4.6 Article

Longitudinal study of earthquake-related PTSD in a randomly selected community sample in North China

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
卷 157, 期 8, 页码 1260-1266

出版社

AMER PSYCHIATRIC PRESS, INC
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.157.8.1260

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: This study longitudinally described ra res of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in two groups with different levels of severity of exposure to an earthquake in North China. The effects of diagnostic criteria on the frequency of detected PTSD were also examined. Method: Subjects were randomly sampled in two villages at different distances from the earthquake epicenter. A total of 181 and 157 subjects were assessed at 3 months and 9 months after the earthquake, respectively, for PTSD by using both DSM-IV and DSM-III-R criteria. The brief Version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment and three subscales of the SCL-90-R were also administered at both assessment points. Results: The village with a higher level of initial exposure to the earthquake and a higher level of postearthquake support had a lower frequency of PTSD than the village with a lower level of initial exposure and less postearthquake support. The rate of onset of DSM-IV PTSD within 9 months for the two villages was 19.8% and 30.3%, respectively. In both villages, the rate of onset of earthquake-related PTSD within 9 months was 24.2% by using DSM-IV criteria and 41.4% by using DSM-III-R criteria. The introduction in DSM-IV of a criterion requiring clinically significant distress or impairment in functioning for a diagnosis of PTSD was a major contributor to the lower rate of DSM-IV PTSD. Conclusions: PTSD may be as prevalent and persistent in disaster victims in China as in those elsewhere. Prompt and effective postdisaster intervention could mitigate the impact of initial exposure and reduce the probability of PTSD occurrence. Caution should be used in comparing rates of postdisaster PTSD identified by using different diagnostic criteria.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据