Suppr超能文献

是否应为未特定的抑郁障碍指定标准?

Should criteria be specified for depressive disorder not otherwise specified?

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Brown Medical School, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, United States.

出版信息

J Affect Disord. 2013 May;147(1-3):118-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2012.10.020. Epub 2012 Nov 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Many patients have clinically significant symptoms of depression that do not meet the DSM-IV diagnostic thresholds for major depressive disorder (MDD) or dysthymic disorder. DSM-IV does not specify criteria for depressive disorder not otherwise specified (DDNOS). While it is not surprising that research on subthreshold depression has used diverse criteria, some consensus has emerged to define minor depression analogous to MDD, though requiring fewer than the 5 symptoms required to diagnose MDD. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we examined how many patients diagnosed with DDNOS met the DSM-IV proposed research criteria for minor depression, and we compared the demographic and clinical profiles of patients diagnosed with DDNOS who did and did not meet the criteria for minor depression

METHODS

Three thousand four hundred psychiatric patients presenting to the Rhode Island Hospital outpatient practice were evaluated with semi-structured diagnostic interviews for DSM-IV Axis I and Axis II disorders and measures of psychosocial morbidity.

RESULTS

More than 6% of the 3400 patients were diagnosed with DDNOS (n=227). Only a minority of the patients with DDNOS met the criteria for minor depression (39.8%). There was no difference between patients with "subthreshold" depression who did and did not meet the DSM-IV research criteria for minor depression in demographic characteristics, the prevalence of comorbid Axis I or Axis II disorders, history of major depressive disorder, and family history of depression.

LIMITATIONS

The present study was conducted in a single outpatient practice in which the majority of patients were white, female, and had health insurance. Although the study was limited to a single site, a strength of the recruitment procedure was that the sample was not selected for participation in a treatment study, and exclusion and inclusion criteria did not reduce the representativeness of the patient groups. While we examined a number of validators, we did not systematically record the treatment the patients received and the outcome of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Amongst psychiatric outpatients with clinically significant depression not meeting criteria for MDD or dysthymic disorder, there was little difference between patients who did and did not meet the DSM-IV research criteria for minor depressive disorder.

摘要

背景

许多患者有明显的抑郁症状,但不符合 DSM-IV 重性抑郁障碍(MDD)或恶劣心境障碍的诊断标准。DSM-IV 没有规定未特定的抑郁障碍(DDNOS)的诊断标准。虽然亚临床抑郁的研究使用了不同的标准并不奇怪,但已经出现了一些共识,定义类似于 MDD 的轻度抑郁,尽管需要的症状少于诊断 MDD 的 5 个症状。在罗德岛改善诊断评估和服务(MIDAS)项目的这份报告中,我们检查了被诊断为 DDNOS 的患者中有多少符合 DSM-IV 提出的轻度抑郁研究标准,我们比较了符合和不符合轻度抑郁研究标准的 DDNOS 患者的人口统计学和临床特征。

方法

3400 名在罗德岛医院门诊就诊的精神科患者接受了半结构式诊断访谈,以评估 DSM-IV 轴 I 和轴 II 障碍和心理社会发病率。

结果

3400 名患者中有 6%以上被诊断为 DDNOS(n=227)。只有少数 DDNOS 患者符合轻度抑郁的标准(39.8%)。在符合和不符合 DSM-IV 研究标准的亚临床抑郁患者中,在人口统计学特征、共患轴 I 或轴 II 障碍、重性抑郁障碍史和抑郁家族史方面没有差异。

局限性

本研究在一个单一的门诊实践中进行,其中大多数患者是白人、女性和有医疗保险。尽管该研究仅限于一个单一的地点,但招募程序的一个优点是样本不是为参与治疗研究而选择的,排除和纳入标准并没有降低患者群体的代表性。虽然我们检查了一些验证器,但我们没有系统地记录患者接受的治疗和治疗结果。

结论

在不符合 MDD 或恶劣心境障碍标准的有明显抑郁症状的精神科门诊患者中,符合和不符合 DSM-IV 研究标准的轻度抑郁障碍的患者之间没有差异。

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