Adjustment disorder as proposed for ICD-11: Dimensionality and symptom differentiation

Glaesmer, Heide; Romppel, Matthias; Brähler, Elmar; Hinz, Andreas; Maercker, Andreas

doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2015.07.010

Cited by 90 publications

(130 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

106

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We used the eight items that measure preoccupation, failure to adapt, and functional impairment to build a total sum score (ADNM-8). The ADNM-20 showed satisfactory properties regarding factor structure, internal consistency, retest-reliability, and construct validity (Bley, Einsle, Maercker, Weidner, & Joraschky, 2008; Einsle et al, 2010; Glaesmer et al, 2015) in previous studies. The use of the ADNM-8 found initial support in two previous studies (Kazlauskas, Gegieckaite, Maercker, Eimontas, & Zelviene, 2018; Zelviene et al, 2017).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Recent studies provided evidence for the proposed stress-response conceptualization for ICD-11 regarding its reliability and clinical utility (Bachem, Perkonigg, Stein, & Maercker, 2016; Glaesmer, Romppel, Brähler, Hinz, & Maercker, 2015; Keeley et al, 2016; Zelviene, Kazlauskas, Eimontas, & Maercker, 2017). However, little is known about predictive factors or models for the development of this disorder.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A socio-interpersonal approach to adjustment disorder: the example of involuntary job loss

Lorenz

Perkonigg

Maercker

2018

European Journal of Psychotraumatology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Adjustment disorder (AjD) was redefined for ICD-11 with core symptoms of preoccupation with a stressor and failure to adapt. The socio-interpersonal framework model for stress-response syndromes suggests that interpersonal factors, besides intrapersonal processes, substantially contribute to the development of AjD. Objective: The current study aimed to identify predictive factors in the development of AjD symptoms by the application of a framework model for stress-response syndromes. Method: N = 321 recently laid-off participants (47.7% female) were assessed with a newly developed standardized clinical diagnostic interview section on ICD-11 AjD. Self-report questionnaires measured AjD symptom severity, and interpersonal and intrapersonal predictors. Path analysis was used to model the associations between AjD symptom severity and the predictor variables. We conducted logistic regression to identify associated characteristics of diagnostic status. Results: AjD symptoms were highly prevalent and 25.6% of participants met the diagnostic criteria. Higher loneliness, higher dysfunctional disclosure, and lower self-efficacy were associated with both higher symptom severity and higher likelihood of meeting the diagnostic criteria for AjD. Higher perceived social support was associated with higher likelihood for AjD diagnosis. Conclusions: Research on risk factors for AjD is still sparse. This study provided empirical evidence on the role of interpersonal factors supporting the socio-interpersonal model for stress-response syndromes.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 87%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A socio-interpersonal approach to adjustment disorder: the example of involuntary job loss

Lorenz

Perkonigg

Maercker

2018

European Journal of Psychotraumatology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The stressor list of the ADNM was used in nine reviewed studies. However, the number of stressors in the first part of the ADNM ranged considerably across different studies: 10 stressors (Bachem & Maercker, 2016; Bachem, Perkonigg, Stein, & Maercker, 2016), 13 stressors (Horn & Maercker, 2016), 15 stressors (Zelviene, Kazlauskas, Eimontas, & Maercker, 2017), 16 stressors (Glaesmer, Romppel, Brähler, Hinz, & Maercker, 2015), 17 stressors (Eimontas et al, 2017), and 19 stressors (Lorenz, Bachem, & Maercker, 2016). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four versions of ADNM were used in studies: the brief 6-item ADNM-6, 8-item ADNM-8, 20-item ADNM-20, and 29-item ADNM-29. Six of the reviewed studies used the 20-item ADNM-20 scale, which included the 20 symptom items comprising six subscales: preoccupation (four items), failure to adapt (three items), avoidance (four items), depression (three items), impulsivity (three items), anxiety (two items) (Glaesmer et al, 2015; Lorenz, Hyland, Perkonigg, & Maercker, 2017; Lorenz et al, 2016; Mahat-Shamir et al, 2017; Zelviene et al, 2017). The 29-item ADNM-29 was used in one study (Bachem et al, 2016).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Glaesmer et al (2015) tested three AjD symptom structure models using a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) in a large German general population sample ( N = 2512). Six symptoms of AjD: preoccupation, failure to adapt, avoidance (Av), depression (De), anxiety (Ax), and impulsivity (Im) comprising of 2–4 items each were included into the CFA analysis.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A scoping review of ICD-11 adjustment disorder research

Kazlauskas

Želvienė

Lorenz

et al. 2017

European Journal of Psychotraumatology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Adjustment disorder (AjD) is one of the most used mental disorder diagnoses among mental health professionals. Important revisions of the AjD definition in the 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) are proposed. AjD is included in a chapter of disorders specifically associated with stress in ICD-11. Objective: This paper aims to review recent developments in ICD-11 AjD research, and to discuss the available ICD-11 AjD diagnosis validation studies, AjD measures, treatment studies, and outline the future perspectives for AjD research and clinical practice. Methods: In total, 10 empirical studies of AjD ICD-11 were identified and included in this review. We searched for studies in Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, PILOTS, SocINDEX, and via additional search by contacting authors of published empirical studies and reference screening. Results: Review of the studies revealed a lack of validation studies of the ICD-11 AjD symptom structure. AjD validation study findings are ambiguous, and there is still little support for the proposed two symptom structure of AjD for the ICD-11. A self-report AjD measure ‘Adjustment Disorder New Module’ (ADNM) based on the ICD-11 definition has been developed and used in all 10 reviewed studies. Two self-help interventions have been developed for the ICD-11 AjD, and findings from these studies indicate that self-help low-intensity cognitive-behavioural interventions, delivered via bibliography or internet-based, might be effective treatment of AjD. Conclusions: The AjD definition in ICD-11 with a description of a new symptom profile facilitates AjD measurement and AjD-focused treatment developments. More studies and insights from clinical practice are needed to move the field of AjD research and practice forward.

show abstract

Demoralisation and its link with depression, psychological adjustment and suicidality among cancer patients: A network psychometrics approach

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Adjustment disorder as proposed for ICD-11: Dimensionality and symptom differentiation

Cited by 90 publications

References 20 publications

A socio-interpersonal approach to adjustment disorder: the example of involuntary job loss

A socio-interpersonal approach to adjustment disorder: the example of involuntary job loss

A scoping review of ICD-11 adjustment disorder research

Demoralisation and its link with depression, psychological adjustment and suicidality among cancer patients: A network psychometrics approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About