C omplicated grief commonly refers to extremes in the intensity and duration of grief symptoms and their clinical complications (1,2). Studies investigating the prevalence of CG among psychiatric outpatients report levels ranging from 20% to 33% (3-5). Despite these high levels, CG is often not detected in initial assessments. This may be due to lack of focus on death losses by both patients and clinicians. Clinicians are expected to inquire about presenting problems, precipitating events, mental status, potential for self-harm, previous disorders and treatments, and current disorders. Little time is available to explore such important events as deaths. Consequently, information relevant to treatment decisions is not obtained. It would be useful to have a few screening questions that possess high sensitivity (that is, identification of patients with CG) and high specificity (that is, identification of patients without CG).Our recent prevalence study (5) provided responses to 2 sets of potential screening items. Table 1 lists 5 items from the TRIG (6) that cover events that clinical reports (7) claim are risk factors or indicators of CG. Affirmative responses to items 3 and 5, and negative answers to items 1, 2, and 4, are thought to indicate increased likelihood of CG. However, supportive research evidence is lacking.Another set of items came from questionnaires used to determine the presence of CG: the PGQ (8) and the IES (9). Subsequent to our prevalence study, we conducted a factor analysis of items from the 2 questionnaires and the BDI-II (10). Separate grief and depression factors emerged (11), which indicated unique symptoms for CG. For the current study, we chose a few items that were highly loaded on the grief factors. We hypothesized that one or more combinations of the items would emerge as CG identifiers that could be used to screen patients. Objective: This study aimed to discover screening questions for initial assessments of psychiatric outpatients to identify which patients are likely experiencing complicated grief (CG).
Method:We examined the responses of 235 outpatients to questionnaire items. One set came from the Texas Revised Inventory of Grief (TRIG). This set represented events cited in clinical literature as indicators or risk factors for CG. Another set came from a factor analysis of items that define CG. We determined relations between items and CG, analyzed sensitivity and specificity, and compared the 2 sets of items.
Results:The factor analysis items were superior. The 2 best items correctly identified nearly 90% of patients with and without CG.
Conclusion:The items can be transformed into screening questions to be used in initial interviews.(Can J Psychiatry 2005;50:680-684)Information on funding and support and author affiliations appears at the end of the article.
Clinical Implication· A few screening items may be able to identify most psychiatric outpatients with CG. This may be more productive than requesting clinicians to conduct thorough assessments for CG.
Limitation· The find...