This has led to a proliferation of studies that attempt to improve both the concept of traumatic event, as well as a clinical structure of its symptoms ( Breslau & Kessler, 2001 Kessler, Chiu, Demler, Merikangas, & Walters, 2005 Owashi & Perkonigg, 2008 ). Since its fi rst inclusion in diagnostic classifi cations, criteria for PTSD have been controversial for the scientifi c community. It was defi ned as a condition caused by exposure to recognizable stress, which could cause signifi cant symptoms of distress in almost everyone. However, the inclusion of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as such, was only included for the fi rst time in the third edition of DMS ( APA, 1980 ), within the “Anxiety Disorders” section. The psychological reactions resulting from traumatic exposure were included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ( American Psychiatric Association, 1952 ) for the fi rst time under the name of “Stress Response Syndrome”. Palabras clave: TEPT, estrés postraumático, DSM-IV, DSM-5, concordancia diagnóstica. Las diferencias en el diagnóstico son debidas fundamentalmente a la nueva conceptualización de criterio C (evitación) y del criterio D (alteraciones negativas cognitivas y del estado del ánimo) en el DSM-5. Conclusiones: existe una alta concordancia entre las clasifi caciones para el diagnóstico de TEPT. Resultados: el análisis de la no concordancia entre los diagnósticos reveló que los participantes diagnosticados de TEPT, según DSM-IV pero no diagnosticados según DSM-5, eran principalmente víctimas indirectas, mientras que los participantes diagnosticados de TEPT según DSM-5 pero no según DSM-IV presentaban síntomas de evitación cognitiva y alteraciones en cognición y ánimo, ambos síntomas no recogidos en la clasifi cación DSM-IV. Método: 166 participantes, mayores de 18 años, fueron evaluados utilizando la Escala Global de Estrés Postraumático (EGEP), instrumento autoaplicado para evaluar la presencia de sintomatología postraumática y diagnóstico de TEPT. Además, se analizan las características de los participantes que no obtienen concordancia diagnóstica entre las dos clasifi caciones. Antecedentes: el presente estudio tiene como objetivo analizar la concordancia diagnóstica entre la clasifi cación DSM-IV y DSM-5 para el Trastorno de Estrés Postraumático (TEPT), en relación al diagnóstico y a la presencia de los diferentes grupos de síntomas. Keywords: PTSD, posttraumatic stress, DSM-IV, DSM-5, diagnostic concordance.Ĭoncordancia diagnóstica entre DSM-IV y DSM-5 para el Trastorno de Estrés Postraumático (TEPT) en una muestra clínica. Differences between the diagnoses are due to the new defi nition of C (avoidance) and D (negative alterations in cognitions and mood) in the DSM-5. Conclusions: A withinsubjects concordance analysis showed high agreement for PTSD diagnosis between the two classifi cations. Conversely, individuals who were diagnosed with the DSM-5 criteria and not with the DSM-IV criteria presented cognitive avoidance and alterations in cognition not included in the DSM-IV criteria. The analysis of the non-concordant individuals revealed that individuals who were diagnosed according to the DSM-IV criteria but not the DSM-5 criteria were primarily indirect victims. Results: The presence of cognitive avoidance was a determinant in the PTSD DSM-5 diagnosis (86% positive predictive value). PTSD diagnosis was established using the Global Scale for Posttraumatic Stress (EGEP), a self-report measure to assess PTSD. Method: The study assessed 166 people over 18 who had experienced at least one traumatic event. ![]() Furthermore, analyses are conducted to establish the features of participants with no concordant diagnoses. Background: The present study aims to analyze diagnostic concordance between the DSM-IV and the DSM-5 for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnostic criteria and their different groups of symptoms.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |