Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
J Trauma Stress. 2010 Jun;23(3):393-8. doi: 10.1002/jts.20529.
The diagnostic accuracy of screening instruments in the immediate aftermath of disaster is unknown. Following the 2005 London bombings a 2-year outreach program identified and screened affected persons. In 331 persons the accuracy of the Trauma Screening Questionnaire (TSQ) was compared to a DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder. The sensitivity of the TSQ was comparable with previous studies, but specificity was substantially lower. Specificity was lowest immediately after the bombings and rose steadily over the next 18 months. Specificity was also lower in non-White individuals, who had elevated scores on the TSQ. The data are consistent with previous research showing elevated distress in ethnic minorities following trauma, and suggest limitations on the performance of screening instruments.
灾难发生后立即使用筛查工具进行诊断的准确性尚不清楚。在 2005 年伦敦爆炸事件后，开展了一项为期两年的外展计划，以识别和筛查受影响人员。在 331 名人员中，将创伤筛查问卷（TSQ）的准确性与 DSM-IV（精神障碍诊断与统计手册，第四版；美国精神病学协会，1994 年）创伤后应激障碍诊断进行了比较。TSQ 的灵敏度与先前的研究相当，但特异性要低得多。特异性在爆炸事件后立即最低，并在接下来的 18 个月中稳步上升。在非白种人群中，特异性也较低，他们的 TSQ 评分较高。这些数据与先前的研究一致，表明少数民族在创伤后会出现更高的痛苦水平，并表明筛查工具的性能存在局限性。
