Evaluating the Performance of the Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) in a Trauma-Exposed, Socioeconomically Vulnerable Patient Population.

IF 1.6 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Emma C Lathan, Jessica M Petri, Tamara Haynes, Stan C Sonu, Yara Mekawi, Vasiliki Michopoulos, Abigail Powers
{"title":"Evaluating the Performance of the Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) in a Trauma-Exposed, Socioeconomically Vulnerable Patient Population.","authors":"Emma C Lathan, Jessica M Petri, Tamara Haynes, Stan C Sonu, Yara Mekawi, Vasiliki Michopoulos, Abigail Powers","doi":"10.1007/s10880-023-09941-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The properties and utility of the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) remain unstudied in community-based populations. This study evaluates the performance of the PC-PTSD-5 to determine whether it can be used as a brief alternative to the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) in a large public hospital in the southeastern United States. Participants (N = 422; 92.7% Black; 85.8% female; M<sub>age</sub> = 42.0 years, SD<sub>age</sub> = 13.4 years) completed the PCL-5 and PC-PTSD-5 after recruitment from medical clinic waiting rooms and admission lists. Using chance-corrected test quality indices and item response theory (IRT) analyses, we determined optimal cut-scores for screening and examined item performance. Approximately 45.0% of the sample screened positive for probable DSM-5 PTSD using the PCL-5. The PC-PTSD-5 demonstrated high internal consistency and strong associations with PCL-5 scores (total, r = .79; items, rs = .51-.61). A cut-score of one was optimally sensitive for screening (κ[1] = .96), and a cut-score of four had the highest quality of probable efficiency (κ[.5] = .66) for detecting self-reported DSM-5 PTSD on the PCL-5. IRT analyses indicated Item 1 (nightmares, intrusive memories) provided the most information, and other items may not be incrementally useful for this sample. Findings provide preliminary support for the use of the PC-PTSD-5 as a brief alternative to the PCL-5 among chronically trauma-exposed patients in the public healthcare setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":15494,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9885055/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10880-023-09941-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The properties and utility of the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) remain unstudied in community-based populations. This study evaluates the performance of the PC-PTSD-5 to determine whether it can be used as a brief alternative to the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) in a large public hospital in the southeastern United States. Participants (N = 422; 92.7% Black; 85.8% female; Mage = 42.0 years, SDage = 13.4 years) completed the PCL-5 and PC-PTSD-5 after recruitment from medical clinic waiting rooms and admission lists. Using chance-corrected test quality indices and item response theory (IRT) analyses, we determined optimal cut-scores for screening and examined item performance. Approximately 45.0% of the sample screened positive for probable DSM-5 PTSD using the PCL-5. The PC-PTSD-5 demonstrated high internal consistency and strong associations with PCL-5 scores (total, r = .79; items, rs = .51-.61). A cut-score of one was optimally sensitive for screening (κ[1] = .96), and a cut-score of four had the highest quality of probable efficiency (κ[.5] = .66) for detecting self-reported DSM-5 PTSD on the PCL-5. IRT analyses indicated Item 1 (nightmares, intrusive memories) provided the most information, and other items may not be incrementally useful for this sample. Findings provide preliminary support for the use of the PC-PTSD-5 as a brief alternative to the PCL-5 among chronically trauma-exposed patients in the public healthcare setting.

Abstract Image

评估DSM-5(PC-PTSD-5)在创伤暴露、社会经济脆弱患者群体中的创伤后应激障碍初级保健筛查表现。
DSM-5初级保健PTSD筛查(PC-PTSD-5)的特性和实用性在社区人群中仍未得到研究。本研究评估了PC-PTSD-5的性能,以确定它是否可以作为美国东南部一家大型公立医院DSM-5(PCL-5)PTSD检查表的简短替代品。参与者(N = 422;92.7%为黑色;女性85.8%;Mage = 42.0岁,SD年龄 = 13.4岁)在从诊所候诊室和入院名单招募后完成了PCL-5和PC-PTSD-5。使用机会修正的测试质量指数和项目反应理论(IRT)分析,我们确定了筛选和检查项目表现的最佳分数。大约45.0%的样本使用PCL-5筛选出可能的DSM-5 PTSD阳性。PC-PTSD-5表现出高度的内部一致性和与PCL-5评分的强相关性(总分 = .79;项目,rs = .51-.61)。1分的切割分数对筛选最敏感(κ[1] = .96),并且四分的切割分数具有最高的可能效率质量(κ[.5] = .66),用于检测PCL-5上自我报告的DSM-5 PTSD。IRT分析表明,第1项(噩梦、侵入性记忆)提供了最多的信息,其他项目可能对该样本没有增量用处。研究结果为在公共医疗环境中长期暴露于创伤的患者中使用PC-PTSD-5作为PCL-5的简短替代品提供了初步支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.50%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers related to all areas of the science and practice of psychologists in medical settings. Manuscripts are chosen that have a broad appeal across psychology as well as other health care disciplines, reflecting varying backgrounds, interests, and specializations. The journal publishes original research, treatment outcome trials, meta-analyses, literature reviews, conceptual papers, brief scientific reports, and scholarly case studies. Papers accepted address clinical matters in medical settings; integrated care; health disparities; education and training of the future psychology workforce; interdisciplinary collaboration, training, and professionalism; licensing, credentialing, and privileging in hospital practice; research and practice ethics; professional development of psychologists in academic health centers; professional practice matters in medical settings; and cultural, economic, political, regulatory, and systems factors in health care. In summary, the journal provides a forum for papers predicted to have significant theoretical or practical importance for the application of psychology in medical settings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信