• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

评估布什-弗朗西斯紧张症评定量表教育模块的有效性。

Evaluating the Effectiveness of an Educational Module for the Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale.

作者信息

Wortzel Joshua R, Maeng Daniel D, Francis Andrew, Oldham Mark A

机构信息

University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.

Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, PA, USA.

出版信息

Acad Psychiatry. 2022 Apr;46(2):185-193. doi: 10.1007/s40596-021-01582-0. Epub 2022 Jan 7.

DOI:10.1007/s40596-021-01582-0
PMID:34997564
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Catatonia is widely underdiagnosed, in large part due to inaccurate recognition of its specific features. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an online educational module to improve theoretical and practical knowledge of the Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS) across a broad range of clinicians and medical students.

METHOD

A 1-h online module, including a training manual and videos, was disseminated to medical students, psychiatry residents and fellows, and psychiatrists through national Listservs and through the Academy of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry. Participants completed pre- and post-module testing consisting of a 50-question multiple-choice test and a 3-min standardized patient video scored using the 23-item BFCRS. Participants accessed the module from October 1, 2020, to April 4, 2021. Immediate improvement and 3-month knowledge retention were assessed using quantitative and qualitative analyses.

RESULTS

Study enrollment was high with moderate dropout (pre-testing: n = 482; post-testing: n = 236; 3-month testing: n = 105). Adjusting for demographics, large pre-post improvements were found in performance (multiple-choice: 11.3 points; standardized patient scoring: 4.2 points; both p < 0.001) and for nearly all individual BFCRS items. Knowledge attrition was modest, and improvements persisted at 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This educational resource provides descriptive and demonstrative reference standards of the items on the BFCRS. This curriculum improved identification of catatonia's features on both multiple choice and standardized patient scoring across all ages and training levels with good overall knowledge retention.

摘要

目的

紧张症在很大程度上未得到充分诊断,这主要是由于对其具体特征的认识不准确。本研究旨在评估一个在线教育模块对提高广泛的临床医生和医学生关于布什-弗朗西斯紧张症评定量表(BFCRS)的理论和实践知识的有效性。

方法

一个1小时的在线模块,包括一本培训手册和视频,通过全国性邮件列表以及会诊-联络精神病学学会分发给医学生、精神科住院医师和研究员以及精神科医生。参与者完成模块前后测试,包括一个50道题的多项选择题测试和一个使用23项BFCRS评分的3分钟标准化患者视频。参与者于2020年10月1日至2021年4月4日访问该模块。使用定量和定性分析评估即时改善情况和3个月的知识保留情况。

结果

研究参与率较高,但有中度失访(预测试:n = 482;后测试:n = 236;3个月测试:n = 105)。调整人口统计学因素后,发现表现有大幅的前后改善(多项选择题:11.3分;标准化患者评分:4.2分;均p < 0.001),并且几乎所有BFCRS单项均有改善。知识流失适度,3个月时改善情况持续存在。

结论

该教育资源提供了BFCRS各项目的描述性和示范性参考标准。该课程在所有年龄和培训水平的多项选择题和标准化患者评分方面都改善了对紧张症特征的识别,且整体知识保留良好。

相似文献

1
Evaluating the Effectiveness of an Educational Module for the Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale.评估布什-弗朗西斯紧张症评定量表教育模块的有效性。
Acad Psychiatry. 2022 Apr;46(2):185-193. doi: 10.1007/s40596-021-01582-0. Epub 2022 Jan 7.
2
Prevalent Gaps in Understanding the Features of Catatonia Among Psychiatrists, Psychiatry Trainees, and Medical Students.精神科医生、精神科实习生和医学生在理解紧张症特征方面普遍存在的差距。
J Clin Psychiatry. 2021 Aug 17;82(5):21m14025. doi: 10.4088/JCP.21m14025.
3
Rating catatonia in patients with chronic schizophrenia: Rasch analysis of the Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale.慢性精神分裂症患者的紧张症评定:Bush-Francis紧张症评定量表的拉施分析
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2007;16(3):161-70. doi: 10.1002/mpr.224.
4
Diagnosing catatonia and its dimensions: Cluster analysis and factor solution using the Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS).诊断紧张症及其维度:使用布什-弗朗西斯紧张症评定量表(BFCRS)进行聚类分析和因子分析
Asian J Psychiatr. 2020 Aug;52:102002. doi: 10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102002. Epub 2020 Apr 10.
5
Turkish Adaptation, Validity and Reliability Study of the Bush Francis Catatonia Rating and KANNER Scales.《布什-弗朗西斯躁狂评定量表和 KANNER 量表的土耳其适应性、有效性和可靠性研究》。
Turk Psikiyatri Derg. 2023 Winter;34(4):254-261. doi: 10.5080/u27064.
6
Describing the features of catatonia: A comparative phenotypic analysis.描述紧张症的特征:一种比较表型分析。
Schizophr Res. 2024 Jan;263:82-92. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2022.08.002. Epub 2022 Aug 20.
7
Assessment of catatonia and inter-rater reliability of three instruments: a descriptive study.三种工具对紧张症的评估及评分者间信度:一项描述性研究
Int J Ment Health Syst. 2021 Nov 22;15(1):82. doi: 10.1186/s13033-021-00505-8.
8
Assessing catatonia using four different instruments: Inter-rater reliability and prevalence in inpatient clinical population.使用四种不同工具评估紧张症:评分者间信度及住院临床人群中的患病率。
Asian J Psychiatr. 2016 Oct;23:27-31. doi: 10.1016/j.ajp.2016.07.003. Epub 2016 Jul 11.
9
Consistency of symptoms in recurrent catatonia.复发性紧张症症状的一致性。
Compr Psychiatry. 1997 Jan-Feb;38(1):56-60. doi: 10.1016/s0010-440x(97)90054-7.
10
Revisiting lorazepam challenge test: Clinical response with dose variations and utility for catatonia in a psychiatric emergency setting.重新审视劳拉西泮挑战试验:在精神科急诊环境中剂量变化的临床反应及其对紧张症的效用。
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2021 Oct;55(10):993-1004. doi: 10.1177/0004867420968915. Epub 2020 Oct 30.

引用本文的文献

1
What Internists and Neurologists Know and Think About Catatonia.内科医生和神经科医生对紧张症的了解与看法。
Prim Care Companion CNS Disord. 2025 Apr 17;27(2):24m03853. doi: 10.4088/PCC.24m03853.
2
Online-Based and Technology-Assisted Psychiatric Education for Trainees: Scoping Review.面向学员的基于网络和技术辅助的精神科教育:范围综述
JMIR Med Educ. 2025 Apr 15;11:e64773. doi: 10.2196/64773.
3
The theoretical sensitivity of virtual assessment of catatonia.紧张症虚拟评估的理论敏感性。

本文引用的文献

1
Catatonia revived: a unique syndrome updated.重新审视紧张症:一种独特综合征的更新认识。
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2020 Aug-Sep;32(5-6):403-411. doi: 10.1080/09540261.2020.1723500. Epub 2020 Feb 18.
2
Redefine statistical significance.重新定义统计学显著性。
Nat Hum Behav. 2018 Jan;2(1):6-10. doi: 10.1038/s41562-017-0189-z.
3
Prevalence of Catatonia and Its Moderators in Clinical Samples: Results from a Meta-analysis and Meta-regression Analysis.刻板症在临床样本中的流行率及其调节因素:荟萃分析和荟萃回归分析的结果。
Schizophr Res. 2024 Dec;274:486-488. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2024.10.020. Epub 2024 Nov 8.
4
Catatonia.紧张症
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2024 Jul 18;10(1):49. doi: 10.1038/s41572-024-00534-w.
5
Evidence-based consensus guidelines for the management of catatonia: Recommendations from the British Association for Psychopharmacology.基于证据的共识指南:英国精神药理学协会对紧张症管理的建议。
J Psychopharmacol. 2023 Apr;37(4):327-369. doi: 10.1177/02698811231158232. Epub 2023 Apr 11.
6
Describing the features of catatonia: A comparative phenotypic analysis.描述紧张症的特征:一种比较表型分析。
Schizophr Res. 2024 Jan;263:82-92. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2022.08.002. Epub 2022 Aug 20.
7
Pseudodelirium: Psychiatric Conditions to Consider on the Differential for Delirium.假性谵妄:鉴别谵妄时需考虑的精神科状况。
J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2021 Fall;33(4):356-364. doi: 10.1176/appi.neuropsych.20120316. Epub 2021 Aug 16.
Schizophr Bull. 2018 Aug 20;44(5):1133-1150. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbx157.
4
The diagnostic criteria and structure of catatonia.紧张症的诊断标准与结构。
Schizophr Res. 2015 May;164(1-3):256-62. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2014.12.036. Epub 2015 Jan 13.
5
Prototypes of catatonia: diagnostic and therapeutic challenges in the general hospital.紧张症的原型:综合医院中的诊断与治疗挑战
Psychosomatics. 2013 Jan-Feb;54(1):88-93. doi: 10.1016/j.psym.2012.06.008. Epub 2012 Dec 4.
6
The catatonia rating scale I--development, reliability, and use.紧张症评定量表I——编制、信度及应用
Compr Psychiatry. 2000 Mar-Apr;41(2):147-58. doi: 10.1016/s0010-440x(00)90148-2.
7
Catatonia. II. Treatment with lorazepam and electroconvulsive therapy.紧张症。二、劳拉西泮与电休克治疗
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1996 Feb;93(2):137-43. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1996.tb09815.x.
8
Catatonia. I. Rating scale and standardized examination.紧张症。一、评定量表与标准化检查。
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1996 Feb;93(2):129-36. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1996.tb09814.x.