首页> 外文期刊>Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment >Psychiatrists’ Understanding and Management of Conversion Disorder: A Bi-National Survey and Comparison with Neurologists
【24h】

Psychiatrists’ Understanding and Management of Conversion Disorder: A Bi-National Survey and Comparison with Neurologists

机译:精神科医生对转化症的理解和管理:双国家调查和神经科学家的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: A 2011 survey of neurologists’ attitudes to conversion disorder found a tacit acceptance of the psychological model but significant ambivalence around its relationship to feigning. These issues are under increased scrutiny as the DSM-5 revision removed both the requirement for a psychological formulation and the exclusion of feigning from the diagnostic criteria. Whether those attitudes are shared with psychiatrists is unknown. Methods: An online survey of the Section of Neuropsychiatry, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists, and the Faculty of Neuropsychiatry, Royal College of Psychiatrists (UK), on their understanding and management of conversion disorder in February 2019. Statistical comparisons are made with our previous survey of Neurologists. Results: A total of 52 Australian and 131 UK-based members completed the survey which revealed similarities but also clear differences from their neurological colleagues. The psychiatrists strongly endorsed a psychogenic model for conversion disorder, and the conversion model in particular, though many models were employed. They felt a psychiatric assessment was essential to the diagnosis of conversion disorder, and they often disagreed with the diagnosis in neurology referrals of putative conversion disorder. Most felt that a psychiatric formulation was supportive, and many that it was necessary to the diagnosis. They saw feigning as usually present to a degree but were more comfortable with discussing this than neurologists. Conclusion: Psychiatrists use psychosocial models for conversion disorder and see an overlap with feigning. They believe psychiatrists are essential for the diagnostic process and would not usually support a diagnosis without a psychiatric formulation.
机译:背景:2011年的神经根学家态度对转化障碍的态度发现默许接受心理模型,而是围绕其与假期的关系矛盾。由于DSM-5修订审查了对心理制定的要求以及从诊断标准中排除假设的要求,这些问题正在增加。这些态度是否与精神科医生共享。方法:对神经精神病,皇家澳大利亚皇家和新西兰精神病学院校的在线调查,以及2019年2月的皇家精神科医生(英国)皇家精神科学院(英国)的神经精神病学院。制造统计比较随着我们以前对神经病学家的调查。结果:共有52名澳大利亚和131名英国成员完成了调查,揭示了相似之处,但也明显了与神经学同事的差异。精神科医生强烈认可了对转化障碍的心理模型,特别是转换模型,尽管采用了许多模型。他们觉得精神病评估对转化障碍的诊断至关重要,并且它们往往不同意诊断调用转化障碍的神经内科引用。大多数人认为精神病制剂是支持性的,并且许多有必要诊断。他们认为通常存在于一定程度但讨论这一点的假期,而不是神经根学家。结论:精神科医生使用心理社会模型进行转化障碍,看看假人的重叠。他们认为精神病学家对诊断过程至关重要,并且通常不会支持没有精神病制定的诊断。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号