评估DSM-5(PC-PTSD-5)在创伤暴露、社会经济脆弱患者群体中的创伤后应激障碍初级保健筛查表现。

IF 1.6 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-01-30 DOI:10.1007/s10880-023-09941-9
Emma C Lathan, Jessica M Petri, Tamara Haynes, Stan C Sonu, Yara Mekawi, Vasiliki Michopoulos, Abigail Powers
{"title":"评估DSM-5(PC-PTSD-5)在创伤暴露、社会经济脆弱患者群体中的创伤后应激障碍初级保健筛查表现。","authors":"Emma C Lathan, Jessica M Petri, Tamara Haynes, Stan C Sonu, Yara Mekawi, Vasiliki Michopoulos, Abigail Powers","doi":"10.1007/s10880-023-09941-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The properties and utility of the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) remain unstudied in community-based populations. This study evaluates the performance of the PC-PTSD-5 to determine whether it can be used as a brief alternative to the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) in a large public hospital in the southeastern United States. Participants (N = 422; 92.7% Black; 85.8% female; M<sub>age</sub> = 42.0 years, SD<sub>age</sub> = 13.4 years) completed the PCL-5 and PC-PTSD-5 after recruitment from medical clinic waiting rooms and admission lists. Using chance-corrected test quality indices and item response theory (IRT) analyses, we determined optimal cut-scores for screening and examined item performance. Approximately 45.0% of the sample screened positive for probable DSM-5 PTSD using the PCL-5. The PC-PTSD-5 demonstrated high internal consistency and strong associations with PCL-5 scores (total, r = .79; items, rs = .51-.61). A cut-score of one was optimally sensitive for screening (κ[1] = .96), and a cut-score of four had the highest quality of probable efficiency (κ[.5] = .66) for detecting self-reported DSM-5 PTSD on the PCL-5. IRT analyses indicated Item 1 (nightmares, intrusive memories) provided the most information, and other items may not be incrementally useful for this sample. Findings provide preliminary support for the use of the PC-PTSD-5 as a brief alternative to the PCL-5 among chronically trauma-exposed patients in the public healthcare setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":15494,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9885055/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Performance of the Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) in a Trauma-Exposed, Socioeconomically Vulnerable Patient Population.\",\"authors\":\"Emma C Lathan, Jessica M Petri, Tamara Haynes, Stan C Sonu, Yara Mekawi, Vasiliki Michopoulos, Abigail Powers\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10880-023-09941-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The properties and utility of the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) remain unstudied in community-based populations. This study evaluates the performance of the PC-PTSD-5 to determine whether it can be used as a brief alternative to the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) in a large public hospital in the southeastern United States. Participants (N = 422; 92.7% Black; 85.8% female; M<sub>age</sub> = 42.0 years, SD<sub>age</sub> = 13.4 years) completed the PCL-5 and PC-PTSD-5 after recruitment from medical clinic waiting rooms and admission lists. Using chance-corrected test quality indices and item response theory (IRT) analyses, we determined optimal cut-scores for screening and examined item performance. Approximately 45.0% of the sample screened positive for probable DSM-5 PTSD using the PCL-5. The PC-PTSD-5 demonstrated high internal consistency and strong associations with PCL-5 scores (total, r = .79; items, rs = .51-.61). A cut-score of one was optimally sensitive for screening (κ[1] = .96), and a cut-score of four had the highest quality of probable efficiency (κ[.5] = .66) for detecting self-reported DSM-5 PTSD on the PCL-5. IRT analyses indicated Item 1 (nightmares, intrusive memories) provided the most information, and other items may not be incrementally useful for this sample. Findings provide preliminary support for the use of the PC-PTSD-5 as a brief alternative to the PCL-5 among chronically trauma-exposed patients in the public healthcare setting.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9885055/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10880-023-09941-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10880-023-09941-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

DSM-5初级保健PTSD筛查(PC-PTSD-5)的特性和实用性在社区人群中仍未得到研究。本研究评估了PC-PTSD-5的性能,以确定它是否可以作为美国东南部一家大型公立医院DSM-5(PCL-5)PTSD检查表的简短替代品。参与者(N = 422;92.7%为黑色;女性85.8%;Mage = 42.0岁,SD年龄 = 13.4岁)在从诊所候诊室和入院名单招募后完成了PCL-5和PC-PTSD-5。使用机会修正的测试质量指数和项目反应理论(IRT)分析,我们确定了筛选和检查项目表现的最佳分数。大约45.0%的样本使用PCL-5筛选出可能的DSM-5 PTSD阳性。PC-PTSD-5表现出高度的内部一致性和与PCL-5评分的强相关性(总分 = .79;项目,rs = .51-.61)。1分的切割分数对筛选最敏感(κ[1] = .96),并且四分的切割分数具有最高的可能效率质量(κ[.5] = .66),用于检测PCL-5上自我报告的DSM-5 PTSD。IRT分析表明,第1项(噩梦、侵入性记忆)提供了最多的信息,其他项目可能对该样本没有增量用处。研究结果为在公共医疗环境中长期暴露于创伤的患者中使用PC-PTSD-5作为PCL-5的简短替代品提供了初步支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluating the Performance of the Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) in a Trauma-Exposed, Socioeconomically Vulnerable Patient Population.

The properties and utility of the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) remain unstudied in community-based populations. This study evaluates the performance of the PC-PTSD-5 to determine whether it can be used as a brief alternative to the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) in a large public hospital in the southeastern United States. Participants (N = 422; 92.7% Black; 85.8% female; Mage = 42.0 years, SDage = 13.4 years) completed the PCL-5 and PC-PTSD-5 after recruitment from medical clinic waiting rooms and admission lists. Using chance-corrected test quality indices and item response theory (IRT) analyses, we determined optimal cut-scores for screening and examined item performance. Approximately 45.0% of the sample screened positive for probable DSM-5 PTSD using the PCL-5. The PC-PTSD-5 demonstrated high internal consistency and strong associations with PCL-5 scores (total, r = .79; items, rs = .51-.61). A cut-score of one was optimally sensitive for screening (κ[1] = .96), and a cut-score of four had the highest quality of probable efficiency (κ[.5] = .66) for detecting self-reported DSM-5 PTSD on the PCL-5. IRT analyses indicated Item 1 (nightmares, intrusive memories) provided the most information, and other items may not be incrementally useful for this sample. Findings provide preliminary support for the use of the PC-PTSD-5 as a brief alternative to the PCL-5 among chronically trauma-exposed patients in the public healthcare setting.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.50%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers related to all areas of the science and practice of psychologists in medical settings. Manuscripts are chosen that have a broad appeal across psychology as well as other health care disciplines, reflecting varying backgrounds, interests, and specializations. The journal publishes original research, treatment outcome trials, meta-analyses, literature reviews, conceptual papers, brief scientific reports, and scholarly case studies. Papers accepted address clinical matters in medical settings; integrated care; health disparities; education and training of the future psychology workforce; interdisciplinary collaboration, training, and professionalism; licensing, credentialing, and privileging in hospital practice; research and practice ethics; professional development of psychologists in academic health centers; professional practice matters in medical settings; and cultural, economic, political, regulatory, and systems factors in health care. In summary, the journal provides a forum for papers predicted to have significant theoretical or practical importance for the application of psychology in medical settings.
期刊最新文献
A Developmental Approach to Mid-Career Faculty Leadership Training at Two Academic Medical Centers. A Faculty Growth Perspective on Peer Review of Teaching: An Institution-Wide, Customizable Approach to Peer Review. Beneficial Childhood Experiences Mitigate the Negative Effects of Adverse Childhood Experiences in Adults. The Role of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Marginalized Identities in US Medical Students' Burnout, Career Regret, and Medical School Experiences. Understanding Differences in Medical Student Perceptions of Treatment Adherence Based on Weight Status in Pediatric Care.
×
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