SUMMARY. Aims – To assess in a national sample the ability of GPs to detect psychiatric disorders using a clinical vs. a standardized interview and to characterize the patients that were falsely diagnosed with an anxiety or affective disorder. Methods – This is a national, cross-sectional, epidemiological survey, carried out by GPs on a random sample of their patients. The GPs were randomly divided into two groups. Apart from the routine clinical interview, the experimental group (group A) had to administer the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Results – Data was collected by 143 GPs. 17.2% of all patients had a clinical diagnosis of an affective disorder, and 25.4% a clinical diagnosis of an anxiety disorder. In group A, the number of clinical diagnoses was about twice that of MINI diagnoses for affective disorders and one and a half times that for anxiety disorders. The majority of clinical diagnoses were represented by MINI subsyndromal cases (52.3%). Females showed a higher OR of being over-detected by GPs with anxiety disorders or of not being diagnosed with an affective disorder. Being divorced/separated/widowed increased the OR of over-detection of affective and anxiety disorders. The OR of over-detection of an affective or an anxiety disorder was higher for individuals with a moderate to poor quality of life. Conclusions – In the primary care a gap exists between clinical and standardized interviews in the detection of affective and anxiety disorders. Some experiential and social factors can increase this tendency. The use of a psycho. Declaration of Interest: GlaxoSmithKline provided unrestricted economic and organizational support to the study. No further declarations on other form of financing or any other involvement that might be considered a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article. KEY WORDS: primary care, detection, affective disorders, anxiety disorders.

Clinical vs. structured interview on anxiety and affective disorders by primary care physicians. Understanding diagnostic discordance

BELLANTUONO, Cesario;
2007

Abstract

SUMMARY. Aims – To assess in a national sample the ability of GPs to detect psychiatric disorders using a clinical vs. a standardized interview and to characterize the patients that were falsely diagnosed with an anxiety or affective disorder. Methods – This is a national, cross-sectional, epidemiological survey, carried out by GPs on a random sample of their patients. The GPs were randomly divided into two groups. Apart from the routine clinical interview, the experimental group (group A) had to administer the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Results – Data was collected by 143 GPs. 17.2% of all patients had a clinical diagnosis of an affective disorder, and 25.4% a clinical diagnosis of an anxiety disorder. In group A, the number of clinical diagnoses was about twice that of MINI diagnoses for affective disorders and one and a half times that for anxiety disorders. The majority of clinical diagnoses were represented by MINI subsyndromal cases (52.3%). Females showed a higher OR of being over-detected by GPs with anxiety disorders or of not being diagnosed with an affective disorder. Being divorced/separated/widowed increased the OR of over-detection of affective and anxiety disorders. The OR of over-detection of an affective or an anxiety disorder was higher for individuals with a moderate to poor quality of life. Conclusions – In the primary care a gap exists between clinical and standardized interviews in the detection of affective and anxiety disorders. Some experiential and social factors can increase this tendency. The use of a psycho. Declaration of Interest: GlaxoSmithKline provided unrestricted economic and organizational support to the study. No further declarations on other form of financing or any other involvement that might be considered a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article. KEY WORDS: primary care, detection, affective disorders, anxiety disorders.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
EPS-EPIDEA 2007.pdf

non disponibili

Tipologia: Documento in Post-print
Licenza: NON PUBBLICO-Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione 88 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
88 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11566/35320
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact