DSM-5 中重度抑郁障碍特定术语的临床实用性和与临床实践的相关性:德尔菲专家共识研究

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Comprehensive psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-05-20 DOI:10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152502
Andrea Fiorillo , Umberto Albert , Bernardo Dell'Osso , Maurizio Pompili , Gabriele Sani , Gaia Sampogna
{"title":"DSM-5 中重度抑郁障碍特定术语的临床实用性和与临床实践的相关性:德尔菲专家共识研究","authors":"Andrea Fiorillo ,&nbsp;Umberto Albert ,&nbsp;Bernardo Dell'Osso ,&nbsp;Maurizio Pompili ,&nbsp;Gabriele Sani ,&nbsp;Gaia Sampogna","doi":"10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a heterogeneous syndrome, associated with different levels of severity and impairment on the personal functioning for each patient. Classification systems in psychiatry, including ICD-11 and DSM-5, are used by clinicians in order to simplify the complexity of clinical manifestations. In particular, the DSM-5 introduced specifiers, subtypes, severity ratings, and cross-cutting symptom assessments allowing clinicians to better describe the specific clinical features of each patient. However, the use of DSM-5 specifiers for major depressive disorder in ordinary clinical practice is quite heterogeneous.</p><p>The present study, using a Delphi method, aims to evaluate the consensus of a representative group of expert psychiatrists on a series of statements regarding the clinical utility and relevance of DSM-5 specifiers for major depressive disorder in ordinary clinical practice. Experts reached an almost perfect agreement on statements related to the use and clinical utility of DSM-5 specifiers in ordinary clinical practice. In particular, a complete consensus was found regarding the clinical utility for ordinary clinical practice of using DSM-5 specifiers. The use of specifiers is considered a first step toward a “dimensional” approach to the diagnosis of mental disorders.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10554,"journal":{"name":"Comprehensive psychiatry","volume":"133 ","pages":"Article 152502"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X24000531/pdfft?md5=c623e5bda2de6cdabf8a3b93004cfb25&pid=1-s2.0-S0010440X24000531-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The clinical utility and relevance in clinical practice of DSM-5 specifiers for major depressive disorder: A Delphi expert consensus study\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Fiorillo ,&nbsp;Umberto Albert ,&nbsp;Bernardo Dell'Osso ,&nbsp;Maurizio Pompili ,&nbsp;Gabriele Sani ,&nbsp;Gaia Sampogna\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152502\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a heterogeneous syndrome, associated with different levels of severity and impairment on the personal functioning for each patient. Classification systems in psychiatry, including ICD-11 and DSM-5, are used by clinicians in order to simplify the complexity of clinical manifestations. In particular, the DSM-5 introduced specifiers, subtypes, severity ratings, and cross-cutting symptom assessments allowing clinicians to better describe the specific clinical features of each patient. However, the use of DSM-5 specifiers for major depressive disorder in ordinary clinical practice is quite heterogeneous.</p><p>The present study, using a Delphi method, aims to evaluate the consensus of a representative group of expert psychiatrists on a series of statements regarding the clinical utility and relevance of DSM-5 specifiers for major depressive disorder in ordinary clinical practice. Experts reached an almost perfect agreement on statements related to the use and clinical utility of DSM-5 specifiers in ordinary clinical practice. In particular, a complete consensus was found regarding the clinical utility for ordinary clinical practice of using DSM-5 specifiers. The use of specifiers is considered a first step toward a “dimensional” approach to the diagnosis of mental disorders.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10554,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comprehensive psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"133 \",\"pages\":\"Article 152502\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X24000531/pdfft?md5=c623e5bda2de6cdabf8a3b93004cfb25&pid=1-s2.0-S0010440X24000531-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comprehensive psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X24000531\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comprehensive psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X24000531","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重度抑郁障碍(MDD)是一种异质性综合征,其严重程度和对每个患者个人功能的损害程度各不相同。临床医生使用包括 ICD-11 和 DSM-5 在内的精神病学分类系统来简化复杂的临床表现。特别是,DSM-5 中引入了具体指标、亚型、严重程度评级和交叉症状评估,使临床医生能够更好地描述每位患者的具体临床特征。本研究采用德尔菲法,旨在评估一组具有代表性的精神病学专家就一系列声明达成的共识,这些声明涉及在普通临床实践中使用 DSM-5 重度抑郁障碍的临床实用性和相关性。专家们在有关 DSM-5 重度抑郁障碍在普通临床实践中的使用和临床效用的声明方面几乎达成了完全一致的意见。特别是,专家们对使用 DSM-5 重度抑郁障碍重度抑郁检测指标在普通临床实践中的临床实用性达成了完全一致的意见。人们认为,使用特定术语是向精神障碍诊断的 "维度 "方法迈出的第一步。
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
The clinical utility and relevance in clinical practice of DSM-5 specifiers for major depressive disorder: A Delphi expert consensus study

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a heterogeneous syndrome, associated with different levels of severity and impairment on the personal functioning for each patient. Classification systems in psychiatry, including ICD-11 and DSM-5, are used by clinicians in order to simplify the complexity of clinical manifestations. In particular, the DSM-5 introduced specifiers, subtypes, severity ratings, and cross-cutting symptom assessments allowing clinicians to better describe the specific clinical features of each patient. However, the use of DSM-5 specifiers for major depressive disorder in ordinary clinical practice is quite heterogeneous.

The present study, using a Delphi method, aims to evaluate the consensus of a representative group of expert psychiatrists on a series of statements regarding the clinical utility and relevance of DSM-5 specifiers for major depressive disorder in ordinary clinical practice. Experts reached an almost perfect agreement on statements related to the use and clinical utility of DSM-5 specifiers in ordinary clinical practice. In particular, a complete consensus was found regarding the clinical utility for ordinary clinical practice of using DSM-5 specifiers. The use of specifiers is considered a first step toward a “dimensional” approach to the diagnosis of mental disorders.

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
Comprehensive psychiatry
Comprehensive psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
12.50
自引率
1.40%
发文量
64
审稿时长
29 days
期刊介绍: "Comprehensive Psychiatry" is an open access, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the field of psychiatry and mental health. Its primary mission is to share the latest advancements in knowledge to enhance patient care and deepen the understanding of mental illnesses. The journal is supported by a diverse team of international editors and peer reviewers, ensuring the publication of high-quality research with a strong focus on clinical relevance and the implications for psychopathology. "Comprehensive Psychiatry" encourages authors to present their research in an accessible manner, facilitating engagement with clinicians, policymakers, and the broader public. By embracing an open access policy, the journal aims to maximize the global impact of its content, making it readily available to a wide audience and fostering scientific collaboration and public awareness beyond the traditional academic community. This approach is designed to promote a more inclusive and informed dialogue on mental health, contributing to the overall progress in the field.
期刊最新文献
Adequacy of treatment in outpatients with obsessive-compulsive disorder A comparison of firefighter mental health education programs: A descriptive thematic analysis of firefighter experiences Acceptability, tolerability and safety of the BRIGhTMIND trial: Connectivity-guided intermittent theta-burst stimulation versus F3- repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression Exercise moderates longitudinal group psychopathology networks in individuals with eating disorders The deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus bairdii) as a model organism to explore the naturalistic psychobiological mechanisms contributing to compulsive-like rigidity: A narrative overview of advances and opportunities
×
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