (e. g. 2 alternatives with the same scoring). Information about psychometric properties of the German version of the SBQ-R were not available until now. The SBQ-R is assumed to be a unidimensional measure and is evaluated using a total score, although its dimensionality has never been tested.

Methods The SBQ-R and several measures for convergent validity were assessed in a representative sample of the German general population (N=2497). Convergent validity was tested against symptoms of depression and anxiety (PHQ-4), as well as the core constructs of the Interpersonal Theory of Suicidal Behavior (IPTS) (INQ, ACSS-FAD). Unidimensionality of the SBQ-R was tested using confirmatory factor analysis and intercorrelations with the convergent measures were calculated.

Results The initial model fit of the unidimensional solution was unsatisfactory. After inclusion of a correlated error term of item 2 and item 4 based on modification indices, the model fit was very good. Moreover the SBQ-R showed satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach’s α=0.72). With the exception of the ACSS-FAD, all correlations with convergent measures were according to the theoretically proposed expectations.

Conclusion In principle the findings on the psychometric properties justify the use of the SBQ-R, although several critical points concerning item scoring remain unresolved. Moreover, sufficient unidimensional model fit was not possible without including correlated errors. Since suicidality is a frequently assessed construct in suicide research and as an exclusion criterion in clinical studies, it would be desirable to develop an economic, psychometrically sound and compelling instrument for the assessment of the different aspects of suicidality in future.

• Literatur

• 1 Statistisches Bundesamt. Gesundheit – Todesursachen in Deutschland (2015.) Im Internet https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/Thematisch/Gesundheit/Todesursachen/Todesursachen2120400157004.pdf?__blob = publicationFil e Stand: 18.04.2017
  PubMed
• 2 Nock MK, Borges G, Ono Y. Suicide. Global perspectives from the WHO World Mental Health Survey. (Hrsg.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2014
  Google Scholar
• 3 Forkmann T, Brähler E, Gauggel S. et al. Prevalence of suicidal ideation and related risk factors in the German general population. J Nerv Ment Dis 2012; 200: 401-405
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Hawgood J, De Leo D. Suicide prediction - A shift in paradigm is needed. Crisis 2016; 37: 251-255
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Franklin JC, Ribeiro JD, Fox KR. et al. Risk factors for suicidal thoughts and behaviors: A meta-analysis of 50 years of research. Psychol Bull 2017; 143: 187-232
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Jobes D, Jacoby A, Cimbolic P. et al. Assessment and treatment of suicidal clients in a university counseling center. J Couns Psychol 1997; 44: 368-377
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Joiner T, Rudd MD, Rajab MH. Agreement between self- and clinician-rated suicidal symptoms in a clinical sample of young adults. J Consult Clin Psychol 1999; 67: 171-176
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Forkmann T, Teismann T, Glaesmer H. Diagnostik von Suizidalität. (Hrsg.) Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2016
  Google Scholar
• 9 Batterham PJ, Ftanou M, Pirkis J. et al. A systematic review and evaluation of measures for suicide ideation and behaviors in population-based research. Psychol Assess 2015; 27: 501-512
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Osman A, Bagge CL, Gutierrez PM. et al. The Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised (SBQ-R): validation with clinical and nonclinical samples. Assessment 2001; 8: 443-454
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Cotton CR, Peters DK, Range LM. Psychometric properties of the suicidal behaviors questionnaire. Death Studies 1995; 19: 391-397
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Linehan MM, Goodstein JL, Nielsen SL. et al. Reasons for staying alive when you are thinking of killing yourself: the reasons for living inventory. J Consult Clin Psychol 1983; 51: 276
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Joiner T. Why people die by suicide. (Hrsg.) Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2005
  Google Scholar
• 14 Angst J, Angst F, Stassen HH. Suicide risk in patients with major depressive disorder. J Clin Psychiatry 1999; 60: 57-62
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Bentley KH, Franklin JC, Ribeiro JD. et al. Anxiety and its disorders as risk factors for suicidal thoughts and behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Clin Psychol Rev 2016; 43: 30-46
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Bagge C, Osman A. The suicide probability scale: Norms and factor structure. Psychol Rep 1998; 83: 637-638
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Wagner B, Klinitzke G, Brähler E. et al. Extreme Obesity is associated with suicidal behaviour and suicide attempts in adults; Results of a population-based representative sample. Anxiety and Depression 2013; 30: 975-981
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Wild D, Grove A, Martin M. et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: Report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value in Health 2005; 8: 94-104
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Van Orden KA, Cukrowicz KC, Witte TK. et al. Thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness: Construct validity and psychometric properties of the Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire. Psychological Assessment 2012; 24: 197-215
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Wachtel S, Teismann T. Die Interpersonale Theorie suizidalen Verhaltens. Z Klin Psychol Psychother 2013; 42: 96-106
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Glaesmer H, Spangenberg L, Scherer A. et al. von Suizidwünschen: Erste psychometrische Befunde zur deutschen Version des Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire (INQ). Psychiatrische Praxis 2014; 41: 250-256
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Hallensleben N, Spangenberg L, Kapusta N. et al. The German Version of the Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire (INQ) - Factorial structure, psychometric properties and population-based norms. J Affect Disord 2016; 195: 191-198
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Ribeiro JD, Witte TK, van Orden KA. et al. Fearlessness about death: The psychometric properties and construct validity of the revision to the acquired capability for suicide scale. Psychol Assess 2014; 26: 115-126
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Spangenberg L, Glaesmer H, Gecht J. et al. Furchtlosigkeit vor dem Tod und Suizidalität: Psychometrische Eigenschaften der deutschen Version der revidierten Acquired Capability for Suicide Scale (ACSS-FAD). Psychiatrische Praxis 2016; 43: 95-100
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Spangenberg L, Hallensleben N, Friedrich M. et al. Dimensionality, psychometric properties and population-based norms of the German Version of the revised Acquired Capability for Suicide Scale (ACSS-FAD). Psychiatry Res 2016; 46-52
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. et al. Anxiety disorders in primary care: prevalence, impairment, comorbidity, and detection. Ann Intern Med 2007; 146: 317-325
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Löwe B, Decker O, Müller S. et al. Validation and standardization of the generalized anxiety disorder screener (GAD-7) in the general population. Med Care 2008; 46: 266-274
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. et al. An ultra-brief screening scale for anxiety and depression: the PHQ–4. Psychosomatics 2009; 50: 613-621
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Loewe B, Wahl I, Rose M. et al. A 4-item measure for depression and anxiety: Validation and standardization of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4) in the general population. J Affect Disord 2010; 122: 86-92
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 AMOS. (Version 19.0). Meadville: 2010;
  PubMed
• 31 Boomsma A. Reporting analyses of covariance structures. Struct Equ Modeling 2000; 7: 461-483
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press; 2011
  Google Scholar
• 33 Zwingmann C, Wirtz M, Mueller C. et al. Positive and negative religious coping in German breast cancer patients. J Behav Med 2006; 29: 533-547
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Brown T. Confirmatory Factor Analysis. (Hrsg.) New York: Guilford Press; 2006
  Google Scholar
• 35 Leppänen JM. Emotional information processing in mood disorders: a review of behavioral and neuroimaging findings. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2006; 19: 34-39
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 George SE, Page AC, Hooke GR. et al. Multifacet assessment of capability for suicide: Development and prospective validation of the acquired capability with rehearsal for suicide scale. Psychol Assess 2016; 28: 1452-1464
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Glaesmer H, Hallensleben N, Forkmann T. et al. Testing the main predictions of the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide in a representative sample of the German general population. J Affect Disord 2017; 211: 150-152
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar