The 4-Item Negative Symptom Assessment (NSA-4) Instrument: A Simple Tool for Evaluating Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia Following Brief Training.

Larry Alphs, Robert Morlock, Cheryl Coon, Arjen van Willigenburg, John Panagides
{"title":"The 4-Item Negative Symptom Assessment (NSA-4) Instrument: A Simple Tool for Evaluating Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia Following Brief Training.","authors":"Larry Alphs,&nbsp;Robert Morlock,&nbsp;Cheryl Coon,&nbsp;Arjen van Willigenburg,&nbsp;John Panagides","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Objective. To assess the ability of mental health professionals to use the 4-item Negative Symptom Assessment instrument, derived from the Negative Symptom Assessment-16, to rapidly determine the severity of negative symptoms of schizophrenia.Design. Open participation.Setting. Medical education conferences.Participants. Attendees at two international psychiatry conferences.Measurements. Participants read a brief set of the 4-item Negative Symptom Assessment instructions and viewed a videotape of a patient with schizophrenia. Using the 1 to 6 4-item Negative Symptom Assessment severity rating scale, they rated four negative symptom items and the overall global negative symptoms. These ratings were compared with a consensus rating determination using frequency distributions and Chi-square tests for the proportion of participant ratings that were within one point of the expert rating.Results. More than 400 medical professionals (293 physicians, 50% with a European practice, and 55% who reported past utilization of schizophrenia ratings scales) participated. Between 82.1 and 91.1 percent of the 4-items and the global rating determinations by the participants were within one rating point of the consensus expert ratings. The differences between the percentage of participant rating scores that were within one point versus the percentage that were greater than one point different from those by the consensus experts was significant (p<0.0001). Participants rating of negative symptoms using the 4-item Negative Symptom Assessment did not generally differ among the geographic regions of practice, the professional credentialing, or their familiarity with the use of schizophrenia symptom rating instruments.Conclusion. These findings suggest that clinicians from a variety of geographic practices can, after brief training, use the 4-item Negative Symptom Assessment effectively to rapidly assess negative symptoms in patients with schizophrenia.</p>","PeriodicalId":20822,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatry (Edgmont (Pa. : Township))","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2922363/pdf/PE_7_7_26.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatry (Edgmont (Pa. : Township))","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective. To assess the ability of mental health professionals to use the 4-item Negative Symptom Assessment instrument, derived from the Negative Symptom Assessment-16, to rapidly determine the severity of negative symptoms of schizophrenia.Design. Open participation.Setting. Medical education conferences.Participants. Attendees at two international psychiatry conferences.Measurements. Participants read a brief set of the 4-item Negative Symptom Assessment instructions and viewed a videotape of a patient with schizophrenia. Using the 1 to 6 4-item Negative Symptom Assessment severity rating scale, they rated four negative symptom items and the overall global negative symptoms. These ratings were compared with a consensus rating determination using frequency distributions and Chi-square tests for the proportion of participant ratings that were within one point of the expert rating.Results. More than 400 medical professionals (293 physicians, 50% with a European practice, and 55% who reported past utilization of schizophrenia ratings scales) participated. Between 82.1 and 91.1 percent of the 4-items and the global rating determinations by the participants were within one rating point of the consensus expert ratings. The differences between the percentage of participant rating scores that were within one point versus the percentage that were greater than one point different from those by the consensus experts was significant (p<0.0001). Participants rating of negative symptoms using the 4-item Negative Symptom Assessment did not generally differ among the geographic regions of practice, the professional credentialing, or their familiarity with the use of schizophrenia symptom rating instruments.Conclusion. These findings suggest that clinicians from a variety of geographic practices can, after brief training, use the 4-item Negative Symptom Assessment effectively to rapidly assess negative symptoms in patients with schizophrenia.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
4项阴性症状评估(NSA-4)仪器:一种简单的评估精神分裂症阴性症状的工具。
目标。评估精神卫生专业人员使用消极症状评估-16衍生的4项消极症状评估工具快速确定精神分裂症消极症状严重程度的能力。participation.Setting开放。医学教育会议,参与者。两个国际精神病学会议的与会者。参与者阅读了一套简短的四项负面症状评估指南,并观看了一名精神分裂症患者的录像带。使用1至6项阴性症状评估严重程度评定量表,他们对四个阴性症状项目和总体阴性症状进行了评定。使用频率分布和卡方检验,将这些评级与共识评级决定进行比较,以确定在专家评级的一个点内的参与者评级比例。结果。超过400名医疗专业人员(293名医生,50%在欧洲执业,55%报告过去使用过精神分裂症评分量表)参与了调查。在82.1%和91.1%之间的4个项目和参与者的全球评级决定是在一个评级点的共识专家评级。参与者评级分数在1分以内的百分比与与共识专家的分数相差大于1分的百分比之间的差异是显着的
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Meow meow or miaow miaow: a new drug of concern. Medical disability and pain medication prescription among internal medicine outpatients. A review of new atypical antipsychotic launches in the United States. Psychiatric disorders: a global look at facts and figures. The blood brain barrier and the role of ratiometric molecular analysis in schizophrenia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1