|
Título:
|
Feasibility, acceptability and clinical utility of the Cultural Formulation Interview: mixed-methods results from the DSM-5 international field trial
|
|
Autores:
|
Lewis-Fernandez, Roberto ;
Aggarwal, Neil Krishan ;
Lam, Peter C. ;
Galfalvy, Hanga ;
Weiss, Mitchell G. ;
Kirmayer, Laurence J. ;
Paralikar, Vasudeo ;
Deshpande, Smita N. ;
Diaz, Esperanza ;
Nicasio, Andel V. ;
Boiler, Marit ;
Alarcon, Renato D. ;
Rohlof, Hans ;
Groen, Simon ;
van Dijk, Rob C. J. ;
Jadhav, Sushrut ;
Sarmukaddam, Sanjeev ;
Ndetei, David ;
Scalco, Monica Z. ;
Bassiri, Kavoos ;
Aguilar-Gaxiola, Sergio ;
Ton, Hendry ;
Westermeyer, Joseph ;
Vega-Dienstmaier, Johann M.
|
|
Tipo de documento:
|
texto impreso
|
|
Editorial:
|
Cambridge University Press, 2019-01-25T15:18:35Z
|
|
Nota general:
|
info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es
|
|
Idiomas:
|
Inglés
|
|
Palabras clave:
|
Editados por otras instituciones
,
Artículos
,
Artículos en revistas indizadas
|
|
Resumen:
|
Background There is a need for clinical tools to identify cultural issues in diagnostic assessment.AimsTo assess the feasibility, acceptability and clinical utility of the DSM-5 Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) in routine clinical practice.MethodMixed-methods evaluation of field trial data from six countries. The CFI was administered to diagnostically diverse psychiatric out-patients during a diagnostic interview. In post-evaluation sessions, patients and clinicians completed debriefing qualitative interviews and Likert-scale questionnaires. The duration of CFI administration and the full diagnostic session were monitored.ResultsMixed-methods data from 318 patients and 75 clinicians found the CFI feasible, acceptable and useful. Clinician feasibility ratings were significantly lower than patient ratings and other clinician-assessed outcomes. After administering one CFI, however, clinician feasibility ratings improved significantly and subsequent interviews required less time.ConclusionsThe CFI was included in DSM-5 as a feasible, acceptable and useful cultural assessment tool.
|
|
En línea:
|
http://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.116.193862
|
