4.5 Article

MINI International Neuropsychiatric Schedule: clinical utility and patient acceptance

期刊

EUROPEAN PSYCHIATRY
卷 18, 期 7, 页码 361-364

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2003.03.004

关键词

MINI; clinical diagnosis; structured diagnosis; patient acceptance; comorbidity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. - Clinical diagnosis has been shown to be unreliable compared to structured diagnostic schedules. However, clinicians rarely use structured diagnostic schedules due to concerns about the feasibility in clinical practice and about patient acceptance. Mini International Neuropsychiatric Schedule is a short diagnostic instrument validated against SCID and CIDI but its feasibility and patient acceptance has not been studied. Subjects and methods. - One hundred and eleven patients admitted to a partial program were administered Mini International Neuropsychiatric Schedule and the interview was timed. A short questionnaire was administered to assess patients' views about the interview. For a subgroup of patients, diagnoses by both open interviews and Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) were available. These were compared to took for agreement in primary diagnoses and co-morbid conditions. Results. - MINI took an average of 16.4 min to administer. Patients' views of MINI were positive. It was considered comprehensive enough to cover all patient symptoms and at the same time not unduly lengthy. Patients were not bothered by the interview format. There was disagreement between MINI primary diagnosis and open diagnosis in 42% cases. In 33% the disagreement was of substantial clinical significance. MINI diagnosed more co-morbid conditions (average 2.05 compared to 0.5 in open interview). Conclusions. - MINI is a short diagnostic interview schedule that can be easily incorporated into routine clinical interviews. It has good acceptance by patients. (D 2003 Editions scientifiques et medicales Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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