Clayton Clark, Parsa Abdi, Kevin Li, Tarek Turk, Marlene Dytoc
{"title":"精神皮肤病评估工具的系统评价:诊断准确性和临床应用。","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":"{\"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}","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}
Systematic Review of Psychodermatologic Assessment Tools: Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Utility.
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.
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.