Measuring Specific Mental Illness Diagnoses with Functional Impairment Workshop Summary (2016) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Instruments Available for Measuring Specific Mental Illness Diagnoses with Functional Impairment
3 Instruments Available for Measuring Specific Mental Illness Diagnoses with Functional Impairment
Pages 21-28
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 21... ...
As defined by the DSM-III at that time, about 28 percent of people had a disorder, and about 15 percent received some mental or addiction services: approximately 6 percent received specialty mental health services, 5 percent received general medical services, and 4 percent received other services. However, about one-half of those who were receiving services were not identified as having a mental or addictive disorder.
|
From page 22... ...
With these criteria in the DSM-IV, the prevalence rates in the ECA and NCS dropped to 18.5 percent for any mental or substance use disorder and 14.9 percent for any mental disorder. Regier recounted that Manderscheid's earlier reference to the definition of severe mental disorders was occasioned by the National Advisory Mental Health Council being asked by Senator Pete Domenici to develop a study of the cost of parity insurance coverage for the severely mentally ill.
|
From page 23... ...
For nursing home long-term hospitalization, data from the Center for Mental Health Services Client/Patient Sample Survey showed 0.05 percent for mental illness. In other words, the different ways of defining severe mental disorders varied and resulted in different prevalence rates.
|
From page 24... ...
THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION DISABILITY ASSESSMENT SCALE Based on the work that has already been completed on the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) , Regier said that this measure became the recommended assessment for disability in the DSM-5.
|
From page 25... ...
. Healthcare reform for Americans with severe mental illness: Report of the National Advisory Mental Health Council.
|
From page 26... ...
For example, people with mental health problems have greater disabilities on the domain of "understanding and communicating" in comparison with people who have physical health problems. People with mental health problems also show high levels of disabilities in the domains of "getting along with people," "work," "household functioning," and "participation with society." Regier commented that it will be valuable to start to disaggregate the WHODAS into the different subscales and start associating these with the specific disorders because of the different profiles for different disorders.
|
From page 27... ...
The challenge for population surveys is to figure out how best to use a combination of the dimensional profiles, categorical diagnostic criteria, disability impairment measures, and severity measures in order to get at information that is clinically relevant and that will provide predictability in terms of clinical course, response to treatment, need for disability insurance coverage, or disability payments for the individual. In his conclusion, Regier noted that WHODAS has the potential to draw attention to disability concepts in clinical settings and to better integrate them into routine practice.
|
From page 28... ...
Future research is also needed to understand what the potential of the WHODAS is to affect clinical care, assist clinical decision making, improve patient care outcomes, and enhance patients' involvement in their own care. In relation to SAMHSA's challenge to link impairment with specific diagnoses, Mark Olfson (Columbia University)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.