A comparison of patient ratings and staff ratings of disability using the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule in individuals with psychotic spectrum disorders who are forensic psychiatric inpatients

Author:

Källman Malin V.12ORCID,Hedlund‐Lindberg Mathilde34,Kristiansson Marianne12,Johansson Anette G. M.12

Affiliation:

1. Department of Clinical Neuroscience Karolinska Institutet Stockholm Sweden

2. Centre for Psychiatric Research Region Stockholm Stockholm Sweden

3. Division of Nursing Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society Karolinska Institutet Huddinge Sweden

4. Department of Medical Sciences Psychiatry Uppsala University University Hospital Uppsala Sweden

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundPsychosocial rehabilitation in forensic psychiatric services requires sound measurement of patient and staff perceptions of psychosocial function. The recommended World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS), designed for this, has not been examined with offender patients.AimsTo examine patient and staff WHODAS ratings of secure hospital inpatients with psychosis, any differences between them and explore associations with other clinical factors.MethodsSeventy‐three patients self‐rated on the WHODAS after 3 months as inpatients. An occupational therapist interviewed the patient's primary nurse and care team at about the same time (staff ratings). Scores were calculated according to the WHODAS manual. WHODAS scores and interview‐rated symptom severity, cognitive measures, daily antipsychotic dose and duration of care were compared.ResultsPatient ratings indicated less disability than staff ratings for total score and for the domains of understanding and communicating, getting along and life activities. Self‐care and participation ratings were similar. Patients were more likely to rate themselves as disabled in getting around (mobility). Only one‐fifth of patient‐ and staff‐ ratings (16, 22%) were similar, while for nearly a third of the patients (23, 32%) self‐ratings were higher than staff ratings. More severe positive symptoms were associated with higher self‐rated WHODAS disability after accounting for treatment duration, negative symptoms, cognitive score and antipsychotic dose. No variable accounted for the staff/patient differences in ratings.ConclusionOur mean WHODAS score findings echoed those in other patient samples—of patient underestimation of disability, linked to severity of symptoms. In this study using the WHODAS for the first time in a forensic mental health secure inpatient service, however, we found that, by comparing individuals, half of the patients reported equivalent or greater disability than did staff. Future research should focus on elucidating from patients what contributes to their self‐ratings. Understanding their thought processes in rating may enhance rehabilitation planning.

Publisher

Wiley

Reference40 articles.

1. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

2. Andreasen N. C.(1983).The Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS) University of Iowa Iowa City.

3. Andreasen N. C.(1984).The Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS) University of Iowa Iowa City.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3