ABSTRACT
Abstract: Introduction: Monitoring child development includes the promotion of development in the healthy child and the detection of delays and early indicators of disorders that begin in the first five years of life through easy-to-use, easy to mark, and low-cost screening tests. Objective: To evaluate the internal reliability and inter-rater reliability of the ASQ-3 in Mexican preschool children. Method: The ASQ-3 was applied to parents and/or teachers of 33 - 60 month old children who attended the Centros de Desarrollo Infantil (Child Development Centers-CENDIS) in the public and private sectors of Mexico City. Results: A total of n = 1052 questionnaires were obtained, grouped into six age groups (33, 36, 42, 48, 54, and 60 months of age) according to the Ages and Stages Questionnaire-3 (ASQ-3). The levels of reliability of the ASQ-3 for each of the age groups were acceptable, with a range of α = .77 to α = .88. Regarding inter-rater reliability (parents vs. teachers), moderate correlation levels were observed. Discussion and conclusion: The results obtained suggest that this is a screening instrument that reliably evaluates the five areas of development that make up the ASQ-3 in pre-school children. This represents an opportunity to continue studying the psychometric characteristics of validity of this instrument in representative samples of Mexican children to optimize the process of early childhood development monitoring.
Resumen: Introducción: La vigilancia del desarrollo infantil contempla la promoción del desarrollo en el niño sano y la detección de retrasos e indicadores tempranos de trastornos que se inician en los primeros cinco años de vida por medio de pruebas de tamizaje de fácil aplicación, calificación y de bajo costo. Objetivo: Evaluar la fiabilidad interna y confiabilidad interevaluador del Cuestionario de Edades y Etapas-3 (ASQ-3) en preescolares mexicanos. Método: Se aplicó el ASQ-3 a padres y/o tutores de niños de edades entre 33 y 60 meses que asistían a Estancias de Desarrollo Infantil (CENDIS) del sector público y privado de la Ciudad de México. Resultados: Se obtuvieron un total de n = 1052 cuestionarios, agrupados en seis grupos de edad (33, 36, 42, 48, 54 y 60 meses de edad) de acuerdo con el ASQ-3. Los niveles de confiabilidad de los ASQ-3 para cada uno de los grupos de edad fueron aceptables con un rango de α =. 77 a α =. 88. Respecto a la confiabilidad interevaluador (padres vs. maestros), se observaron niveles de correlación moderados. Discusión y conclusión: Los resultados obtenidos sugieren que es un instrumento de tamizaje que evalúa de forma fidedigna las cinco áreas del desarrollo que conforman el ASQ-3 en los preescolares. Ello representa una oportunidad para seguir estudiando las características psicométricas de validez de este instrumento en muestras representativas de niños mexicanos con la finalidad de optimizar el proceso de vigilancia del desarrollo en edades tempranas.
ABSTRACT
Resumen: INTRODUCCIÓN: En México, existe poca experiencia en el desarrollo de modelos en atención primaria en salud mental. OBJETIVO: Estructurar y aplicar un modelo de atención colaborativa en salud mental, basado en evidencias científicas probadas en otros países. MÉTODO: Se diseñó un modelo acorde a las características del sistema de salud de la Ciudad de México. El modelo consistió en: la capacitación del equipo de salud para detectar posibles casos, la aplicación del instrumento de tamizaje (K-10), para el diagnóstico de depresión y ansiedad, así como realizar reuniones de atención colaborativa entre los médicos generales y el especialista en psiquiatría para la supervisión de casos. Se aplicó una entrevista de opinión a los médicos generales. RESULTADOS: Se capacitaron 104 profesionistas. Durante tres años se detectaron 830 (50.5%) posibles casos, se valoraron el 38% de éstos en sesiones de atención colaborativa entre el médico general y el psiquiatra. El 50% de las sesiones fueron suspendidas por motivos administrativos principalmente; la asistencia de los médicos generales y de los pasantes de medicina fue regular. DISCUSIÓN Y CONCLUSIÓN: El modelo de atención colaborativa entre el médico general y el especialista en este contexto puede funcionar. Sin embargo, se deben resolver algunas barreras administrativas, como la organización de los servicios y el número de programas que se desarrollan en el primer nivel de atención. Ante esta limitación, y dada la experiencia, se propone que los estudiantes de servicio social de medicina se involucren en este tipo de modelos, con el apoyo de los médicos generales.
Abstract: INTRODUCTION: In Mexico, there is scarce experience on the development of mental health primary care models. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this work was to structure and apply a collaborative care model in mental health based on scientific evidence proven in other countries. METHOD: A model complying with the characteristics of Mexico City's health system was designed. The model was composed of: training sessions for the health team to detect possible cases, application of a screening instrument (K-10), diagnostics of depression and anxiety, and collaborative care meetings, among general practitioners and the specialist (psychiatrist) to oversee cases. An opinion interview about the model was applied to general practitioners. RESULTS: One hundred and four professionals were trained. During the three years, 830 (50.5%) possible cases were detected; 38% of them were evaluated in collaborative care sessions between the general practitioners and the psychiatrist. Half the sessions were cancelled, mainly for administrative reasons. The assistance of medical practitioners and pregraduate medical education was regular. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: A collaborative care model between the general practitioner and the specialist is feasible in this context. However, some administrative barriers -such as the organization of services and the number of programs developed at the primary care- should be solved, because there are other programs demanding from them the exclusiveness of time. In the light of this limitation, and given the collaboration in the project, it is proposed that pregraduate medical education students involve themselves in this type of models with the support of general practitioners.
ABSTRACT
According to studies conducted in different countries, it is estimated that approximately 30% to 50% of people with mental health problems are not recognized by the general practitioner. Given this situation, it has been proposed that the practitioner at the primary care services must play a decisive role in the early detection of cases by establishing a definitive diagnostic and a timely treatment. Several organizations have pointed out that one of the first actions that need to be implemented to fulfill the aims in the care of people with mental disorders is to prepare the first-contact doctors and to have a brief, low cost, self-applied, valid and reliable scale. The studies mention that using screening tests at the primary care level is crucial for the success of the programs. The detection and recognition of psychiatric symptomatology rates vary depending on the type of scale applied. The tools that have been widely used are the Goldberg's General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, the Depression Symptom Checklist (DS 20), the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL), the Hamilton Depression Scale, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), the self-administered computerized assessment (PROQSY), the criteria of the 3rd revised edition of the Diagnostical and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III-R), the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID), and the criteria of the Symptom Driven Diagnostic System for Primary Care (SDDS-PC), among others. The preliminary results confirm the existence of a high percentage of possible psychiatric cases (46.9%), but only 4% of cases are referral. The low capability of the general practitioner at the primary care level in detecting these pathologies has been confirmed as well. These scales have been applied in different scenarios and to different types of population. Although the dominating criteria for choosing the tool are sensitivity and specificity, some authors mention that strategies for adequately handling cases, such as the confirmation of the diagnosis and follow-up of the patients, are required once the treatment has started. In this paper, we present the psychometric characteristics of the Kessler (K-10) scale in detecting depression and anxiety disorders in the primary care. Material and methods The study is a methodological process that aims to validate the Kessler Psychological Distress scale (K-10). It was conducted in two health care centers of primary care level in Mexico City. The subjects were 280 individuals who requested attention at the mentioned centers and to whom the K-10 test was applied after giving their informed consent. Later on, the computerized version of the International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), which uses the diagnostic criteria of the DSM-IV, was applied to the subjects in order to confirm the diagnostics for depression and anxiety. The MINI is a version adapted to Latin American Spanish by the National Institute of Psychiatry Ramon de la Fuente Muñiz. The diagnostic accuracy was processed following the MINI diagnoses for depression and anxiety closely, and the scores on the scale K-10 as a predictor. The sensitivity and specificity were calculated for all possible cut points in order to establish the optimal cut off point. The efficiency and maximum likelihood ratios were also calculated. The area under the ROC curve as well as the probability quotients, positive and negative (LR+ and LR-), were also calculated. The K-10 is a brief screening tool that can be easily applied by the primary care personnel which measures the psychological distress of a person during the four weeks prior to the application. It consists of ten questions with Likert-like answers that range from 1 to 5 and are categorized in a five level ordinal scale: Always, Very Often, Sometimes, Rarely, Never; where «Never¼ has an assigned value of 1, and «Always¼ has assigned value of 5. It has a minimum score of 10 and a maximum of 50. The ranges of the instrument are four levels: low (10-15), moderate (16-21), high (22-29) and very high (30-50). The instrument showed an internal consistency of 0.90 and it has been used in various population studies promoted by the World Health Organization as well as government organizations in Australia, Spain, Colombia and Peru. Results Out of 280 individuals to whom the tool was applied, 78.9% (221) were female and 21.1% (59) male. These values represent the proportion of patients attending the primary care services (95% confidence interval=±5.4%). The mean age of women was 39 years, and the mean age of men was 41. The 70.6% of the women manifested more psychological distress than men (52.5%)[χ2(1)=6.05,p=0.014. No other socio-demographic variable showed significant differences. The instrument is highly precise, it can detect up to 87% of depression cases, and 82.4% of anxiety cases. The scale was compared with the MINI and it presented a prevalence of 26.8% and 10.6%, respectively. Of the total of depression cases, 26.4% also presented anxiety; these represent a co-morbidity of 5.4%. The construct validity presented one factor alone that explains the 53.4% of the total variance, this is why the scale is considered as one-dimensional. In other words, the scale only measures the construct of the psychological distress. The internal consistency was α=0.901. Once the sensitivity and specificity for all cut off points had been determined using the MINI as a golden rule, it was observed that the cut off point for maximum sensitivity and specificity corresponded to 21 for the diagnosis of depression, and 22 for anxiety. Conclusions The K-10 is a good instrument for the detection of depression and anxiety cases at the primary care level which meets the criteria of validity and reliability. However, given that only one diagnosis was considered for all the range of anxiety disorders, the scale must be chosen carefully for all the other disorders that are not included in this paper. The use of the instrument is recommended for the general practitioners at the primary care level, mainly for diagnosing depression. Various studies in which other screening instruments have been used for the detection of depressive disorder at primary care point out that any screening method are useful in making the diagnosis. By using these instruments, the depression diagnosis at primary care level increases from 10% to 47%. The latter supports the fact that the selection of a good instrument turns out to be effective in detection, treatment and clinical outcomes of the entity. Since this recommendation is only one of the activities required in primary care level for good handling of detected cases, it is noteworthy to mention that a comprehensive care model that encompasses both the detection as well as the pharmacological and psychosocial treatments is required.
De acuerdo con estudios realizados en diferentes países se estima que aproximadamente hay entre 30% a 50% de personas que presentan algún problema de salud mental que no es reconocido por el médico general. En virtud de esta situación se ha propuesto como estrategia a la atención primaria como base del sistema de salud, lo que permitiría la detección temprana de pacientes con algún trastorno psiquiátrico. Diferentes organismos señalan que una de las primeras acciones para cumplir con los objetivos en la atención de personas con algún trastorno mental, consiste en contar con una escala breve, autoaplicable, válida y confiable y de bajo costo. En este trabajo se presentan las características psicométricas de la escala Kessler (K-10) para detectar trastornos depresivos y ansiosos. La K-10 es un instrumento de tamizaje breve y de fácil aplicación por el personal del primer nivel de atención y ha sido utilizada en diferentes estudios a nivel poblacional. En Australia, en 1997, se aplicó la K-10 en una encuesta de salud, por medio del Consejo Nacional de Encuestas de Salud Mental. Material y métodos Se trata de un estudio de proceso metodológico, cuyo objetivo fue la validación de la escala de malestar psicológico K-10 de Kessler. El estudio se llevó a cabo en dos Centros de Salud del primer nivel de atención en la Ciudad de México. Los participantes fueron 280 personas que acudieron a la consulta externa de dichos centros. Se utilizaron los criterios del DSM-IV para la confirmación del diagnóstico de depresión y de ansiedad, por medio de la Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), en su versión computarizada, adaptada al español latinoamericano en el Instituto Nacional de Psiquiatría Ramón de la Fuente Muñiz. La validez diagnóstica se procesó utilizando los diagnósticos de la MINI para depresión y ansiedad como regla de oro y las puntuaciones obtenidas en la escala K-10 como predictor. Se calculó la sensibilidad y especificidad para todos los posibles puntos de corte con el fin de establecer el óptimo. Se calculó adicionalmente la eficiencia y las razones de máxima verosimilitud, así como el área bajo la curva ROC y los cocientes de probabilidad, positivo y negativo (LR+ y LR-). Resultados Del total de personas a quiénes se les aplicó la escala, el 78.9% (221) fueron mujeres y 21.1% (59) hombres. Estos valores representan la proporción en que los pacientes acuden a los servicios de primer nivel (IC 95%=±5.4%). El 70.6% de las mujeres presentaron mayor malestar psicológico en comparación con los hombres que representaron el 52.5% [χ²(1)=6.05,p=0.014]. En ninguna otra variable socio-demográfica se presentaron diferencias significativas. El instrumento tiene una alta precisión, ya que puede detectar hasta el 87% de los casos de depresión y un 82.4% de los casos de ansiedad. La escala se comparó con el MINI en español y presentó una prevalencia de 26.8% y 26.4%, respectivamente. Conclusiones El instrumento cumple con los criterios de validez y confiabilidad, por lo que se recomienda su uso por los médicos generales en el primer nivel de atención. Dado que esta recomendación sólo es una de las actividades que se requieren en la atención primaria para un buen manejo de los casos que se detecten, es necesario señalar que se requiere de un modelo de atención integral que incorpore tanto la detección como el tratamiento farmacológico y psicosocial.