27 research outputs found

    Mental health professionals' use of the ICD-11 classification of impulse control disorders and behavioral addictions: An international field study

    Get PDF
    Background and aims The ICD-11 chapter on mental, behavioral and neurodevelopmental disorders contains new controversial diagnoses including compulsive sexual behavior disorder (CSBD), intermittent explosive disorder (IED) and gaming disorder. Using a vignette-based methodology, this field study examined the ability of mental health professionals (MHPs) to apply the new ICD-11 diagnostic requirements for impulse control disorders, which include CSBD and IED, and disorders due to addictive behaviors, which include gaming disorder, compared to the previous ICD-10 guidelines. Methods Across eleven comparisons, members of the WHO's Global Clinical Practice Network (N = 1,090) evaluated standardized case descriptions that were designed to test key differences between the diagnostic guidelines of ICD-11 and ICD-10. Results The ICD-11 outperformed the ICD-10 in the accuracy of diagnosing impulse control disorders and behavioral addictions in most comparisons, while the ICD-10 was not superior in any. The superiority of the ICD-11 was particularly clear where new diagnoses had been added to the classification system or major revisions had been made. However, the ICD-11 outperformed the ICD-10 only in a minority of comparisons in which mental health professionals were asked to evaluate cases with non-pathological high involvement in rewarding behaviors. Discussion and Conclusions Overall, the present study indicates that the ICD-11 diagnostic requirements represent an improvement over the ICD-10 guidelines. However, additional efforts, such as training programs for MHPs and possible refinements of diagnostic guidance, are needed to avoid over-diagnosis of people who are highly engaged in a repetitive and rewarding behavior but below the threshold for a disorder

    Core considerations in the development of the world health organization's international classification of diseases, 11th Revision

    No full text
    The World Health Organization (WHO) Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse is updating the diagnostic guidelines for mental and behavioural disorders intended for inclusion in the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11). When ratified and implemented, the ICD-11 will serve as a global standard used across the world for varied purposes ranging from diagnosis, clinical management, health data collection and reporting, research, service and program planning, and policy development. Given the eventual ubiquity of the ICD-11 and its potentially significant impact on clinical practice and public health, WHO has identified three core organizing principles to guide ICD-11 development: 1.) maximizing the clinical utility or usefulness of the guidelines in the clinical context (e.g., ease-of-use, goodness-of-fit, clarity, feasibility of implementation); 2.) assessing the clinical consistency or reliability of the guidelines; and 3.) ensuring the global applicability of the system to clinicians working in diverse settings worldwide. This article provides a review of each of these three core considerations, specifying rationale for their selection and defining the various mechanisms designed by WHO to assess and enhance these key elements of the ICD-11

    Patterns of concordances in mhGAP-IG screening and DSM-IV/ICD10 diagnoses by trained community service providers in Kenya:a pilot cross-sectional study

    No full text
    Purpose: The objective of this study was to determine the extent of concordance between positive screens for mental disorders by various trained community-based health workers using the WHO mental health Gap Action Programme Intervention Guide (mhGAP-IG) and independently confirmed DSM-IV/ICD-10 diagnoses. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in Makueni County, Kenya. 40 nurses/clinical officers, 60 Community Health Workers (CHWs), 51 Faith Healers (FHs), and 59 Traditional Healers (THs) from 20 facilities were trained to screen and refer patients with eight priority mental health conditions using the mhGAP-IG. These referrals, as well as referrals from friends or family members, and self-referrals were assessed using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Instrument (M.I.N.I.) Plus. Concordance between positive screens and M.I.N.I. Plus diagnoses was investigated. Results: 15,078 community members agreed to participate in screening. Of these 12,170 (81%) screened positive for a mental disorder and were referred to their local clinics/hospitals. 8333 (68.5%) of those who were referred went for independent diagnostic assessment at the nearest facility. Positive predictive values varied with different providers and for different conditions. There was over 80% concordance between the initial screen and the M.I.N.I. Plus diagnoses across the different health providers and across all diagnoses. Conclusion: Both formal and informal mental health providers can be trained to successfully and accurately screen for mental health disorders using the mhGAP-IG symptoms. This suggests that community-based non-specialist providers may play a key role in decreasing the mental health treatment gap. Further policy implications are discussed

    [The Italian ICD-11 field trial: inter-rater reliability in the use of diagnostic guidelines for schizophrenia and related disorders]

    No full text
    The World Health Organization (WHO) is about to publish the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Disorders (ICD-11). A pre-final version has been disseminated in 2018, in order to allow the 194 member States to provide suggestions for amendments and to prepare shared strategies for the implementation of the diagnostic system. Furthermore, the Ecological Implementation Field Studies (EIFS) have been conducted in various countries, with the aim to assess the reliability and clinical utility of the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines. In this paper we present the overall methodology of the EIFS and discuss the results of the Italian field trials concerning the reliability in the use of ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines concerning schizophrenia and related disorders. In Italy the field trials have been carried out at the Department of Psychiatry of the University of Campania "L. Vanvitelli", WHO Collaborating Centre. The inter-rater reliability of the diagnostic guidelines for schizophrenia and related disorders has been assessed on the basis of clinical interviews with 100 patients conducted by 14 psychiatrists. The results show an almost perfect reliability for the diagnosis of schizophrenia (kappa=0.85) and a good reliability for the diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder (kappa=0.79). These Italian data are in line with those of the international sample, and the kappa values are higher than those previously reported in the ICD-10 field trials. They suggest the feasibility of the implementation of ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines in ordinary clinical practice in our country

    Can clinicians use dimensional information to make a categorical diagnosis of paraphilic disorders? An ICD-11 field study

    No full text
    Background: the diagnosis of paraphilic disorder is a complicated clinical judgment based on the integration of information from multiple dimensions to arrive at a categorical (present/absent) conclusion. The recent update of the guidelines for paraphilic disorders in ICD-11 presents an opportunity to investigate how mental health professionals use the diagnostic guidelines to arrive at a diagnosis which thereby can optimize the guidelines for clinical use.Aim: this study examined clinicians’ ability to use the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for paraphilic disorders which contain multiple dimensions that must be simultaneously assessed to arrive at a diagnosis.Methods: the study investigated the ability of 1,263 international clinicians to identify the dimensions of paraphilic disorder in the context of written case vignettes that varied on a single dimension only.Outcomes: participants provided diagnoses for the case vignettes along with dimensional ratings of the degree of presence of five dimensions of paraphilic disorder (arousal, consent, action, distress, and risk).Results: across a series of analyses, clinicians demonstrated a clear ability to recognize and appropriately integrate the dimensions of paraphilic disorders; however, there was some evidence that clinicians may over-diagnose non-pathological cases.Clinical Translation: clinicians would likely benefit from targeted training on the ICD-11 definition of paraphilic disorder and should be cautious of over-diagnosing.Strengths and Limitations: this study represents a large international sample of health professionals and is the first to examine clinicians’ ability to apply the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for paraphilic disorders. Important limitations include not generalizing to all clinicians and acknowledging that results may be different in direct clinical interactions vs written case vignettes.Conclusion: these results indicate that clinicians appear capable of interpreting and implementing the diagnostic guidelines for paraphilic disorders in ICD-11

    Mental health professionals' use of the ICD-11 classification of impulse control disorders and behavioral addictions: An international field study

    No full text
    Background and aims: The ICD-11 chapter on mental, behavioral and neurodevelopmental disorders contains new controversial diagnoses including compulsive sexual behavior disorder (CSBD), intermittent explosive disorder (IED) and gaming disorder. Using a vignette-based methodology, this field study examined the ability of mental health professionals (MHPs) to apply the new ICD-11 diagnostic requirements for impulse control disorders, which include CSBD and IED, and disorders due to addictive behaviors, which include gaming disorder, compared to the previous ICD-10 guidelines. Methods: Across eleven comparisons, members of the WHO’s Global Clinical Practice Network (N 5 1,090) evaluated standardized case descriptions that were designed to test key differences between the diagnostic guidelines of ICD-11 and ICD-10. Results: The ICD11 outperformed the ICD-10 in the accuracy of diagnosing impulse control disorders and behavioral addictions in most comparisons, while the ICD-10 was not superior in any. The superiority of the ICD-11 was particularly clear where new diagnoses had been added to the classification system or major revisions had been made. However, the ICD-11 outperformed the ICD-10 only in a minority of comparisons in which mental health professionals were asked to evaluate cases with non-pathological high involvement in rewarding behaviors. Discussion and Conclusions: Overall, the present study indicates that the ICD-11 diagnostic requirements represent an improvement over the ICD-10 guidelines. However, additional efforts, such as training programs for MHPs and possible refinements of diagnostic guidance, are needed to avoid over-diagnosis of people who are highly engaged in a repetitive and rewarding behavior but below the threshold for a disorder
    corecore