急性应激障碍的分类

M. Pacella, D. Delahanty
{"title":"急性应激障碍的分类","authors":"M. Pacella, D. Delahanty","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780195399066.013.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The diagnosis of acute stress disorder (ASD) was originally introduced in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) to identify survivors soon after a trauma who were likely to develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, despite demonstrating acceptable predictive power, subsequent research often failed to display high rates of sensitivity or specificity for ASD predicting PTSD. This led researchers to question the utility of the diagnosis and ultimately led to a revision of the diagnosis in the fifth edition of DSM. The updated ASD diagnosis was intended to primarily promote access to healthcare services following a traumatic event, and symptoms were not selected with the aim of predicting likelihood of one developing PTSD. Ultimately, the DSM-5 ASD criteria align more closely with PTSD symptoms without an emphasis on dissociative symptoms (as was true of the DSM-IV). This chapter summarizes the development of the ASD criteria/diagnosis and evaluates the utility of the reconceptualized diagnosis for both clinicians and researchers.","PeriodicalId":177564,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Traumatic Stress Disorders, Second Edition","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Classification of Acute Stress Disorder\",\"authors\":\"M. Pacella, D. Delahanty\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780195399066.013.0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The diagnosis of acute stress disorder (ASD) was originally introduced in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) to identify survivors soon after a trauma who were likely to develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, despite demonstrating acceptable predictive power, subsequent research often failed to display high rates of sensitivity or specificity for ASD predicting PTSD. This led researchers to question the utility of the diagnosis and ultimately led to a revision of the diagnosis in the fifth edition of DSM. The updated ASD diagnosis was intended to primarily promote access to healthcare services following a traumatic event, and symptoms were not selected with the aim of predicting likelihood of one developing PTSD. Ultimately, the DSM-5 ASD criteria align more closely with PTSD symptoms without an emphasis on dissociative symptoms (as was true of the DSM-IV). This chapter summarizes the development of the ASD criteria/diagnosis and evaluates the utility of the reconceptualized diagnosis for both clinicians and researchers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":177564,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Oxford Handbook of Traumatic Stress Disorders, Second Edition\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Oxford Handbook of Traumatic Stress Disorders, Second Edition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780195399066.013.0003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Oxford Handbook of Traumatic Stress Disorders, Second Edition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780195399066.013.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

急性应激障碍(ASD)的诊断最初是在《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版(DSM-IV)中引入的,用于识别创伤后不久可能发展为创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的幸存者。然而,尽管显示出可接受的预测能力,随后的研究往往未能显示出ASD预测PTSD的高敏感性或特异性。这导致研究人员对诊断的实用性提出质疑,并最终导致了DSM第五版诊断的修订。最新的ASD诊断主要是为了促进创伤性事件后获得医疗服务,而选择症状的目的不是为了预测一个人患PTSD的可能性。最终,DSM-5的ASD标准与PTSD症状更接近,而没有强调解离症状(就像DSM-IV一样)。本章总结了ASD标准/诊断的发展,并评估了重新概念化诊断对临床医生和研究人员的效用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Classification of Acute Stress Disorder
The diagnosis of acute stress disorder (ASD) was originally introduced in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) to identify survivors soon after a trauma who were likely to develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, despite demonstrating acceptable predictive power, subsequent research often failed to display high rates of sensitivity or specificity for ASD predicting PTSD. This led researchers to question the utility of the diagnosis and ultimately led to a revision of the diagnosis in the fifth edition of DSM. The updated ASD diagnosis was intended to primarily promote access to healthcare services following a traumatic event, and symptoms were not selected with the aim of predicting likelihood of one developing PTSD. Ultimately, the DSM-5 ASD criteria align more closely with PTSD symptoms without an emphasis on dissociative symptoms (as was true of the DSM-IV). This chapter summarizes the development of the ASD criteria/diagnosis and evaluates the utility of the reconceptualized diagnosis for both clinicians and researchers.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Assessing Acute Stress Symptoms Assessment of PTSD in Non-Western Cultures Biological Contributions to PTSD Empirically Supported Psychological Treatments Prevention and Early Intervention Programs for Vulnerable Populations
×
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