Rocha Neto Helio Gomes, Estellita-Lins Carlos Eduardo, Lessa José Luiz Martins, Cavalcanti Maria Tavares
Centro Universitario Lusíada, São Paulo, Brazil.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Front Psychiatry. 2019 Mar 5;10:77. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00077. eCollection 2019.
Mental State Examination (MSE) is compared with physical examination as a reliable method of objective data investigation. There is a growing concern with psychiatric clinics, nosology, and the reliability of diagnostic interview methods as a source of valid diagnostic strategy. Efforts to achieve an international diagnosis protocol have been unsuccessful or polemical. This paper focuses on psychopathology, MSE, and mental function development within Brazilian psychiatry over the last few decades. Searches, interviews, and narrative reviews were done to look for systematic ways in which to conduct MSE, mental functions, symptom clusters, orientations about data observation and records. Brazilian psychopathology textbooks were examined, if they provided access to consolidated knowledge on psychopathology examination. Sixteen textbooks were selected from a 49 year span. Descriptive psychopathology with phenomenological orientation was the primary trend in the MSE. Concepts derived from different traditions, most lacking common terminology, suggested some divergence among authors. Recommendations for patient observation and how to collect objective data was clear, but MSE standardization efforts were missing. A detailed description of mental function abnormalities was the main MSE record strategy, without consensus about ways to summarize and record this data. In an examination summary, mental strata was divided into "mental functions," and MSE subsets were frequent. All authors considered the following mental functions: consciousness, perception, thought, memory, attention, orientation, and volition. Psychiatric competence demands MSE proficiency. Official documents are not clear about performance and recording standards. MSE data was usually recorded through descriptive psychopathology. A shift from detailed descriptive findings, to an array of observed pathological elements, described through a mental function checklist was observed over time. Clinical practice and research guidelines should consider the development of reliable MSE practices; however, it has been neglected by modern psychiatry/neuroscience through the excessive emphasis on interview protocols. Better MSE practices, and the improvement of bedside skill in psychiatry are necessary and depend on the recovery of psychopathological debates and semiological reasoning, which will allow the return of phenomenology-oriented "observational" techniques.
精神状态检查(MSE)作为一种可靠的客观数据调查方法,与体格检查相比较。人们越来越关注精神病诊所、疾病分类学以及诊断访谈方法作为有效诊断策略来源的可靠性。实现国际诊断协议的努力一直未成功或存在争议。本文聚焦于过去几十年巴西精神病学中的精神病理学、MSE以及心理功能发展。通过检索、访谈和叙述性综述来寻找进行MSE、心理功能、症状群、数据观察和记录方向的系统方法。查阅了巴西精神病理学教科书,看其是否能提供关于精神病理学检查的综合知识。从49年的跨度中选取了16本教科书。以现象学为导向的描述性精神病理学是MSE的主要趋势。源自不同传统的概念,大多缺乏共同术语,这表明作者之间存在一些分歧。关于患者观察以及如何收集客观数据的建议很明确,但MSE标准化工作缺失。对心理功能异常的详细描述是主要MSE记录策略,但对于总结和记录这些数据的方法没有达成共识。在检查总结中,心理层次被分为“心理功能”,MSE子集很常见。所有作者都考虑了以下心理功能:意识、感知、思维、记忆、注意力、定向和意志。精神科能力要求具备MSE熟练程度。官方文件对于操作和记录标准并不明确。MSE数据通常通过描述性精神病理学来记录。随着时间的推移,可以观察到从详细的描述性发现转向通过心理功能清单描述的一系列观察到的病理元素。临床实践和研究指南应考虑可靠的MSE实践的发展;然而,现代精神病学/神经科学因过度强调访谈协议而忽视了这一点。更好的MSE实践以及提高精神病学床边技能是必要的,这依赖于精神病理学辩论和符号学推理的恢复,这将使以现象学为导向的“观察性”技术回归。