神经性厌食症的精神并发症和严重程度:DSM-5、ICD-11 和体重/体形严重程度评级高估的比较研究。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Eating Disorders Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-06 DOI:10.1080/10640266.2024.2346001
An Binh Dang, Litza Kiropoulos, David Castle, Zoe Jenkins, Andrea Phillipou, Susan Rossell, Isabel Krug
{"title":"神经性厌食症的精神并发症和严重程度:DSM-5、ICD-11 和体重/体形严重程度评级高估的比较研究。","authors":"An Binh Dang, Litza Kiropoulos, David Castle, Zoe Jenkins, Andrea Phillipou, Susan Rossell, Isabel Krug","doi":"10.1080/10640266.2024.2346001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study assessed the rate of a.) the total and b.) specific psychiatric comorbidities among the three severity ratings for Anorexia Nervosa (AN): DSM-5, ICD-11 and overvaluation of weight and shape (OWS). The sample comprised 312 treatment-seeking patients with AN (mean age = 26.9). Weight and height were taken at intake to calculate BMI, the foundation for the DSM-5 and ICD-11 severity indices. The EDE-Q was used to assess OWS, and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview was conducted to assess psychiatric comorbidities. For the DSM-5, the mild severity group showed a higher total number of psychiatric comorbidities, especially for panic, social anxiety, generalised anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorders compared to the severe and extremely severe groups. ICD-11 and OWS severity groups did not significantly differ in total comorbidities, except for major depressive disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorders being more prevalent in the \"significantly low BMI\" ICD-11 group. The high OWS group displayed a notably higher rate of major depressive disorder than the low OWS group. The study underscores inconsistent patterns across the three severity systems, emphasising the need to recognise the current limitations of the assessed severity classification systems in AN assessment and guiding treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":48835,"journal":{"name":"Eating Disorders","volume":" ","pages":"546-562"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychiatric comorbidity and severity in anorexia nervosa: a comparative study of the DSM-5, the ICD-11, and overvaluation of Weight/Shape severity ratings.\",\"authors\":\"An Binh Dang, Litza Kiropoulos, David Castle, Zoe Jenkins, Andrea Phillipou, Susan Rossell, Isabel Krug\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10640266.2024.2346001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study assessed the rate of a.) the total and b.) specific psychiatric comorbidities among the three severity ratings for Anorexia Nervosa (AN): DSM-5, ICD-11 and overvaluation of weight and shape (OWS). The sample comprised 312 treatment-seeking patients with AN (mean age = 26.9). Weight and height were taken at intake to calculate BMI, the foundation for the DSM-5 and ICD-11 severity indices. The EDE-Q was used to assess OWS, and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview was conducted to assess psychiatric comorbidities. For the DSM-5, the mild severity group showed a higher total number of psychiatric comorbidities, especially for panic, social anxiety, generalised anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorders compared to the severe and extremely severe groups. ICD-11 and OWS severity groups did not significantly differ in total comorbidities, except for major depressive disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorders being more prevalent in the \\\"significantly low BMI\\\" ICD-11 group. The high OWS group displayed a notably higher rate of major depressive disorder than the low OWS group. The study underscores inconsistent patterns across the three severity systems, emphasising the need to recognise the current limitations of the assessed severity classification systems in AN assessment and guiding treatment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48835,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Eating Disorders\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"546-562\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Eating Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10640266.2024.2346001\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eating Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10640266.2024.2346001","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究评估了厌食症(AN)三种严重程度分级中a.)总体和b.)特定精神病合并症的比率:DSM-5、ICD-11 和对体重和体型的高估(OWS)。样本包括312名寻求治疗的厌食症患者(平均年龄=26.9岁)。入院时测量体重和身高,以计算体重指数(BMI),这是DSM-5和ICD-11严重程度指数的基础。EDE-Q用于评估OWS,而迷你国际神经精神访谈则用于评估精神病合并症。就 DSM-5 而言,与严重和极度严重组相比,轻度严重组的精神病合并症总数更高,尤其是恐慌症、社交焦虑症、广泛性焦虑症和创伤后应激障碍。ICD-11组和OWS严重程度组在合并症总数上没有明显差异,只是重度抑郁症和强迫症在 "体重指数明显偏低 "的ICD-11组中更为普遍。高 OWS 组的重度抑郁症发病率明显高于低 OWS 组。该研究强调了三种严重程度分类系统的不一致模式,强调有必要认识到目前评估严重程度分类系统在AN评估和指导治疗方面的局限性。
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
Psychiatric comorbidity and severity in anorexia nervosa: a comparative study of the DSM-5, the ICD-11, and overvaluation of Weight/Shape severity ratings.

This study assessed the rate of a.) the total and b.) specific psychiatric comorbidities among the three severity ratings for Anorexia Nervosa (AN): DSM-5, ICD-11 and overvaluation of weight and shape (OWS). The sample comprised 312 treatment-seeking patients with AN (mean age = 26.9). Weight and height were taken at intake to calculate BMI, the foundation for the DSM-5 and ICD-11 severity indices. The EDE-Q was used to assess OWS, and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview was conducted to assess psychiatric comorbidities. For the DSM-5, the mild severity group showed a higher total number of psychiatric comorbidities, especially for panic, social anxiety, generalised anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorders compared to the severe and extremely severe groups. ICD-11 and OWS severity groups did not significantly differ in total comorbidities, except for major depressive disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorders being more prevalent in the "significantly low BMI" ICD-11 group. The high OWS group displayed a notably higher rate of major depressive disorder than the low OWS group. The study underscores inconsistent patterns across the three severity systems, emphasising the need to recognise the current limitations of the assessed severity classification systems in AN assessment and guiding treatment.

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
Eating Disorders
Eating Disorders PSYCHIATRY-PSYCHOLOGY
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Eating Disorders is contemporary and wide ranging, and takes a fundamentally practical, humanistic, compassionate view of clients and their presenting problems. You’ll find a multidisciplinary perspective on clinical issues and prevention research that considers the essential cultural, social, familial, and personal elements that not only foster eating-related problems, but also furnish clues that facilitate the most effective possible therapies and treatment approaches.
期刊最新文献
Peer mentors' experiences of delivering peer support for individuals with eating disorders: giving back and supporting processes of change. Absolute and relative outcomes of cognitive behavior therapy for eating disorders in adults: a meta-analysis. Differential effects of community involvement on eating disorder prevention outcomes in sexual minority men. Developing a justice-focused body image program for U.S. middle schoolers: a school-based community-engaged research process. The need for more inclusive measurement to advance equity in eating disorders prevention.
×
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