26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Revisión crítica sobre los instrumentos para la evaluación psiquiátrica en atención primaria Translated title: Critical revision of Mental health Assessment Tools in Primary Care

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Antecedentes. Actualmente existen múltiples escalas y guías de entrevista en atención primaria en salud mental. Sin embargo, estas tienen limitaciones en la práctica clínica diaria. Muchas fueron creadas para realizar investigación, otras requieren gran entrenamiento de quien las aplica y en su gran mayoría cubren un rango limitado de síntomas, por ejemplo ansiedad y depresión. Escalas de gran uso clínico para síntomas ansiosos y depresivos permiten evaluar la presencia o ausencia de síntomas más que dar un diagnóstico específico y deja por fuera un espectro amplio de trastornos psiquiátricos como la demencia y la psicosis. Por estas razones, se han propuesto múltiples alternativas que permitan superar los problemas mencionados. Objetivo. Revisar de forma crítica los instrumentos utilizados para la evaluación psiquiátrica en atención primaria. Materiales y métodos. Revisión de la literatura. Resultados. Dentro de las herramientas desarrolladas y más utilizadas se encuentran la Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD) y el Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ). Otra estrategia es la Herramienta Mundial de Evaluación en Salud Mental (GMHAT). Esta herramienta permite hacer tamizajes amplios y diagnósticos de problemas mentales por personas con poco entrenamiento en psiquiatría y en poco tiempo. Conclusiones. Se recomiendan los instrumentos breves que realizan una valoración global del estado mental sobre aquellos que son específicos para un solo trastorno.

          Translated abstract

          Background. There are many instruments to use in primary care in Mental Health. However, the overall limitations found are that some instruments were developed specifically for research purposes and scales cover a limited range of symptoms and mental disorders like anxiety and depression. Scales used in clinical settings for anxiety and depressive symptoms usually assess the presence or absence of symptoms rather than give a specific diagnosis and leaves out a broad spectrum of psychiatric disorders such as dementia and psychosis. For this reasons, multiple alternatives to overcome these problems have been proposed worldwide. Objective. To review in a critical way the instruments used in primary care. Materials and methods. Literatury review. Results. Among the tools developed and used are the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD) and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ). Another instrument is the Global Mental Health Assessment Tool (GMHAT). This tool allows broad screening and diagnosis of mental health problems for people with little training in psychiatry and in a short time. Conclusion. Short Instruments that perform an overall assessment of the mental state are preferred over those that are specific to a single disorder.

          Related collections

          Most cited references71

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure.

          While considerable attention has focused on improving the detection of depression, assessment of severity is also important in guiding treatment decisions. Therefore, we examined the validity of a brief, new measure of depression severity. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) is a self-administered version of the PRIME-MD diagnostic instrument for common mental disorders. The PHQ-9 is the depression module, which scores each of the 9 DSM-IV criteria as "0" (not at all) to "3" (nearly every day). The PHQ-9 was completed by 6,000 patients in 8 primary care clinics and 7 obstetrics-gynecology clinics. Construct validity was assessed using the 20-item Short-Form General Health Survey, self-reported sick days and clinic visits, and symptom-related difficulty. Criterion validity was assessed against an independent structured mental health professional (MHP) interview in a sample of 580 patients. As PHQ-9 depression severity increased, there was a substantial decrease in functional status on all 6 SF-20 subscales. Also, symptom-related difficulty, sick days, and health care utilization increased. Using the MHP reinterview as the criterion standard, a PHQ-9 score > or =10 had a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 88% for major depression. PHQ-9 scores of 5, 10, 15, and 20 represented mild, moderate, moderately severe, and severe depression, respectively. Results were similar in the primary care and obstetrics-gynecology samples. In addition to making criteria-based diagnoses of depressive disorders, the PHQ-9 is also a reliable and valid measure of depression severity. These characteristics plus its brevity make the PHQ-9 a useful clinical and research tool.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Validation of a brief measure of anxiety-related severity and impairment: the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS).

            The Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS) is a 5-item self-report measure that can be used to assess severity and impairment associated with any anxiety disorder or multiple anxiety disorders. A prior investigation with a nonclinical sample supported the reliability and validity of the OASIS; however, to date it has not been validated for use in clinical samples. The present study assessed the psychometric properties of the OASIS in a large sample (N=1036) of primary care patients whose physicians referred them to an anxiety disorders treatment study. Latent structure, internal consistency, convergent/discriminant validity, and cut-score analyses were conducted. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported a unidimensional structure. The five OASIS items displayed strong loadings on the single factor and had a high degree of internal consistency. OASIS scores demonstrated robust correlations with global and disorder-specific measures of anxiety, and weak correlations with measures of unrelated constructs. A cut-score of 8 correctly classified 87% of this sample as having an anxiety diagnosis or not. Convergent validity measures consisted solely of other self-report measures of anxiety. Future studies should evaluate the convergence of OASIS scores with clinician-rated and behavioral measures of anxiety severity. Overall, this investigation suggests that the OASIS is a valid instrument for measurement of anxiety severity and impairment in clinical samples. Its brevity and applicability to a wide range of anxiety disorders enhance its utility as a screening and assessment tool.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Primary Care Validation of a Single-Question Alcohol Screening Test

              ABSTRACT BACKGROUND Unhealthy alcohol use is prevalent but under-diagnosed in primary care settings. OBJECTIVE To validate, in primary care, a single-item screening test for unhealthy alcohol use recommended by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA). DESIGN Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS Adult English-speaking patients recruited from primary care waiting rooms. MEASUREMENTS Participants were asked the single screening question, “How many times in the past year have you had X or more drinks in a day?”, where X is 5 for men and 4 for women, and a response of >1 is considered positive. Unhealthy alcohol use was defined as the presence of an alcohol use disorder, as determined by a standardized diagnostic interview, or risky consumption, as determined using a validated 30-day calendar method. MAIN RESULTS Of 394 eligible primary care patients, 286 (73%) completed the interview. The single-question screen was 81.8% sensitive (95% confidence interval (CI) 72.5% to 88.5%) and 79.3% specific (95% CI 73.1% to 84.4%) for the detection of unhealthy alcohol use. It was slightly more sensitive (87.9%, 95% CI 72.7% to 95.2%) but was less specific (66.8%, 95% CI 60.8% to 72.3%) for the detection of a current alcohol use disorder. Test characteristics were similar to that of a commonly used three-item screen, and were affected very little by subject demographic characteristics. CONCLUSIONS The single screening question recommended by the NIAAA accurately identified unhealthy alcohol use in this sample of primary care patients. These findings support the use of this brief screen in primary care.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Journal
                rfmun
                Revista de la Facultad de Medicina
                rev.fac.med.
                Universidad Naciona de colombia (Bogotá )
                0120-0011
                January 2014
                : 62
                : 1
                : 101-110
                Affiliations
                [1 ] University of Chester United Kingdom
                [2 ] Universidad Nacional de Colombia Colombia
                Article
                S0120-00112014000100013
                10.15446/revfacmed.v62n1.43759
                c591a7c8-878d-48e8-9b1a-9086edca7145

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History
                Product

                SciELO Colombia

                Self URI (journal page): http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_serial&pid=0120-0011&lng=en
                Categories
                MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL

                Internal medicine
                Primary Care,Mental Health,Psychiatric Status Rating Scales,Diagnosis,Straining,Atención Primaria de Salud,Salud Mental,Escalas de Valoración Psiquiátrica,Diagnóstico,Cribado

                Comments

                Comment on this article