Assessment of catatonia and inter-rater reliability of three instruments: a descriptive study

Abstract Background Clinical assessment of catatonia includes the use of diagnostic systems, such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) and the International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10), or screening tools such as the Bush Francis Catatonia Screening...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Zukiswa Zingela, Louise Stroud, Johan Cronje, Max Fink, Stephan van Wyk
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	BMC 2021
Materias:	Catatonia Assessment Screening Tool Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale Neurosciences. Biological psychiatry. Neuropsychiatry RC321-571
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/04e021f841c74150939496976dbfe2c1
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:04e021f841c74150939496976dbfe2c1
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:04e021f841c74150939496976dbfe2c12021-11-28T12:13:09ZAssessment of catatonia and inter-rater reliability of three instruments: a descriptive study10.1186/s13033-021-00505-81752-4458https://doaj.org/article/04e021f841c74150939496976dbfe2c12021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-021-00505-8https://doaj.org/toc/1752-4458Abstract Background Clinical assessment of catatonia includes the use of diagnostic systems, such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) and the International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10), or screening tools such as the Bush Francis Catatonia Screening Instrument (BFCSI)/Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS) and the Braunig Catatonia Rating Scale. In this study, we describe the inter-rater reliability (IRR), utilizing the BFCSI, BFCRS, and DSM-5 to screen for catatonia. Methods Data from 10 participants recruited as part of a larger prevalence study (of 135 participants) were used to determine the IRR by five assessors after they were trained in the application of the 14-item BFCSI, 23-item BFCRS, and DSM-5 to assess catatonia in new admissions. Krippendorff’s α was used to compute the IRR, and Spearman’s correlation was used to determine the concordance between screening tools. The study site was a 35-bed acute mental health unit in Dora Nginza Hospital, Nelson Mandela Bay Metro. Participants were mostly involuntary admissions under the Mental Health Care Act of 2002 and between the ages of 13 and 65 years. Results Of the 135 participants, 16 (11.9%) had catatonia. The majority (92 [68.1%]) were between 16 and 35 years old, with 126 (93.3%) of them being Black and 89 (66.4%) being male. The BFCRS (complete 23-item scale) had the greatest level of inter-rater agreement with α = 0.798, while the DSM-5 had the lowest level of inter-rater agreement with α = 0.565. The highest correlation coefficients were observed between the BFCRS and the BFCSI. Conclusion The prevalence rate of catatonia was 11.9%, with the BFCSI and BFCRS showing the highest pick-up rate and a high IRR with high correlation coefficients, while the DSM-5 had deficiencies in screening for catatonia with low IRR and the lowest correlation with the other two tools.Zukiswa ZingelaLouise StroudJohan CronjeMax FinkStephan van WykBMCarticleCatatoniaAssessmentScreening ToolBush Francis Catatonia Rating ScaleNeurosciences. Biological psychiatry. NeuropsychiatryRC321-571ENInternational Journal of Mental Health Systems, Vol 15, Iss 1, Pp 1-8 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Catatonia Assessment Screening Tool Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale Neurosciences. Biological psychiatry. Neuropsychiatry RC321-571
spellingShingle	Catatonia Assessment Screening Tool Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale Neurosciences. Biological psychiatry. Neuropsychiatry RC321-571 Zukiswa Zingela Louise Stroud Johan Cronje Max Fink Stephan van Wyk Assessment of catatonia and inter-rater reliability of three instruments: a descriptive study
description	Abstract Background Clinical assessment of catatonia includes the use of diagnostic systems, such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) and the International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10), or screening tools such as the Bush Francis Catatonia Screening Instrument (BFCSI)/Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS) and the Braunig Catatonia Rating Scale. In this study, we describe the inter-rater reliability (IRR), utilizing the BFCSI, BFCRS, and DSM-5 to screen for catatonia. Methods Data from 10 participants recruited as part of a larger prevalence study (of 135 participants) were used to determine the IRR by five assessors after they were trained in the application of the 14-item BFCSI, 23-item BFCRS, and DSM-5 to assess catatonia in new admissions. Krippendorff’s α was used to compute the IRR, and Spearman’s correlation was used to determine the concordance between screening tools. The study site was a 35-bed acute mental health unit in Dora Nginza Hospital, Nelson Mandela Bay Metro. Participants were mostly involuntary admissions under the Mental Health Care Act of 2002 and between the ages of 13 and 65 years. Results Of the 135 participants, 16 (11.9%) had catatonia. The majority (92 [68.1%]) were between 16 and 35 years old, with 126 (93.3%) of them being Black and 89 (66.4%) being male. The BFCRS (complete 23-item scale) had the greatest level of inter-rater agreement with α = 0.798, while the DSM-5 had the lowest level of inter-rater agreement with α = 0.565. The highest correlation coefficients were observed between the BFCRS and the BFCSI. Conclusion The prevalence rate of catatonia was 11.9%, with the BFCSI and BFCRS showing the highest pick-up rate and a high IRR with high correlation coefficients, while the DSM-5 had deficiencies in screening for catatonia with low IRR and the lowest correlation with the other two tools.
format	article
author	Zukiswa Zingela Louise Stroud Johan Cronje Max Fink Stephan van Wyk
author_facet	Zukiswa Zingela Louise Stroud Johan Cronje Max Fink Stephan van Wyk
author_sort	Zukiswa Zingela
title	Assessment of catatonia and inter-rater reliability of three instruments: a descriptive study
title_short	Assessment of catatonia and inter-rater reliability of three instruments: a descriptive study
title_full	Assessment of catatonia and inter-rater reliability of three instruments: a descriptive study
title_fullStr	Assessment of catatonia and inter-rater reliability of three instruments: a descriptive study
title_full_unstemmed	Assessment of catatonia and inter-rater reliability of three instruments: a descriptive study
title_sort	assessment of catatonia and inter-rater reliability of three instruments: a descriptive study
publisher	BMC
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/04e021f841c74150939496976dbfe2c1
work_keys_str_mv	AT zukiswazingela assessmentofcatatoniaandinterraterreliabilityofthreeinstrumentsadescriptivestudy AT louisestroud assessmentofcatatoniaandinterraterreliabilityofthreeinstrumentsadescriptivestudy AT johancronje assessmentofcatatoniaandinterraterreliabilityofthreeinstrumentsadescriptivestudy AT maxfink assessmentofcatatoniaandinterraterreliabilityofthreeinstrumentsadescriptivestudy AT stephanvanwyk assessmentofcatatoniaandinterraterreliabilityofthreeinstrumentsadescriptivestudy
_version_	1718408118841376768

Assessment of catatonia and inter-rater reliability of three instruments: a descriptive study

Ejemplares similares