Suppr超能文献

误诊双相情感障碍——临床医生是否存在启发式偏差?

Misdiagnosing bipolar disorder--do clinicians show heuristic biases?

机构信息

University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.

出版信息

J Affect Disord. 2011 May;130(3):405-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2010.10.036. Epub 2010 Nov 18.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorders (BD) are often misdiagnosed. Clinicians seem to use heuristics instead of following the recommendations of diagnostic manuals. Bruchmüller and Meyer (2009) suggest that 'reduced sleep' is a prototypic criterion that increases the likelihood of a bipolar diagnosis. This study examines if this criterion specifically elevates the likelihood of a bipolar diagnosis or if the finding of the study mentioned above is rather due to the total number of criteria. Furthermore, we want to replicate the finding that patients offering a causal explanation for their manic symptoms are misdiagnosed more often. Additionally, we examine therapeutic attributes that might influence diagnostic decisions as well as treatment consequences following a (mis-)diagnosis.

METHODS

204 Psychotherapists were presented with a case vignette describing someone with a BD and were asked to make a diagnosis. Symptoms and the total number of criteria varied systematically within the vignettes but each still fulfilled enough diagnostic criteria to be diagnosed as bipolar.

RESULTS

Almost 60% of the clinicians made misdiagnoses. A correct diagnosis did not depend on the specific criterion of 'reduced sleep' but on the total number of criteria. The causal explanation as well as therapeutic attributes did not significantly influence diagnostic decisions. However, the study showed that a misdiagnosis can lead to severe consequences concerning the treatment recommended by clinicians.

LIMITATIONS

The validity of case vignettes is discussible.

CONCLUSIONS

It seems as if specific symptoms might not be of so much relevance as assumed. Instead, clinicians seem to follow the additive model when making diagnoses.

摘要

背景

双相情感障碍(BD)经常被误诊。临床医生似乎使用启发式方法,而不是遵循诊断手册的建议。Bruchmüller 和 Meyer(2009)提出,“减少睡眠”是增加双相诊断可能性的典型标准。本研究检验了这一标准是否特别提高了双相诊断的可能性,或者上述研究的发现是否是由于标准总数。此外,我们想复制这样的发现,即对自己躁狂症状提供因果解释的患者更容易被误诊。此外,我们还研究了可能影响诊断决策的治疗属性以及误诊后的治疗后果。

方法

204 名心理治疗师收到了一个描述双相情感障碍患者的案例描述,并被要求做出诊断。症状和标准总数在案例描述中系统地变化,但每个案例都满足足够的诊断标准,被诊断为双相情感障碍。

结果

近 60%的临床医生做出了误诊。正确的诊断不取决于“减少睡眠”这一特定标准,而是取决于标准总数。因果解释和治疗属性并没有显著影响诊断决策。然而,该研究表明,误诊可能会对临床医生推荐的治疗产生严重后果。

局限性

案例描述的有效性是值得讨论的。

结论

似乎特定的症状并不像想象的那么重要。相反,临床医生在做出诊断时似乎遵循了加法模型。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验