Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Psychiatry 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

An evaluation of ICD-11 posttraumatic stress disorder criteria in two samples of adolescents and young adults exposed to mass shootings: factor analysis and comparisons to ICD-10 and DSM-IV

Authors: Henna Haravuori, Olli Kiviruusu, Laura Suomalainen, Mauri Marttunen

Published in: BMC Psychiatry | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The proposed posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) criteria for the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 11th revision are simpler than the criteria in ICD-10, DSM-IV or DSM-5. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ICD-11 PTSD factor structure in samples of young people, and to compare PTSD prevalence rates and diagnostic agreement between the different diagnostic systems. Possible differences in clinical characteristics of the PTSD cases identified by ICD-11, ICD-10 and DSM-IV are explored.

Methods

Two samples of adolescents and young adults were followed after exposure to similar mass shooting incidents in their schools. Semi-structured diagnostic interviews were performed to assess psychiatric diagnoses and PTSD symptom scores (N = 228, mean age 17.6 years). PTSD symptom item scores were used to compose diagnoses according to the different classification systems.

Results

Confirmatory factor analyses indicated that the proposed ICD-11 PTSD symptoms represented two rather than three factors; re-experiencing and avoidance symptoms comprised one factor and hyperarousal symptoms the other factor. In the studied samples, the three-factor ICD-11 criteria identified 51 (22.4 %) PTSD cases, the two-factor ICD-11 identified 56 (24.6 %) cases and the DSM-IV identified 43 (18.9 %) cases, while the number of cases identified by ICD-10 was larger, being 85 (37.3 %) cases. Diagnostic agreement of the ICD-11 PTSD criteria with ICD-10 and DSM-IV was moderate, yet the diagnostic agreement turned to be good when an impairment criterion was imposed on ICD-10. Compared to ICD-11, ICD-10 identified cases with less severe trauma exposure and posttraumatic symptoms and DSM-IV identified cases with less severe trauma exposure.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that the two-factor model of ICD-11 PTSD is preferable to the three-factor model. The proposed ICD-11 criteria are more restrictive compared to the ICD-10 criteria. There were some differences in the clinical characteristics of the PTSD cases identified by ICD-11, when compared to ICD-10 and DSM-IV.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Reed GM. Toward ICD-11: Improving the clinical utility of WHO’s international classification of mental disorders. Prof Psychol Res Pr. 2010;41(6):457–64.CrossRef Reed GM. Toward ICD-11: Improving the clinical utility of WHO’s international classification of mental disorders. Prof Psychol Res Pr. 2010;41(6):457–64.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Maercker A, Brewin CR, Bryant RA, Cloitre M, Reed GM, van Ommeren M, et al. Proposals for mental disorders specifically associated with stress in the ICD-11. Lancet. 2013;381(9878):1683–5.CrossRefPubMed Maercker A, Brewin CR, Bryant RA, Cloitre M, Reed GM, van Ommeren M, et al. Proposals for mental disorders specifically associated with stress in the ICD-11. Lancet. 2013;381(9878):1683–5.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference World Health Organization. The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders: Clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1992. World Health Organization. The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders: Clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1992.
6.
go back to reference Forbes D, Lockwood E, Creamer M, Bryant RA, McFarlane AC, Silove D, et al. Latent structure of the proposed ICD-11 post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms: implications for the diagnostic algorithm. Br J Psychiatry. 2015;206(3):245–51.CrossRefPubMed Forbes D, Lockwood E, Creamer M, Bryant RA, McFarlane AC, Silove D, et al. Latent structure of the proposed ICD-11 post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms: implications for the diagnostic algorithm. Br J Psychiatry. 2015;206(3):245–51.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Elhai JD, Miller ME, Ford JD, Biehn TL, Palmieri PA, Frueh BC. Posttraumatic stress disorder in DSM-5: estimates of prevalence and symptom structure in a nonclinical sample of college students. J Anxiety Disord. 2012;26(1):58–64.CrossRefPubMed Elhai JD, Miller ME, Ford JD, Biehn TL, Palmieri PA, Frueh BC. Posttraumatic stress disorder in DSM-5: estimates of prevalence and symptom structure in a nonclinical sample of college students. J Anxiety Disord. 2012;26(1):58–64.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Miller MW, Wolf EJ, Kilpatrick D, Resnick H, Holowka BP, Keane DW, et al. The prevalence and latent structure of proposed DSM-5 posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms in U.S. national and veteran samples. Psychol Trauma. 2012;5(6):501–2.CrossRef Miller MW, Wolf EJ, Kilpatrick D, Resnick H, Holowka BP, Keane DW, et al. The prevalence and latent structure of proposed DSM-5 posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms in U.S. national and veteran samples. Psychol Trauma. 2012;5(6):501–2.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1994. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1994.
12.
go back to reference American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Washington, DC: Author; 2013. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Washington, DC: Author; 2013.
13.
go back to reference Reed GM, Roberts MC, Keeley J, Hooppell C, Matsumoto C, Sharan P, et al. Mental health professionals’ natural taxonomies of mental disorders: Implications for the clinical utility of the ICD-11 and the DSM-5. J Clin Psychol. 2013;69(12):1191–212.CrossRefPubMed Reed GM, Roberts MC, Keeley J, Hooppell C, Matsumoto C, Sharan P, et al. Mental health professionals’ natural taxonomies of mental disorders: Implications for the clinical utility of the ICD-11 and the DSM-5. J Clin Psychol. 2013;69(12):1191–212.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Morina N, van Emmerik AAP, Andrews B, Brewin CR. Comparison of DSM-IV and proposed ICD-11 formulations of PTSD among civilian survivors of war and war veterans. J Trauma Stress. 2014;27(6):647–54.CrossRefPubMed Morina N, van Emmerik AAP, Andrews B, Brewin CR. Comparison of DSM-IV and proposed ICD-11 formulations of PTSD among civilian survivors of war and war veterans. J Trauma Stress. 2014;27(6):647–54.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference O’Donnell M, Nathan A, Nickerson A, Creamer M, McFarlane AC, Silove D, et al. Impact of the diagnostic changes to post-traumatic stress disorder for DSM-5 and the proposed changes to ICD-11. Br J Psychiatry. 2014;205(3):230–5.CrossRefPubMed O’Donnell M, Nathan A, Nickerson A, Creamer M, McFarlane AC, Silove D, et al. Impact of the diagnostic changes to post-traumatic stress disorder for DSM-5 and the proposed changes to ICD-11. Br J Psychiatry. 2014;205(3):230–5.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Suomalainen L, Haravuori H, Berg N, Kiviruusu O, Marttunen M. A controlled follow-up study of adolescents exposed to a school shooting: psychological consequences after four months. Eur Psychiatry. 2011;26(8):490–7.CrossRefPubMed Suomalainen L, Haravuori H, Berg N, Kiviruusu O, Marttunen M. A controlled follow-up study of adolescents exposed to a school shooting: psychological consequences after four months. Eur Psychiatry. 2011;26(8):490–7.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Kaufman J, Birmaher B, Brent D, Rao U, Flynn C, Moreci P, et al. Schedule for affective disorders and schizophrenia for school-age children—present and lifetime version (K-SADS-PL): initial reliability and validity data. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1997;36(7):980–8.CrossRefPubMed Kaufman J, Birmaher B, Brent D, Rao U, Flynn C, Moreci P, et al. Schedule for affective disorders and schizophrenia for school-age children—present and lifetime version (K-SADS-PL): initial reliability and validity data. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1997;36(7):980–8.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Ambrosini PJ. Historical development and present status of the schedule for affective disorders and schizophrenia for school-age children (K-SADS). J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2000;39(1):49–58.CrossRefPubMed Ambrosini PJ. Historical development and present status of the schedule for affective disorders and schizophrenia for school-age children (K-SADS). J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2000;39(1):49–58.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference First MBSR, Gibbon M, Williams JBW. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders – Patient Edition (SCID I/P). 2/2001 Revision. New York: Biometrics Research Department, New York State Psychiatric Institute; 2001. First MBSR, Gibbon M, Williams JBW. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders – Patient Edition (SCID I/P). 2/2001 Revision. New York: Biometrics Research Department, New York State Psychiatric Institute; 2001.
27.
go back to reference Shaffer D, Gould MS, Brasic J, Ambrosini P, Fisher P, Bird H, Aluwahlia S. A Children’s Global Assessment Scale (CGAS). Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1983;40(11):1228–31.CrossRefPubMed Shaffer D, Gould MS, Brasic J, Ambrosini P, Fisher P, Bird H, Aluwahlia S. A Children’s Global Assessment Scale (CGAS). Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1983;40(11):1228–31.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Horowitz M, Wilner NJ, Alvarez W. Impact of events scale: a measure of subjective stress. Psychosom Med. 1979;41(3):209–18.CrossRefPubMed Horowitz M, Wilner NJ, Alvarez W. Impact of events scale: a measure of subjective stress. Psychosom Med. 1979;41(3):209–18.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Holi MM, Marttunen M, Aalberg V. Comparison of the GHQ-36, the GHQ-12 and the SCL-90 as psychiatric screening instruments in the Finnish population. Nord J Psychiatry. 2003;57(3):233–8.CrossRefPubMed Holi MM, Marttunen M, Aalberg V. Comparison of the GHQ-36, the GHQ-12 and the SCL-90 as psychiatric screening instruments in the Finnish population. Nord J Psychiatry. 2003;57(3):233–8.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Model. 1999;6(1):1–55.CrossRef Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Model. 1999;6(1):1–55.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus User’s Guide. 7th ed. Muthén & Muthén: Los Angeles, CA; 1998–2012 Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus User’s Guide. 7th ed. Muthén & Muthén: Los Angeles, CA; 1998–2012
Metadata
Title
An evaluation of ICD-11 posttraumatic stress disorder criteria in two samples of adolescents and young adults exposed to mass shootings: factor analysis and comparisons to ICD-10 and DSM-IV
Authors
Henna Haravuori
Olli Kiviruusu
Laura Suomalainen
Mauri Marttunen
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Psychiatry / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1471-244X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-016-0849-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Psychiatry 1/2016 Go to the issue