Suppr超能文献

《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版创伤后应激障碍:因子结构与诊断率

DSM-5 posttraumatic stress disorder: factor structure and rates of diagnosis.

作者信息

Gentes Emily L, Dennis Paul A, Kimbrel Nathan A, Rissling Michelle B, Beckham Jean C, Calhoun Patrick S

机构信息

Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA; The VA Mid-Atlantic Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Durham, NC, USA.

Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA; VA Center for Health Services Research in Primary Care, Durham, NC, USA.

出版信息

J Psychiatr Res. 2014 Dec;59:60-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.08.014. Epub 2014 Aug 30.

Abstract

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a significant problem among Iraq/Afghanistan-era veterans. To date, however, there has been only limited research on how the recent changes in DSM-5 influence the prevalence and factor structure of PTSD. To address this key issue, the present research used a modified version of a gold-standard clinical interview to assess PTSD among a large sample of Iraq/Afghanistan-era veterans (N = 414). Thirty-seven percent of the sample met DSM-5 criteria for PTSD compared to a rate of 38% when DSM-IV diagnostic criteria were used. Differences in rates of diagnosis between DSM-IV and DSM-5 were primarily attributable to changes to Criterion A and the separation of the "avoidance" and "numbing" symptoms into separate clusters. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to compare the fit of the previous 3-factor DSM-IV model of PTSD to the 4-factor model specified in DSM-5, a 4-factor "dysphoria" model, and a 5-factor model. CFA demonstrated that the 5-factor model (re-experiencing, active avoidance, emotional numbing, dysphoric arousal, anxious arousal) provided the best overall fit to the data, although substantial support was also found for the 4-factor DSM-5 model. Low factor loadings were noted for two of the symptoms in the DSM-5 model (psychogenic amnesia and reckless/self-destructive behavior), raising questions regarding the adequacy of fit between these symptoms and the other core features of PTSD. Overall, findings suggest the DSM-5 model of PTSD is an improvement over the previous DSM-IV model of PTSD, but still may not represent the true underlying factor structure of PTSD.

摘要

创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)在伊拉克/阿富汗战争时期的退伍军人中是一个严重问题。然而,迄今为止,关于《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM-5)的最新变化如何影响PTSD的患病率和因素结构的研究还很有限。为了解决这一关键问题,本研究使用了金标准临床访谈的修改版本,对大量伊拉克/阿富汗战争时期的退伍军人样本(N = 414)进行PTSD评估。该样本中37%的人符合DSM-5的PTSD标准,而使用DSM-IV诊断标准时这一比例为38%。DSM-IV和DSM-5之间诊断率的差异主要归因于A标准的变化以及“回避”和“麻木”症状被分为不同类别。验证性因素分析(CFA)用于比较先前PTSD的3因素DSM-IV模型与DSM-5中指定的4因素模型、4因素“烦躁不安”模型和5因素模型的拟合度。CFA表明,5因素模型(重新体验、主动回避、情感麻木、烦躁不安的唤醒、焦虑的唤醒)对数据的整体拟合度最佳,尽管也发现了对4因素DSM-5模型的大量支持。DSM-5模型中的两个症状(心因性失忆和鲁莽/自我毁灭行为)的因素负荷较低,这引发了关于这些症状与PTSD其他核心特征之间拟合度是否充分的问题。总体而言,研究结果表明,PTSD的DSM-5模型比先前的PTSD的DSM-IV模型有所改进,但可能仍不能代表PTSD真正的潜在因素结构。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验