Boeschoten Manon A, Van der Aa Niels, Bakker Anne, Ter Heide F Jackie June, Hoofwijk Marthe C, Jongedijk Ruud A, Van Minnen Agnes, Elzinga Bernet M, Olff Miranda
Foundation Centrum '45, Oegstgeest/Diemen, The Netherlands | Partner in Arq Psychotrauma Expert Group, Diemen, The Netherlands.
Department of Psychiatry, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2018 Nov 22;9(1):1546085. doi: 10.1080/20008198.2018.1546085. eCollection 2018.
: In 2013, the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale, the golden standard to assess PTSD, was adapted to the DSM-5 (CAPS-5). : This project aimed to develop a clinically relevant Dutch translation of the CAPS-5 and to investigate its psychometric properties. : We conducted a stepped translation including Delphi rounds with a crowd of 44 Dutch psychotrauma experts and five senior psychotrauma experts. Using partial crowd-translations, two professional translations and the official Dutch translation of the DSM-5, each senior expert aggregated one independent translation. Consensus was reached plenary. After back-translation, comparison with the original CAPS-5 and field testing, a last round with the senior experts resulted in the final version. After implementation clinicians conducted CAPS-5 interviews with 669 trauma-exposed individuals referred for specialized diagnostic assessment. Reliability of the Dutch CAPS-5 was investigated through internal consistency and interrater reliability analyses, and construct validity through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). : CAPS-5 total severity score showed high internal consistency ( = .90) and interrater reliability (ICC = .98, 95% CI: .94-.99). CAPS-5 diagnosis showed modest interrater reliability (kappa = .59, 95% CI: .20-.98). CFA with alternative PTSD models revealed adequate support for the DSM-5 four-factor model, but a six-factor (Anhedonia) model fit the data best. : The Dutch CAPS-5 is a carefully translated instrument with adequate psychometric properties. Current results add to the growing support for more refined (six and seven) factor models for DSM-5 PTSD indicating that the validity and clinical implications of these models should be objective of further research.
2013年，用于评估创伤后应激障碍（PTSD）的金标准——临床医生管理的PTSD量表被改编为符合《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第5版（DSM - 5）的版本（CAPS - 5）。本项目旨在开发与临床相关的荷兰语版CAPS - 5，并研究其心理测量特性。我们进行了逐步翻译，包括与44名荷兰心理创伤专家和5名资深心理创伤专家进行德尔菲轮次。利用部分群体翻译、两份专业翻译以及DSM - 5的官方荷兰语翻译，每位资深专家汇总出一份独立翻译。全体会议达成了共识。经过回译、与原始CAPS - 5进行比较以及现场测试后，与资深专家进行的最后一轮讨论得出了最终版本。实施后，临床医生对669名因专门诊断评估而被转诊的受过创伤的个体进行了CAPS - 5访谈。通过内部一致性和评分者间信度分析研究了荷兰语版CAPS - 5的信度，并通过验证性因素分析（CFA）研究了结构效度。CAPS - 5总严重程度得分显示出高内部一致性（α = 0.90）和评分者间信度（组内相关系数ICC = 0.98，95%置信区间：0.94 - 0.99）。CAPS - 5诊断显示出适度的评分者间信度（kappa = 0.59，95%置信区间：0.20 - 0.98）。对替代PTSD模型进行的CFA显示，对DSM - 5四因素模型有充分支持，但六因素（快感缺乏）模型最适合数据。荷兰语版CAPS - 5是经过精心翻译的工具，具有适当的心理测量特性。当前结果进一步支持了对DSM - 5创伤后应激障碍更精细的（六因素和七因素）模型，表明这些模型的效度和临床意义应成为进一步研究的目标。
