Psychologists’ perspectives on the diagnostic classification of mental disorders: Results from the WHO-IUPsyS Global Survey

Post #263 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-3dj

Psychologists’ perspectives on the diagnostic classification of mental disorders: Results from the WHO-IUPsyS Global Survey

Int J Psychol. 2013 Jun 10. [Epub ahead of print]

Psychologists’ perspectives on the diagnostic classification of mental disorders: Results from the WHO-IUPsyS Global Survey.

Evans SC, Reed GM, Roberts MC, Esparza P, Watts AD, Correia JM, Ritchie P, Maj M, Saxena S.
Source
a Clinical Child Psychology Program, University of Kansas, Lawrence , KS, USA.

Abstract

This study examined psychologists’ views and practices regarding diagnostic classification systems for mental and behavioral disorders so as to inform the development of the ICD-11 by the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO and the International Union of Psychological Science (IUPsyS) conducted a multilingual survey of 2155 psychologists from 23 countries, recruited through their national psychological associations. Sixty percent of global psychologists routinely used a formal classification system, with ICD-10 used most frequently by 51% and DSM-IV by 44%. Psychologists viewed informing treatment decisions and facilitating communication as the most important purposes of classification, and preferred flexible diagnostic guidelines to strict criteria. Clinicians favorably evaluated most diagnostic categories, but identified a number of problematic diagnoses. Substantial percentages reported problems with crosscultural applicability and cultural bias, especially among psychologists outside the USA and Europe. Findings underscore the priority of clinical utility and professional and cultural differences in international psychology. Implications for ICD-11 development and dissemination are discussed.

PMID: 23750927

[PubMed – as supplied by publisher]

+++

Slide Presentation: Aug 3, 2012

The WHO-IUPsyS Global Survey of Psychologists’ Attitudes Toward Mental Disorders Classification.

Download PDF WHO-IUPsyS Global Survey slides

+++
More information on this WHO study can be found on Page 7 (3.) of this report:

http://www.apa.org/international/outreach/icd-report-2012.pdf

2012 Annual Report of the International Union of Psychological Science to the American Psychological Association

Revision of World Health Organization’s ICD-10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders

Pierre L.-J. Ritchie, Ph.D., Main Representative to the World Health Organization, International Union of Psychological Science, January, 2013

Click link for PDF document    WHO-IUPsyS ICD Survey Report Report 2012

This report also sets out the responsibilities of ICD Revision working groups, on Page 3 (1.1), and gives some information on the field studies for ICD-11 and ICD11-PHC, on Page 8 (4.)

+++

The earlier study: WPA-WHO Global Survey of Psychiatrists’ Attitudes Towards Mental Disorders Classification can be downloaded here: 

The WPA-WHO Global Survey of Psychiatrists’ Attitudes Towards Mental Disorders Classification

World Psychiatry 2011;10:118-131

Research report

Geoffrey M Reed, João Mendonça Correia, Patricia Esparza, Shekhar Saxena, Mario Maj

+++

DSM-5 released: professional and campaigning reaction: Round up #7

Post #262 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-3cF

DSM-5 released: professional and campaigning reaction: Round up #7

A considerable amount of media coverage and commentary on DSM-5 has been published since posting Round up #6, on May 24. Occupied with other matters, I shall likely not catch-up. The world will continue to turn.

Here, though, are some recent commentaries from psychiatry and psychology professionals; a report from Prof Sir Simon Wessely on last week’s Institute of Psychiatry’s two day DSM-5 Conference; below that, new Online Assessment Measures documents from the APA’s DSM-5 Resource pages, including Somatic Symptom assessment instruments for 6-17 year olds, and a clarification from CMS on HIPAA and the status of the DSM-5 code sets.

Via Patrick Landman

Pédopsychiatre, Psychiatre, Président d’Initiative Pour une Clinique du Sujet Stop-Dsm, Psychanalyste Membre d’Espace Analytiquea

A statement written and signed by prominent French psychiatrists in response to recent comments by APA President-Elect, Jeffrey Lieberman, was issued, yesterday:

Full text on the STOP-DSM campaign website:

To oppose the DSM-5 is not to oppose psychiatry

Recently, some of the DSM-5 supporters have been trying to portray the opposition against the fifth edition of this manual of the American Psychiatric Association as an opposition to psychiatry and a form of antipsychiatry. This political argument aims to discredit the movement and to subsume it in its entirety, including its numerous variations, under a single label, one that can easily be identified and connected with a certain history, the sixties. Such specious rhetoric allows its authors not to have to respond to serious and well-documented arguments of the DSM-5 critics. In reality, its many opponents from Europe, Australia, South America and even the United States include a great number of psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, social workers and other mental health practitioners… Read on


Report on the website of South London and Maudsely NHS Foundation Trust from Prof Sir Simon Wessely on the Institute of Psychiatry’s recent DSM-5 Conference.

Prof Wessely is Head of the Department of Psychological Medicine and Vice Dean, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London. 

DSM-5 at the IoP

Monday June 10, 2013

The latest and fifth version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), invariably known as the DSM, was published on 18 May 2013. To mark the occasion, we hosted an international conference at the Institute of Psychiatry from 3-4 June. This was the first such meeting since the launch and the first platform for Professor David Kupfer, Chair of Psychiatry at the Western Psychiatric Institute in Pittsburgh, but more importantly for us, the man who has directed the compilation and development of DSM-5, and who is justly regarded as its architect…

…I used the somatoform disorders as an example of where “DSM feared to tread”. The latest attempt to come up with something that is both empirically rigorous but also suitable for real world use in this particular area represents a small step forward, at least in simplifying an area of previous mind numbing complexity, but I suggested, was unlikely to represent real progress. This is because the DSM (and for that matter the ICD) are both diagnostic systems that are written by psychiatrists but which in this area need to be used by physicians, who ignore them, and concern patients who don’t like them, often fiercely so… Full Text


Essay by Sarah Kamens MA on the Dx Summit platform

DSM-5′s Somatic Symptom Disorder: From Medical Enigma to Psychiatric Sphinx

Sarah Kamens is a Ph.D. candidate in clinical psychology at Fordham University and in media & communications at the European Graduate School (EGS). Her work focuses on diagnostic discourse and sociopolitics in the psy disciplines.


Spiked Review of Books

‘This manual is, frankly, a disaster for children’

Christopher Lane talks to spiked about the new edition of the bible of psychiatry – ‘a legal document facilitating the medication of millions’.

by Helene Guldberg


http://www.psychiatry.org/dsm5

DSM-5 Online Assessment Measures

APA is inviting clinicians and researchers to provide feedback on the instruments’ usefulness in characterizing patient status and improving patient care. There are a large number of documents that can be downloaded from the link above, including:

For Adults

LEVEL 2–Somatic Symptom–Adult (Patient Health Questionnaire 15 Somatic Symptom Severity Scale [PHQ-15])

For Parents of Children Ages 6–17

LEVEL 2—Somatic Symptom—Parent/Guardian of Child Age 6-17 (Patient Health Questionnaire 15 Somatic Symptom Severity Scale [PHQ-15])

For Children Ages 11–17

LEVEL 2—Somatic Symptom—Parent/Guardian of Child Age 11-17 (Patient Health Questionnaire 15 Somatic Symptom Severity Scale [PHQ-15])

Clinician-Rated

Clinician-Rated Severity of Somatic Symptom Disorder


Finally, a note on the FAQ pages of the CMS.gov website which clarifies the non official status of DSM-5 code sets:

Frequently Asked Questions

(FAQ1817)

[Q] In current practice by the mental health field, many clinicians use the DSM-IV in diagnosing mental disorders. As of May 19, 2013, the DSM-5 was released. Can these clinicians continue current practice and use the DSM-IV and DSM-5 diagnostic criteria?

[A] Yes. The Introductory material to the DSM-IV and DSM-5 code set indicates that the DSM-IV and DSM-5 are “compatible” with the ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes. The updated DSM-5 codes are crosswalked to both ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM. As of October 1, 2014, the ICD-10-CM code set is the HIPAA adopted standard and required for reporting diagnosis for dates of service on and after October 1, 2014.

Neither the DSM-IV nor DSM-5 is a HIPAA adopted code set and may not be used in HIPAA standard transactions. It is expected that clinicians may continue to base their diagnostic decisions on the DSM-IV/DSM-5 criteria, and, if so, to crosswalk those decisions to the appropriate ICD-9-CM and, as of October 1, 2014, ICD-10 CM codes. In addition, it is still perfectly permissible for providers and others to use the DSM-IV and DSM-5 codes, descriptors and diagnostic criteria for other purposes, including medical records, quality assessment, medical review, consultation and patient communications.

Dates when the DSM-IV may no longer be used by mental health providers will be determined by the maintainer of the DSM-IV/DSM-5 code set, the American Psychiatric Association, http://www.dsm5.org

(FAQ1817)

Somatic Symptom Disorder in recent journal papers

Post #261 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-3ah

Somatic Symptom Disorder in recent journal papers

Somatic Symptom Disorder is also included in Saving Normal: An Insider’s Revolt Against Out-Of-Control Psychiatric Diagnosis, Dsm-5, Big Pharma, and the Medicalization of Ordinary Life (pp. 193-6): Allen Frances, William Morrow & Company (20 May 2013).

Also in Essentials of Psychiatric Diagnosis: Responding to the Challenge of DSM-5 (Chapter 16): Allen Frances, Guilford Press (14 June 2013).

In the June edition of Journal of Nervous and Mental Disorders, Allen Frances, MD, who chaired the Task Force for DSM-IV, discusses his concerns for the loosely defined DSM-5 category, Somatic Symptom Disorder, sets out his suggestions for revising the criteria prior to finalization, as presented to the SSD Work Group chair, in December, and advises clinicians against using the new SSD diagnosis.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23719325

DSM-5 Somatic Symptom Disorder.

Frances A.

Department of Psychiatry, Duke University, Durham, NC.

J Nerv Ment Dis. 2013 Jun;201(6):530-1. doi: 10.1097/NMD.0b013e318294827c. No abstract available.

PMID: 23719325

[PubMed – in process]

+++

Commentary by Allen Frances, MD, and Suzy Chapman in the May issue of Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry. The paper discusses the over-inclusive DSM-5 Somatic Symptom Disorder criteria and the potential implications for diverse patient groups. The paper concludes by advising clinicians not to use the new SSD diagnosis.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23653063

DSM-5 somatic symptom disorder mislabels medical illness as mental disorder.

Allen Frances¹, Suzy Chapman²

1 Department of Psychiatry, Duke University 2 DxRevisionWatch.com

Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2013 May;47(5):483-4. doi: 10.1177/0004867413484525. No abstract available.

PMID: 23653063

[PubMed – in process]

+++

The April 22 edition of Current Biology published a feature article on DSM-5 by science writer, Michael Gross, Ph.D. The article includes quotes from Allen Frances, MD, and Suzy Chapman on the implications for patients for the application of the new DSM-5 Somatic Symptom Disorder. The article includes concerns for the influence of Somatic Symptom Disorder on proposals for a new ICD category – Bodily Distress Disorder – being field tested for ICD-11 and ICD-11-PHC.

Current Biology 22 April, 2013 Volume 23, Issue 8

Copyright 2013 All rights reserved. Current Biology, Volume  23, Issue  8, R295-R298, 22 April 2013

doi:10.1016/j.cub.2013.04.009

Feature

Has the manual gone mental?

Michael Gross

Full text: http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(13)00417-X

PDF: http://download.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/PIIS096098221300417X.pdf

+++

In this opinion piece, published in the BMJ, March 18, Allen Frances, MD, strongly opposes the new Somatic Symptom Disorder, discusses its lack of specificity, data from the field trials and advises clinicians to ignore this new category.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23511949

The new somatic symptom disorder in DSM-5 risks mislabeling many people as mentally ill.

Frances A.

Allen Frances, chair of the DSM-IV task force

BMJ. 2013 Mar 18;346:f1580. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f1580. No abstract available.

PMID: 23511949

[PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

+++

Further reading

APA Somatic Symptom Disorder Fact Sheet APA DSM-5 Resources

Somatic Chapter Drops Centrality Of Unexplained Medical Symptoms Psychiatric News, Mark Moran, March 1, 2013

Somatic Symptoms Criteria in DSM-5 Improve Diagnosis, Care David J Kupfer, MD, Chair, DSM-5 Task Force, defends the SSD construct, Huffington Post, February 8, 2013

The new somatic symptom disorder in DSM-5 risks mislabeling many people as mentally ill Allen Frances, MD, BMJ 2013;346:f1580 BMJ Press Release

Somatic Symptom Disorder could capture millions more under mental health diagnosis Suzy Chapman, May 26, 2012

Mislabeling Medical Illness As Mental Disorder Allen Frances, MD, Psychology Today, DSM 5 in Distress, December 8, 2012

Why Did DSM 5 Botch Somatic Symptom Disorder? Allen Frances, MD, Psychology Today, Saving Normal, February 6, 2013

New Psych Disorder Could Mislabel Sick as Mentally Ill Susan Donaldson James, ABC News, February 27, 2013

Dimsdale JE. Medically unexplained symptoms: a treacherous foundation for somatoform disorders? Psychiatr Clin North Am 2011;34:511-3. [PMID: 21889675]