Testing DSM-5 in routine clinical practice settings: Feasibility and clinical utility

Eve K. Mościcki, Diana E. Clarke, S. Janet Kuramoto, Helena C. Kraemer, William Narrow, David J. Kupfer, Darrel A. Regier

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: This article describes the clinical utility and feasibility of proposed DSM-5 criteria and measures as tested in the DSM-5 Field Trials in Routine Clinical Practice Settings (RCP). Methods: RCP data were collected online for six months (October 2011 to March 2012). Participants included psychiatrists, licensed clinical psychologists, clinical social workers, advanced practice psychiatric-mental health nurses, licensed counselors, and licensed marriage and family therapists. Clinicians received staged, online training and enrolled at least one patient. Patients completed self-assessments of cross-cutting symptom domains, disability measures, and an evaluation of these measures. Clinicians conducted diagnostic interviews and completed DSM-5 and related assessments and a clinical utility questionnaire. Results: A total of 621 clinicians provided data for 1,269 patients. Large proportions of clinicians reported that the DSM-5 approach was generally very or extremely easy for assessment of both pediatric (51%) and adult (46%) patients and very or extremely useful in routine clinical practice for pediatric (48%) and adult (46%) patients. Clinicians considered the DSM-5 approach to be better (57%) or much better (18%) than that of DSM-IV. Patients, including children age 11 to 17 (47%), parents of children age six to ten (64%), parents of adolescents age 11 to 17 (72%), and adult patients (52%), reported that the cross-cutting measures would help their clinicians better understand their symptoms. Similar patterns in evaluations of feasibility and clinical utility were observed among clinicians from various disciplines. Conclusions: The DSM-5 approach was feasible and clinically useful in a wide range of routine practice settings and favorably received by both clinicians and patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)952-960
Number of pages9
JournalPsychiatric Services
Volume64
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Psychiatry
Parents
Disability Evaluation
Pediatrics
Marriage
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Mental Health
Nurses
Interviews
Psychology
Self-Assessment
Surveys and Questionnaires
Counselors
Social Workers

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

Mościcki, E. K., Clarke, D. E., Kuramoto, S. J., Kraemer, H. C., Narrow, W., Kupfer, D. J., & Regier, D. A. (2013). Testing DSM-5 in routine clinical practice settings: Feasibility and clinical utility. Psychiatric Services, 64(10), 952-960. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201300098

Testing DSM-5 in routine clinical practice settings : Feasibility and clinical utility. / Mościcki, Eve K.; Clarke, Diana E.; Kuramoto, S. Janet; Kraemer, Helena C.; Narrow, William; Kupfer, David J.; Regier, Darrel A.

In: Psychiatric Services, Vol. 64, No. 10, 01.10.2013, p. 952-960.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mościcki, EK, Clarke, DE, Kuramoto, SJ, Kraemer, HC, Narrow, W, Kupfer, DJ & Regier, DA 2013, 'Testing DSM-5 in routine clinical practice settings: Feasibility and clinical utility', Psychiatric Services, vol. 64, no. 10, pp. 952-960. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201300098
Mościcki, Eve K. ; Clarke, Diana E. ; Kuramoto, S. Janet ; Kraemer, Helena C. ; Narrow, William ; Kupfer, David J. ; Regier, Darrel A. / Testing DSM-5 in routine clinical practice settings : Feasibility and clinical utility. In: Psychiatric Services. 2013 ; Vol. 64, No. 10. pp. 952-960.
@article{17d726ce84914f1e933cc4947a60615c,
title = "Testing DSM-5 in routine clinical practice settings: Feasibility and clinical utility",
abstract = "Objective: This article describes the clinical utility and feasibility of proposed DSM-5 criteria and measures as tested in the DSM-5 Field Trials in Routine Clinical Practice Settings (RCP). Methods: RCP data were collected online for six months (October 2011 to March 2012). Participants included psychiatrists, licensed clinical psychologists, clinical social workers, advanced practice psychiatric-mental health nurses, licensed counselors, and licensed marriage and family therapists. Clinicians received staged, online training and enrolled at least one patient. Patients completed self-assessments of cross-cutting symptom domains, disability measures, and an evaluation of these measures. Clinicians conducted diagnostic interviews and completed DSM-5 and related assessments and a clinical utility questionnaire. Results: A total of 621 clinicians provided data for 1,269 patients. Large proportions of clinicians reported that the DSM-5 approach was generally very or extremely easy for assessment of both pediatric (51{\%}) and adult (46{\%}) patients and very or extremely useful in routine clinical practice for pediatric (48{\%}) and adult (46{\%}) patients. Clinicians considered the DSM-5 approach to be better (57{\%}) or much better (18{\%}) than that of DSM-IV. Patients, including children age 11 to 17 (47{\%}), parents of children age six to ten (64{\%}), parents of adolescents age 11 to 17 (72{\%}), and adult patients (52{\%}), reported that the cross-cutting measures would help their clinicians better understand their symptoms. Similar patterns in evaluations of feasibility and clinical utility were observed among clinicians from various disciplines. Conclusions: The DSM-5 approach was feasible and clinically useful in a wide range of routine practice settings and favorably received by both clinicians and patients.",
author = "Mościcki, {Eve K.} and Clarke, {Diana E.} and Kuramoto, {S. Janet} and Kraemer, {Helena C.} and William Narrow and Kupfer, {David J.} and Regier, {Darrel A.}",
year = "2013",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1176/appi.ps.201300098",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "64",
pages = "952--960",
journal = "Psychiatric Services",
issn = "1075-2730",
publisher = "American Psychiatric Association",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Testing DSM-5 in routine clinical practice settings

T2 - Feasibility and clinical utility

AU - Mościcki, Eve K.

AU - Clarke, Diana E.

AU - Kuramoto, S. Janet

AU - Kraemer, Helena C.

AU - Narrow, William

AU - Kupfer, David J.

AU - Regier, Darrel A.

PY - 2013/10/1

Y1 - 2013/10/1

N2 - Objective: This article describes the clinical utility and feasibility of proposed DSM-5 criteria and measures as tested in the DSM-5 Field Trials in Routine Clinical Practice Settings (RCP). Methods: RCP data were collected online for six months (October 2011 to March 2012). Participants included psychiatrists, licensed clinical psychologists, clinical social workers, advanced practice psychiatric-mental health nurses, licensed counselors, and licensed marriage and family therapists. Clinicians received staged, online training and enrolled at least one patient. Patients completed self-assessments of cross-cutting symptom domains, disability measures, and an evaluation of these measures. Clinicians conducted diagnostic interviews and completed DSM-5 and related assessments and a clinical utility questionnaire. Results: A total of 621 clinicians provided data for 1,269 patients. Large proportions of clinicians reported that the DSM-5 approach was generally very or extremely easy for assessment of both pediatric (51%) and adult (46%) patients and very or extremely useful in routine clinical practice for pediatric (48%) and adult (46%) patients. Clinicians considered the DSM-5 approach to be better (57%) or much better (18%) than that of DSM-IV. Patients, including children age 11 to 17 (47%), parents of children age six to ten (64%), parents of adolescents age 11 to 17 (72%), and adult patients (52%), reported that the cross-cutting measures would help their clinicians better understand their symptoms. Similar patterns in evaluations of feasibility and clinical utility were observed among clinicians from various disciplines. Conclusions: The DSM-5 approach was feasible and clinically useful in a wide range of routine practice settings and favorably received by both clinicians and patients.

AB - Objective: This article describes the clinical utility and feasibility of proposed DSM-5 criteria and measures as tested in the DSM-5 Field Trials in Routine Clinical Practice Settings (RCP). Methods: RCP data were collected online for six months (October 2011 to March 2012). Participants included psychiatrists, licensed clinical psychologists, clinical social workers, advanced practice psychiatric-mental health nurses, licensed counselors, and licensed marriage and family therapists. Clinicians received staged, online training and enrolled at least one patient. Patients completed self-assessments of cross-cutting symptom domains, disability measures, and an evaluation of these measures. Clinicians conducted diagnostic interviews and completed DSM-5 and related assessments and a clinical utility questionnaire. Results: A total of 621 clinicians provided data for 1,269 patients. Large proportions of clinicians reported that the DSM-5 approach was generally very or extremely easy for assessment of both pediatric (51%) and adult (46%) patients and very or extremely useful in routine clinical practice for pediatric (48%) and adult (46%) patients. Clinicians considered the DSM-5 approach to be better (57%) or much better (18%) than that of DSM-IV. Patients, including children age 11 to 17 (47%), parents of children age six to ten (64%), parents of adolescents age 11 to 17 (72%), and adult patients (52%), reported that the cross-cutting measures would help their clinicians better understand their symptoms. Similar patterns in evaluations of feasibility and clinical utility were observed among clinicians from various disciplines. Conclusions: The DSM-5 approach was feasible and clinically useful in a wide range of routine practice settings and favorably received by both clinicians and patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84885442066&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84885442066&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1176/appi.ps.201300098

DO - 10.1176/appi.ps.201300098

M3 - Article

C2 - 23852272

AN - SCOPUS:84885442066

VL - 64

SP - 952

EP - 960

JO - Psychiatric Services

JF - Psychiatric Services

SN - 1075-2730

IS - 10

ER -