Article

Telephone versus face-to-face administration of the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, for diagnosis of psychotic disorders

Mental Health Research Centre, Tehran Psychiatric Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran 15745-344, Iran.
Comprehensive psychiatry (Impact Factor: 2.26). 08/2011; 53(5):579-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2011.06.001
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The current study aims to compare telephone vs face-to-face administration of the version of Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, (SCID) for diagnosis of "any psychotic disorder" in a clinical population in Iran.
The sample consisted of 72 subjects from 2 psychiatric outpatient services in Tehran, Iran. The subjects were interviewed using face-to-face SCID for the purpose of diagnosing psychotic disorders. A second independent telephone SCID was administered to the entire sample within 5 to 10 days, and the lifetime and 12-month diagnoses were compared.
The positive likelihood ratio of telephone-administered SCID for diagnosis of "any lifetime psychotic disorder" was 5.1 when compared with the face-to-face SCID. The value for the primary psychotic disorders in the past 12 months was lower (2.3).
The data indicate that telephone administration of the SCID is an acceptable method to differentiate between subjects with lifetime psychotic disorders and those who have had no psychotic disorders and provides a less resource-demanding alternative to face-to-face assessments.

0 Followers
 · 
97 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Iranian Mental Health Survey (IranMHS) was conducted to assess the twelve-month prevalence and severity of psychiatric disorders in the Iranian adult population and to determine the pattern of health care utilization and cost of services. IranMHS is a cross-sectional national household survey with face-to-face interviews as the main data collection method. The study was carried out between January and June 2011. A three-stage probability sampling was applied for the selection of a representative sample from the non-institutionalized population aged 15 to 64. The primary instrument utilized for assessing the prevalence of mental disorders was the Persian version of Composite International Diagnosis Interview, version 2.1. The instruments for assessing the service and cost of mental illness were developed by the research team. The response rate was 86.2%, and a total of 7886 individuals participated in the study. Sampling weights were the joint product of inverse probability of unit selection, non-response weights and post-stratification weights. This paper presents an overview of the study design, fieldwork organization and procedures, weightings and analysis. The strengths and limitations of the study are also discussed.
    04/2014; 9(2):96-109.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a common and disabling disorder. Although evidence-based psychological treatments exists, such as cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), the cost-effectiveness of CBT has not been properly investigated. In this trial, we used health economic data from a recently conducted randomized controlled trial, where 101 OCD patients were allocated to either internet-based CBT (ICBT) or control condition (online support therapy). We analyzed treatment effectiveness in relation to costs, using both a societal- (including all direct and indirect costs) and a health care unit perspective (including only the direct treatment costs). Bootstrapped net benefit regression analyses were also conducted, comparing the difference in costs and effects between ICBT and control condition, with different willingness-to-pay scenarios. Results showed that ICBT produced one additional remission for an average societal cost of $931 and this figure was even lower ($672) when narrowing the perspective to treatment costs only. The cost-utility analysis also showed that ICBT generated one additional QALY to an average price of $7186 from a societal perspective and $4800 when just analyzing the treatment costs. We conclude that ICBT is a cost-effective treatment and the next step in this line of research is to compare the cost-effectiveness of ICBT with face-to-face CBT.
    Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders 01/2015; 4. DOI:10.1016/j.jocrd.2014.12.004 · 0.81 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment for OCD when delivered face-to-face, in group-format and also via the internet. However, despite overall large effect sizes, a considerable amount of the patients relapse. One intervention that has the potential to reduce these relapse rates is booster programs, but if booster program is a cost-effective method of preventing relapse is still unknown. We used health economical data from a recent randomized controlled trial, where patients who had undergone an internet-based CBT were randomly allocated to receive an additional booster program. Assessment points were 4-, 7-, 12- and 24-month. Health economical data were primarily analyzed using a societal perspective. Results showed that the booster program was effective in preventing relapse, and the cost of one avoided relapse was estimated to $1066-1489. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that the booster program had a 90% probability of being cost-effective given a willingness to pay of $1000-1050 the first year, but this figure grew considerably after two years ($2500-5500). We conclude that internet-based booster programs are probably a cost-effective alternative within one-year time frame and that more treatment may be needed to maintain adequate cost-effectiveness up to two years.
    Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders 10/2014; 4. DOI:10.1016/j.jocrd.2014.10.002 · 0.81 Impact Factor