Systematic Review of Psychodermatologic Assessment Tools: Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Utility.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY
Clayton Clark, Parsa Abdi, Kevin Li, Tarek Turk, Marlene Dytoc
{"title":"Systematic Review of Psychodermatologic Assessment Tools: Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Utility.","authors":"Clayton Clark, Parsa Abdi, Kevin Li, Tarek Turk, Marlene Dytoc","doi":"10.1177/12034754241311267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Primary psychodermatologic disorders such as body dysmorphic disorder, trichotillomania, and excoriation disorder present significant challenges in dermatological and psychiatric assessment due to their complex psychological and dermatological symptoms. Reliable and valid screening tools are essential for effective diagnosis and management, yet there is a lack of consensus on the most appropriate instruments. A systematic review was conducted, identifying 81 studies that employed 45 different psychodermatologic tools, of which 13 studies provided empirical data on their diagnostic accuracy. Tools were assessed for their psychometric properties, including sensitivity, specificity, reliability, and validity. The Body Dysmorphic Disorder Questionnaire (BDDQ) and its variants demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy, with the BDDQ showing a sensitivity of 0.97 [95% CI: 0.82-1.00] and specificity of 0.91 [95% CI: 0.86-0.95]. The Skin Picking Scale-Revised showed high diagnostic accuracy for excoriation disorder, with a sensitivity of 0.89 [95% CI: 0.84-0.94] and specificity of 0.95 [95% CI: 0.93-0.96]. Similarly, the Massachusetts General Hospital Hairpulling Scale, frequently utilized for trichotillomania, exhibited strong psychometric properties, with a sensitivity of 0.90 [95% CI: 0.81-0.96] and specificity of 0.72 [95% CI: 0.63-0.80]. Despite their frequent use, many tools lack a comprehensive assessment of the full range of symptoms, including social impairment and behavioural nuances. The review highlights the importance of developing standardized, multidimensional assessment tools that are valid, reliable, and easy to implement in daily practice. Further research is needed to establish the practical utility of these tools in routine dermatology settings, addressing gaps in effectiveness, referral and intervention limitations, and patient acceptability.</p>","PeriodicalId":15403,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"12034754241311267"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/12034754241311267","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Primary psychodermatologic disorders such as body dysmorphic disorder, trichotillomania, and excoriation disorder present significant challenges in dermatological and psychiatric assessment due to their complex psychological and dermatological symptoms. Reliable and valid screening tools are essential for effective diagnosis and management, yet there is a lack of consensus on the most appropriate instruments. A systematic review was conducted, identifying 81 studies that employed 45 different psychodermatologic tools, of which 13 studies provided empirical data on their diagnostic accuracy. Tools were assessed for their psychometric properties, including sensitivity, specificity, reliability, and validity. The Body Dysmorphic Disorder Questionnaire (BDDQ) and its variants demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy, with the BDDQ showing a sensitivity of 0.97 [95% CI: 0.82-1.00] and specificity of 0.91 [95% CI: 0.86-0.95]. The Skin Picking Scale-Revised showed high diagnostic accuracy for excoriation disorder, with a sensitivity of 0.89 [95% CI: 0.84-0.94] and specificity of 0.95 [95% CI: 0.93-0.96]. Similarly, the Massachusetts General Hospital Hairpulling Scale, frequently utilized for trichotillomania, exhibited strong psychometric properties, with a sensitivity of 0.90 [95% CI: 0.81-0.96] and specificity of 0.72 [95% CI: 0.63-0.80]. Despite their frequent use, many tools lack a comprehensive assessment of the full range of symptoms, including social impairment and behavioural nuances. The review highlights the importance of developing standardized, multidimensional assessment tools that are valid, reliable, and easy to implement in daily practice. Further research is needed to establish the practical utility of these tools in routine dermatology settings, addressing gaps in effectiveness, referral and intervention limitations, and patient acceptability.

精神皮肤病评估工具的系统评价:诊断准确性和临床应用。
原发性精神皮肤疾病,如身体畸形症、拔毛癖和刮伤症,由于其复杂的心理和皮肤症状,在皮肤病学和精神病学评估中提出了重大挑战。可靠和有效的筛查工具对于有效诊断和管理至关重要,但对于最合适的工具缺乏共识。进行了系统回顾,确定了81项研究,使用了45种不同的心理皮肤病学工具,其中13项研究提供了诊断准确性的经验数据。评估工具的心理测量特性,包括敏感性、特异性、信度和效度。身体畸形障碍问卷(Body Dysmorphic Disorder Questionnaire, BDDQ)及其变体具有较高的诊断准确性,其中BDDQ的敏感性为0.97 [95% CI: 0.82-1.00],特异性为0.91 [95% CI: 0.86-0.95]。《扒皮量表-修订版》对擦伤障碍的诊断准确率较高,敏感性为0.89 [95% CI: 0.84-0.94],特异性为0.95 [95% CI: 0.93-0.96]。同样,经常用于拔毛癖的麻省总医院拔毛量表显示出很强的心理测量特性,其敏感性为0.90 [95% CI: 0.81-0.96],特异性为0.72 [95% CI: 0.63-0.80]。尽管经常使用,但许多工具缺乏对所有症状的全面评估,包括社交障碍和行为细微差别。该审查强调了开发有效、可靠和易于在日常实践中实施的标准化、多维评估工具的重要性。需要进一步的研究来确定这些工具在常规皮肤科设置中的实际效用,解决有效性,转诊和干预限制以及患者可接受性方面的差距。
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
3.70
自引率
4.30%
发文量
98
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery (JCMS) aims to reflect the state of the art in cutaneous biology and dermatology by providing original scientific writings, as well as a complete critical review of the dermatology literature for clinicians, trainees, and academicians. JCMS endeavours to bring readers cutting edge dermatologic information in two distinct formats. Part of each issue features scholarly research and articles on issues of basic and applied science, insightful case reports, comprehensive continuing medical education, and in depth reviews, all of which provide theoretical framework for practitioners to make sound practical decisions. The evolving field of dermatology is highlighted through these articles. In addition, part of each issue is dedicated to making the most important developments in dermatology easily accessible to the clinician by presenting well-chosen, well-written, and highly organized information in a format that is interesting, clearly presented, and useful to patient care.
×
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