Results of the Search for Personality Disorder Screening Tools: Clinical Implications

被引:29
作者
Germans, Sara [1 ]
Van Heck, Guus L. [2 ,3 ]
Hodiamont, Paul P. G. [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Namsos Hosp, Dept Psychiat, N-7800 Namsos, Norway
[2] Tilburg Univ, Dept Med Psychol & Neuropsychol, NL-5000 LE Tilburg, Netherlands
[3] Tilburg Univ, Ctr Res Psychol Somat Dis CoRPS, NL-5000 LE Tilburg, Netherlands
[4] Tilburg Univ, Dept Dev Clin & Cross Cultural Psychol, NL-5000 LE Tilburg, Netherlands
[5] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Med Ctr, Dept Psychiat, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, Netherlands
关键词
STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT; SCID-II; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; PRELIMINARY VALIDATION; DIAGNOSTIC EFFICIENCY; INTERVIEW; VERSION; DEPRESSION; SCALE; QUESTIONNAIRE;
D O I
10.4088/JCP.11m07067
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
Objective: To examine the characteristics, validity, posttest probabilities, and screening capabilities of 8 different instruments used to predict personality disorders. Method: Screening instruments were examined in 3 prospective, observational, test-development studies in 3 random samples of Dutch psychiatric outpatients, using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Disorders (SCID-II) as the "gold standard." The studies were performed from March 2004 to March 2005 (study 1: N = 195, mean age = 32.7 years), October 2006 to January 2007 (study 2: N = 79, mean age = 34.3 years), and January 2008 to October 2009 (study 3: N = 102, mean age = 33.7 years). The following 8 assessment instruments were examined: 3 short questionnaires (a self-report form of the Standardized Assessment of Personality-Abbreviated Scale [SAPAS-SR], the self-report Iowa Personality Disorder Screen [IPDS], and a short self-report version of the SCID-II [S-SCID-II]); 2 longer questionnaires (the self-report SCID-II Personality Questionnaire [SCID-II-PQ] and the NEO Five-Factor Inventory [NEO-FFI]); 1 short semistructured interview (the Quick Personality Assessment Schedule [PAS-Q]); and 2 informant-based interviews (the Standardized Assessment of Personality [SAP] and the Standardized Assessment of Personality-Abbreviated Scale for Informants [SAPAS-INF]). Results: The SCID-II rate of identification of personality disorders in the 3 studies was between 48.1% and 64.1%. The SAPAS-SR, the IPDS, and the PAS-Q had the best sensitivity (83%, 77%, and 80%, respectively) and specificity (80%, 85%, and 82%, respectively). Moreover, these 3 instruments correctly classified the largest number of patients. Using the SAPAS-SR, the IPDS, or the PAS-Q raises the odds from 50% to between 80% and 84% that a patient in a psychiatric outpatient population will receive a personality disorder diagnosis. Conclusions:The results provide evidence for the usefulness of the SAPAS-SR, IPDS, and PAS-Q instruments for personality disorder screening. Because the PAS-Q takes a longer time and requires qualified personnel to administer it, we recommend use of the SAPAS-SR or the self-report version of the IPDS. J Clin Psychiatry 2012;73(2):165-173 (C) Copyright 2012 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:165 / 173
页数:9
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]  
Adel A, 2006, J RURAL COMM PSYCH E, VE9
[2]   Personality and personality disorders predict development and relapses of major depression [J].
Alnaes, R ;
Torgersen, S .
ACTA PSYCHIATRICA SCANDINAVICA, 1997, 95 (04) :336-342
[3]  
[Anonymous], PERSONALITY DISORDER
[4]  
BERNSTEIN DP, 1995, DIAG TR MEN, P45
[5]  
CATh Rijnders, 2008, THESIS TILBURG U TIL
[6]  
Costa PT, 2002, ADVANCES IN PERSONALITY SCIENCE, P219
[7]   THE 5-FACTOR MODEL OF PERSONALITY AND ITS RELEVANCE TO PERSONALITY-DISORDERS [J].
COSTA, PT ;
MCCRAE, RR .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY DISORDERS, 1992, 6 (04) :343-359
[8]  
Costa PT., 1992, NEO PI R PROFESSIONA
[9]  
Costa PT., 1990, J Person Disord, V4, P362, DOI [10.1521/pedi.1990.4.4.362, DOI 10.1521/PEDI.1990.4.4.362]
[10]  
CRONBACH LJ, 1951, PSYCHOMETRIKA, V16, P297, DOI DOI 10.1007/BF02310555