Basit Tabinda, Anderson Mathew, Lindstrom Akiaja, Santomauro Damian F, Whiteford Harvey A, Ferrari Alize J
Queensland Centre for Mental Health Research, The Park - Centre for Mental Health, Archerfield, QLD, Australia.
School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Herston, QLD, Australia.
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2023 Feb;57(2):283-290. doi: 10.1177/00048674221150361. Epub 2023 Jan 23.
The Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0 is a standardised diagnostic interview commonly used in population-based mental health surveys, but has not been used in community-residing Indigenous Australians. This paper seeks to determine whether the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0 can produce valid diagnostic information when compared with a diagnostic interview in an urban Indigenous Australian sample.
This research was conducted over 10 weeks with adult Indigenous clients of two participating Aboriginal Medical Services in South-East Queensland. Using a cross-sectional, repeated-measures design, participants were administered the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0 by an Indigenous interviewer and within 2 weeks attended a second appointment with an Indigenous clinical psychologist, who produced a diagnostic summary. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0 diagnoses were compared with the diagnostic summaries and clinical concordance between the two measures was calculated.
The diagnostic accuracy of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0 differed by module. The Post-traumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depression modules had good utility in diagnosing post-traumatic stress disorder and major depressive episodes, respectively; however, the Mania module that provides diagnoses of bipolar disorder was found to be unsuitable for this population. Although there were no identified contraindications for the use of the Generalised Anxiety and Alcohol Use Disorder modules, further research on the diagnostic accuracy of these modules is warranted.
The Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0 can accurately diagnose some common mental disorders in an Indigenous Australian population, but was found to be unsuitable for others. Given these findings, care should be taken when using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0 in epidemiological prevalence studies with Indigenous Australian populations.
《综合国际诊断访谈3.0》是一种标准化诊断访谈，常用于基于人群的心理健康调查，但尚未在居住于社区的澳大利亚原住民中使用。本文旨在确定与澳大利亚城市原住民样本中的诊断访谈相比，《综合国际诊断访谈3.0》是否能产生有效的诊断信息。
本研究在昆士兰州东南部两家参与研究的原住民医疗服务机构中，对成年原住民客户进行了为期10周的调查。采用横断面重复测量设计，由一名原住民访谈员对参与者进行《综合国际诊断访谈3.0》的测试，并在2周内安排他们与一名原住民临床心理学家进行第二次预约，由该临床心理学家出具诊断总结。将《综合国际诊断访谈3.0》的诊断结果与诊断总结进行比较，并计算两种测量方法之间的临床一致性。
《综合国际诊断访谈3.0》的诊断准确性因模块而异。创伤后应激障碍模块和重度抑郁模块在诊断创伤后应激障碍和重度抑郁发作方面分别具有良好的效用；然而，用于诊断双相情感障碍的躁狂症模块被发现不适用于该人群。虽然未发现使用广泛性焦虑症模块和酒精使用障碍模块的禁忌证，但有必要对这些模块的诊断准确性进行进一步研究。
《综合国际诊断访谈3.0》能够准确诊断澳大利亚原住民人群中的一些常见精神障碍，但也发现其不适用于其他一些障碍。鉴于这些发现，在对澳大利亚原住民人群进行流行病学患病率研究时，使用《综合国际诊断访谈3.0》时应谨慎。
