...
首页> 外文期刊>The European journal of psychiatry. >Reliability of clinical ICD-10 diagnoses among electroconvulsive therapy patients with chronic affective disorders
【24h】

Reliability of clinical ICD-10 diagnoses among electroconvulsive therapy patients with chronic affective disorders

机译:慢性情感障碍电痉挛治疗患者临床ICD-10诊断的可靠性

获取原文
           

摘要

Background and Objectives: Diagnostic reliability is of major concern both to clinicians and researchers. The aim has been to investigate the trustworthiness of clinical ICD-10 affective disorder diagnoses for research purpose. Methods: 150 ECT patients with chronic affective disorders were investigated. A standardized schema for basic anamnesis and the Operational Criteria Checklist for Psychotic and Affective Illness (OPCRIT) were used. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of clinical affective disorder ICD-10 diagnoses and the formal agreement between clinical ICD-10, OPCRIT ICD-10 and DSM-IV diagnoses were determined using unweighted κ-statistics. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the clinical bipolar diagnoses was 0.55, 0.75, 0.42 and 0.84, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the clinical unipolar diagnoses was 0.79, 0.55, 0.77 and 0.58, respectively. The agreement between clinical ICD-10 and OPCRIT ICD-10 bipolar vs. non-bipolar diagnoses was low, κ = 0.28. The agreement between clinical ICD-10 and OPCRIT ICD-10 unipolar vs. non-unipolar diagnoses was low, κ = 0.35. The agreement between OPCRIT ICD-10 and DSM-IV diagnoses on bipolar vs. non-bipolar disorders was high, κ = 0.91, and the agreement on unipolar vs. non-unipolar disorders was fairly high, κ = 0.78. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that the reliability of clinical ICD-10 diagnoses of affective disorders from chronic subjects with a history of ECT is problematic despite sample homogeneity on basic clinical, demographic and epidemiological parameters.
机译:背景与目的:诊断的可靠性是临床医生和研究人员都非常关注的问题。目的是为了研究目的研究临床ICD-10情感障碍诊断的可信度。方法:对150名患有慢性情感障碍的ECT患者进行了调查。使用了基本记忆的标准化方案和精神病和情感病的操作标准清单(OPCRIT)。使用非加权κ统计量确定临床情感障碍ICD-10诊断的敏感性,特异性,阳性和阴性预测值以及临床ICD-10,OPCRIT ICD-10和DSM-IV诊断之间的正式协议。结果:临床双相型诊断的敏感性,特异性,阳性和阴性预测值分别为0.55、0.75、0.42和0.84。临床单极诊断的敏感性,特异性,阳性和阴性预测值分别为0.79、0.55、0.77和0.58。临床ICD-10和OPCRIT ICD-10双相和非双相诊断之间的一致性很低,κ= 0.28。临床ICD-10和OPCRIT ICD-10单极与非单极诊断之间的一致性很低,κ= 0.35。 OPCRIT ICD-10和DSM-IV诊断双相情感障碍与非双相情感障碍的一致性很高,κ= 0.91,单相情感障碍与非单相情感障碍的一致性很高,κ= 0.78。结论:这项研究表明,尽管在基本临床,人口统计学和流行病学参数上样本均一,但临床ICD-10诊断患有ECT史的慢性受试者的情感障碍的可靠性仍然存在问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号