Malin V. Källman, Mathilde Hedlund-Lindberg, Marianne Kristiansson, Anette G. M. Johansson
{"title":"使用世界卫生组织残疾评估表对法医精神病住院患者中的精神病谱系障碍患者的残疾评级和工作人员的残疾评级进行比较。","authors":"Malin V. Källman, Mathilde Hedlund-Lindberg, Marianne Kristiansson, Anette G. M. Johansson","doi":"10.1002/cbm.2344","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Psychosocial rehabilitation in forensic psychiatric services requires sound measurement of patient and staff perceptions of psychosocial function. The recommended World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS), designed for this, has not been examined with offender patients.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>To examine patient and staff WHODAS ratings of secure hospital inpatients with psychosis, any differences between them and explore associations with other clinical factors.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Seventy-three patients self-rated on the WHODAS after 3 months as inpatients. An occupational therapist interviewed the patient's primary nurse and care team at about the same time (staff ratings). Scores were calculated according to the WHODAS manual. WHODAS scores and interview-rated symptom severity, cognitive measures, daily antipsychotic dose and duration of care were compared.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Patient ratings indicated less disability than staff ratings for total score and for the domains of understanding and communicating, getting along and life activities. Self-care and participation ratings were similar. Patients were more likely to rate themselves as disabled in getting around (mobility). Only one-fifth of patient- and staff- ratings (16, 22%) were similar, while for nearly a third of the patients (23, 32%) self-ratings were higher than staff ratings. More severe positive symptoms were associated with higher self-rated WHODAS disability after accounting for treatment duration, negative symptoms, cognitive score and antipsychotic dose. No variable accounted for the staff/patient differences in ratings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Our mean WHODAS score findings echoed those in other patient samples—of patient underestimation of disability, linked to severity of symptoms. In this study using the WHODAS for the first time in a forensic mental health secure inpatient service, however, we found that, by comparing individuals, half of the patients reported equivalent or greater disability than did staff. Future research should focus on elucidating from patients what contributes to their self-ratings. Understanding their thought processes in rating may enhance rehabilitation planning.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47362,"journal":{"name":"Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cbm.2344","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of patient ratings and staff ratings of disability using the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule in individuals with psychotic spectrum disorders who are forensic psychiatric inpatients\",\"authors\":\"Malin V. Källman, Mathilde Hedlund-Lindberg, Marianne Kristiansson, Anette G. M. Johansson\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cbm.2344\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Psychosocial rehabilitation in forensic psychiatric services requires sound measurement of patient and staff perceptions of psychosocial function. The recommended World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS), designed for this, has not been examined with offender patients.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aims</h3>\\n \\n <p>To examine patient and staff WHODAS ratings of secure hospital inpatients with psychosis, any differences between them and explore associations with other clinical factors.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Seventy-three patients self-rated on the WHODAS after 3 months as inpatients. An occupational therapist interviewed the patient's primary nurse and care team at about the same time (staff ratings). Scores were calculated according to the WHODAS manual. WHODAS scores and interview-rated symptom severity, cognitive measures, daily antipsychotic dose and duration of care were compared.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Patient ratings indicated less disability than staff ratings for total score and for the domains of understanding and communicating, getting along and life activities. Self-care and participation ratings were similar. Patients were more likely to rate themselves as disabled in getting around (mobility). Only one-fifth of patient- and staff- ratings (16, 22%) were similar, while for nearly a third of the patients (23, 32%) self-ratings were higher than staff ratings. More severe positive symptoms were associated with higher self-rated WHODAS disability after accounting for treatment duration, negative symptoms, cognitive score and antipsychotic dose. No variable accounted for the staff/patient differences in ratings.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our mean WHODAS score findings echoed those in other patient samples—of patient underestimation of disability, linked to severity of symptoms. In this study using the WHODAS for the first time in a forensic mental health secure inpatient service, however, we found that, by comparing individuals, half of the patients reported equivalent or greater disability than did staff. Future research should focus on elucidating from patients what contributes to their self-ratings. Understanding their thought processes in rating may enhance rehabilitation planning.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47362,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cbm.2344\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cbm.2344\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cbm.2344","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A comparison of patient ratings and staff ratings of disability using the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule in individuals with psychotic spectrum disorders who are forensic psychiatric inpatients
Background
Psychosocial rehabilitation in forensic psychiatric services requires sound measurement of patient and staff perceptions of psychosocial function. The recommended World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS), designed for this, has not been examined with offender patients.
Aims
To examine patient and staff WHODAS ratings of secure hospital inpatients with psychosis, any differences between them and explore associations with other clinical factors.
Methods
Seventy-three patients self-rated on the WHODAS after 3 months as inpatients. An occupational therapist interviewed the patient's primary nurse and care team at about the same time (staff ratings). Scores were calculated according to the WHODAS manual. WHODAS scores and interview-rated symptom severity, cognitive measures, daily antipsychotic dose and duration of care were compared.
Results
Patient ratings indicated less disability than staff ratings for total score and for the domains of understanding and communicating, getting along and life activities. Self-care and participation ratings were similar. Patients were more likely to rate themselves as disabled in getting around (mobility). Only one-fifth of patient- and staff- ratings (16, 22%) were similar, while for nearly a third of the patients (23, 32%) self-ratings were higher than staff ratings. More severe positive symptoms were associated with higher self-rated WHODAS disability after accounting for treatment duration, negative symptoms, cognitive score and antipsychotic dose. No variable accounted for the staff/patient differences in ratings.
Conclusion
Our mean WHODAS score findings echoed those in other patient samples—of patient underestimation of disability, linked to severity of symptoms. In this study using the WHODAS for the first time in a forensic mental health secure inpatient service, however, we found that, by comparing individuals, half of the patients reported equivalent or greater disability than did staff. Future research should focus on elucidating from patients what contributes to their self-ratings. Understanding their thought processes in rating may enhance rehabilitation planning.
期刊介绍:
Criminal Behaviour & Mental Health – CBMH – aims to publish original material on any aspect of the relationship between mental state and criminal behaviour. Thus, we are interested in mental mechanisms associated with offending, regardless of whether the individual concerned has a mental disorder or not. We are interested in factors that influence such relationships, and particularly welcome studies about pathways into and out of crime. These will include studies of normal and abnormal development, of mental disorder and how that may lead to offending for a subgroup of sufferers, together with information about factors which mediate such a relationship.