Vitiligo is associated with high psychiatric morbidity. There is a need to develop cross-cultural database on psychosocial aspects and psychiatric morbidity associated with vitiligo.

In a tertiary-care teaching hospital in India, dermatology outpatients with vitiligo (N=113) and psoriasis (N=103) were studied for psychiatric morbidity. The two groups were similar with regard to education, locality, religion, and attitude to appearance (ATT). Psoriasis cases were older, more often male, and more often married. The General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) assessed psychiatric morbidity rates at 33.63% and 24.7% for vitiligo and psoriasis, respectively. The ICD-10 psychiatric diagnoses in GHQ positive cases were: adjustment disorder (56% vs 62%), depressive episode (22% vs 29%) and dysthymia (9% vs 4%) in vitiligo and psoriasis, respectively. The Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS) assessed that depression, anxiety, and total psychopathology levels were similar in the two GHQ positive subgroups. Significant correlations were noted between psychopathology (GHQ CRPS), dysfunction as per Dysfunction Analysis Questionnaire (DAQ), and behavior change as per Impact of Skin Disease Scale (IMPACT), and all were more prominent in vitiligo.

Reliable, clinically useful, and globally applicable diagnostic classification of mental disorders is an essential foundation for global mental health. The World Health Organization (WHO) is nearing completion of the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11). The present study assessed inter-diagnostician reliability of mental disorders accounting for the greatest proportion of global disease burden and the highest levels of service utilization - schizophrenia and other primary psychotic disorders, mood disorders, anxiety and fear-related disorders, and disorders specifically associated with stress - among adult patients presenting for treatment at 28 participating centers in 13 countries. A concurrent joint-rater design was used, focusing specifically on whether two clinicians, relying on the same clinical information, agreed on the diagnosis when separately applying the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines. A total of 1,806 patients were assessed by 339 clinicians in the local language. Intraclass kappa coefficients for diagnoses weighted by site and study prevalence ranged from 0.45 (dysthymic disorder) to 0.88 (social anxiety disorder) and would be considered moderate to almost perfect for all diagnoses. Overall, the reliability of the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines was superior to that previously reported for equivalent ICD-10 guidelines. These data provide support for the suitability of the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for implementation at a global level. The findings will inform further revision of the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines prior to their publication and the development of programs to support professional training and implementation of the ICD-11 by WHO member states.

No abstract

In this paper we report the clinical utility of the diagnostic guidelines for ICD-11 mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders as assessed by 339 clinicians in 1,806 patients in 28 mental health settings in 13 countries. Clinician raters applied the guidelines for schizophrenia and other primary psychotic disorders, mood disorders (depressive and bipolar disorders), anxiety and fear-related disorders, and disorders specifically associated with stress. Clinician ratings of the clinical utility of the proposed ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines were very positive overall. The guidelines were perceived as easy to use, corresponding accurately to patients' presentations (i.e., goodness of fit), clear and understandable, providing an appropriate level of detail, taking about the same or less time than clinicians' usual practice, and providing useful guidance about distinguishing disorder from normality and from other disorders. Clinicians evaluated the guidelines as less useful for treatment selection and assessing prognosis than for communicating with other health professionals, though the former ratings were still positive overall. Field studies that assess perceived clinical utility of the proposed ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines among their intended users have very important implications. Classification is the interface between health encounters and health information; if clinicians do not find that a new diagnostic system provides clinically useful information, they are unlikely to apply it consistently and faithfully. This would have a major impact on the validity of aggregated health encounter data used for health policy and decision making. Overall, the results of this study provide considerable reason to be optimistic about the perceived clinical utility of the ICD-11 among global clinicians.