Rösler M, Retz W, Thome J, Schneider M, Stieglitz R-D, Falkai P
University Hospital of the Saarland, Neurocenter, 66421, Homburg/Saar, Germany.
Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2006 Sep;256 Suppl 1:i3-11. doi: 10.1007/s00406-006-1001-7.
The diagnosis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults is a complex procedure which should include retrospective assessment of childhood ADHD symptoms either by patient recall or third party information, diagnostic criteria according to DSM-IV, current adult ADHD psychopathology including symptom severity and pervasiveness, functional impairment, quality of life and comorbidity. In order to obtain a systematic database for the diagnosis and evaluation of the course ADHD rating scales can be very useful. This article reviews rating instruments that have found general acceptance. The Wender-Utah Rating Scale (WURS) and the Childhood Symptoms Scale by Barkley and Murphy try to make a retrospective assessment of childhood ADHD symptoms. The Connors Adult ADHD Rating Scales (CAARS), the Current Symptoms Scales by Barkley and Murphy (CSS), the Adult Self Report Scale (ASRS) by Adler et al. and Kessler et al. or the Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder--Self Report Scale (ADHD-SR by Rösler et al.) are self report rating scales focusing mainly on the DSM-IV criteria. The CAARS and the CSS have other report forms too. The Brown ADD Rating Scale (Brown ADD-RS) and the Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder--Other Report Scale (ADHD-OR by Rösler et al.) are instruments for use by clinicians or significant others. Both self rating scales and observer report scales quantify the ADHD symptoms by use of a Likert scale mostly ranging from 0 to 3. This makes the instruments useful to follow the course of the disease quantitatively. Comprehensive diagnostic interviews not only evaluate diagnostic criteria, but also assess different psychopathological syndrome scores, functional disability measures, indices of pervasiveness and information about comorbid disorders. The most comprehensive procedures are the Brown ADD Diagnostic Form and the Adult Interview (AI) by Barkley and Murphy. An instrument of particular interest is the Wender Reimherr Interview (WRI) which follows a diagnostic algorithm different from DSM-IV. The interview contains only items delineated from adult psychopathology and not derived from symptoms originally designed for use in children. Other instruments focus on functional impairment, quality of life, comorbid disorders, gender effects and specific psychopathological models.
成人注意力缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)的诊断是一个复杂的过程,应包括通过患者回忆或第三方信息对童年ADHD症状进行回顾性评估、依据《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版(DSM-IV)的诊断标准、当前成人ADHD的精神病理学表现(包括症状严重程度和广泛性)、功能损害、生活质量以及共病情况。为了获得用于诊断和评估病程的系统数据库,ADHD评定量表可能非常有用。本文回顾了已获得普遍认可的评定工具。温德-犹他评定量表(WURS)以及巴克利和墨菲编制的儿童症状量表试图对童年ADHD症状进行回顾性评估。康纳斯成人ADHD评定量表(CAARS)、巴克利和墨菲编制的当前症状量表(CSS)、阿德勒等人及凯斯勒等人编制的成人自陈量表(ASRS)或罗斯勒等人编制的注意力缺陷多动障碍自陈量表(ADHD-SR)均为主要关注DSM-IV标准的自陈评定量表。CAARS和CSS还有其他报告形式。布朗ADD评定量表(Brown ADD-RS)以及罗斯勒等人编制的注意力缺陷多动障碍他人报告量表(ADHD-OR)是供临床医生或重要他人使用的工具。自陈量表和观察者报告量表大多通过使用范围从0到3的李克特量表来量化ADHD症状。这使得这些工具在定量跟踪疾病病程方面很有用。全面的诊断访谈不仅评估诊断标准,还评估不同的精神病理综合征评分、功能残疾测量、广泛性指标以及有关共病障碍的信息。最全面的程序是布朗ADD诊断表以及巴克利和墨菲编制的成人访谈(AI)。一个特别有趣的工具是温德-赖姆赫尔访谈(WRI),它遵循一种不同于DSM-IV的诊断算法。该访谈仅包含从成人精神病理学中划分出来的项目,而非源自最初为儿童设计的症状。其他工具则关注功能损害、生活质量、共病障碍、性别影响以及特定的精神病理模型。