Inpatient diagnostic assessments: 3. Causes and effects of diagnostic imprecision☆
Introduction
The Traditional Diagnostic Assessment (TDA) is the standard of practice for making initial psychiatric diagnoses. Textbooks (Othmer and Othmer, 1994, Hales et al., 1995, Sadock and Sadock, 2000) agree generally about the TDA's processes and formats. Although textbooks accept its diagnostic precision as sufficient for clinical practice, research finds that TDA users often make inaccurate diagnoses (Hill et al., 1996, Lipton and Simon, 1985, McGorry et al., 1995, Miller, 2001, Miller et al., 2001, Mojtabai and Nicholson, 1995, Skodol et al., 1984, van Praag, 1997, Williams et al., 1996). Clinicians continue their universal use of the TDA in spite of contrary evidence, but investigators avoid using it as a solo diagnostic instrument in research (Basco et al., 2000, Shear et al., 2000, Widiger et al., 1994, Widiger et al., 1996).
The Computer Assisted Diagnostic Interview (CADI) is a structured computer-based interview. Previous studies (Miller et al., 2001, Miller, 2001) found that CADI's inpatient diagnoses agree with SCID-CV (kappa>0.75) and Consensus Diagnosis (kappa>0.81) and that CADI has excellent interrater reliability (kappa>0.91), thus warranting CADI's use as the standard for data collection and diagnosis in this study.
When TDA users and CADI users independently examined 106 inpatient-subjects, TDA users agreed only 45.3% (48/106) with the CADI diagnoses and named on average only 50.5% (1.53 versus 3.03) as many diagnoses per patient as did CADI. The purpose of this study is to research the causes and effects of those findings.
Section snippets
Subjects and evaluators
Subjects came from two groups. Group A (Miller et al., 2001, Miller, 2001) included 56 inpatient-subjects in an acute psychiatric unit of a publicly funded hospital affiliated with a medical school. Six experienced clinicians (five psychiatrists, one Ph.D. psychologist) made the TDA evaluations. Five research investigators (including the author) made the CADI evaluations blind (data came only from subjects).
Group B included 50 inpatient-subjects admitted consecutively to a publicly funded
TDA users’ diagnostic accuracy
Table 2, bottom line, shows that only 46.2% (49/106) of TDA write-ups assessed enough symptom criteria to meet DSM-IV diagnostic requirements. The consequent diagnoses agreed only 45.3% (48/106) with CADI diagnoses. CADI requires users to collect all data; the program then computes the diagnosis by matching the collected data exactly with DSM-IV algorithms.
TDA users’ diagnostic completeness
DSM-IV requires that Key Criteria must be evaluated to make the linked diagnoses. Table 1 (bottom two lines) shows that TDA users assessed
Limitations
These include regionalism (multi-ethnicity and urbanism of Los Angeles County) and non-representativeness of subjects (inpatients with severe chronic disorders). Clinicians represented public, private and medical school sectors about equally. Results are provisional, awaiting other studies for wider validation.
Clinicians make the best diagnoses possible, given constraints of money and time
Health care financing drives HMOs, insurance companies, and government agencies to restrict time for initial evaluations to a fraction of Klein's (1995) recommendation for 90–120 min.
References (30)
- et al.
Methods to improve diagnostic accuracy in a community mental health setting
American Journal of Psychiatry
(2000) - et al.
Medical Problem Solving. An Analysis of Clinical Reasoning
(1978) - et al.
Diagnostic efficiency of DSM-III schizophrenia
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease
(1989) Studying the Clinician: Judgment Research and Psychological Assessment
(1998)Defining best practices: a prescription for greater autonomy
Psychiatric Services
(1998)Clinical computing. The computer as clinician assistant: assessment made simple
Psychiatric Services
(1998)- Hales, R.E., Yudofsky, S.C., Talbott, J.A. (Eds.), 1995. Textbook of Psychiatry. Second ed. American Psychiatric Press,...
- et al.
Problem of diagnosis in post-mortem brain studies of schizophrenia
American Journal of Psychiatry
(1996) The Universe Within. A New Science Explores the Human Mind
(1977)- Jason, H., 1978. Foreword. In: Elstein, A.S., Shulman, L.S., Sprafka, S.A. (Eds.), Medical Problem Solving. An Analysis...
Psychopharmacological practice and health reform
Psychiatric Annals
Psychiatric diagnosis in a state hospital: Manhattan State revisited
Hospital and Community Psychiatry
Protocol-based computer reminders, the quality of care and the non-perfectibility of man
New England Journal of Medicine
Spurious precision: procedural validity of diagnostic assessment in psychotic disorders
American Journal of Psychiatry
Note-taking and information recall
Journal of American Medical Education
Cited by (28)
Agreement between clinical and MINI diagnoses in outpatients with mood and anxiety disorders
2017, Journal of Affective DisordersCitation Excerpt :So why do the MINI and the clinical evaluation of the same patient not agree to the degree we expected? Previous studies explained the moderate agreement rates of clinician's diagnoses (Miller et al., 2001) (compared to structured clinical assessment) through insufficient data collection; i.e. clinicians focus on the most likely (primary) diagnosis and are therefore more likely to disregard other symptoms and comorbid diagnoses (Miller, 2002; Rettew et al., 2009). Clinicians may also be more focused on identification of the primary disorder to ensure a diagnosis that responds best to treatment (de Beurs et al., 2011; Rettew et al., 2009; Weinstein et al., 1989; Welner et al., 1987).
Implementing the K-SADS-PL as a standard diagnostic tool: Effects on clinical diagnoses
2016, Psychiatry ResearchCitation Excerpt :There is strong evidence for a low to moderate agreement between research diagnostic assessments and clinical evaluations, as well as for the poor inter-rater reliability of clinician-generated diagnoses (Miller, 2001, 2002; Jewell et al., 2004; Rettew et al., 2009).
Clinical Utility of a Dimensional Model of Personality Disorder
2010, Professional Psychology: Research and PracticeClinical Utility and DSM-V
2009, Psychological Assessment
- ☆
Similar findings with an overlapping sample were presented at the Annual Meetings, American Psychiatric Association, 6 May, 2000, in Chicago, IL, and 18 May, 2002, in Philadelphia, PA.