四种人格障碍检测工具效度的比较研究——人格障碍检测工具系列研究Ⅱ  

Four Existing Instruments for Assessing Personality Disorders (Study II)

作　　者：卢宁[1] 刘协和[1] 朱昌明[1] 杨彦春[1] 曹丽萍 岳振雷 

机构地区：[1]华西医科大学附属第一医院心理卫生研究所,610041 [2]贵州省遵义市康复医院精神科

出　　处：《中国心理卫生杂志》2001年第2期129-132,共4页Chinese Mental Health Journal

摘　　要：目的 :对四种来自西方的人格障碍检测工具的效度进行比较研究。方法 :本研究将四种人格障碍检测工具IPDE (国际人格障碍检查 )、SCID -Ⅱ (DSM -Ⅲ -R人格障碍临床定式检测 )、SCID -ⅡPQ(DSM -Ⅲ -R人格障碍筛查问卷 )、PDI -Ⅳ (DSM -Ⅳ人格障碍检测 )在中国大陆人群中抽样测试并进行效度检验。结果 :在四个检测工具中强迫型、回避型、依赖型、表演型、边缘型、反社会型、分裂样型和偏执型等 8个人格障碍型别具有较好的效度 ;IPDE较其他检测工具的效度更为完善。IPDE的不足之处 :项目 8、9结构稳定性差 ;项目 2、 3、 8、 2 4、 2 5、 2 9、 5 2的区分度较差。结论 :强迫型、回避型、依赖型、表演型、边缘型、反社会型、分裂样型和偏执型等 8个人格障碍型别有较好的独特性和鉴别诊断效能 ;IPDE较其他检测工具有更好的可操作性。Objective: To compare and study the validity of the four instruments for assessment of personality disorders in Chinese subjects Method: 42 patients with psychosis in remission, 41 patients with neurosis in stable state, 29 subjects with personality disorder and 41 normal control were evaluated using the four instruments: IPDE (International Personality Disorder Examination), SCID-II (Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R Personality Disorder), SCID-II PQ (SCID-II Patient Questionnaire), PDI-IV (Personality Disorder Interview for DSM-IV) Their validities in Chinese subjects were tested Result: It was found that obsessive-compulsive, avoidant, dependent, histrionic, borderline, antisocial, schizoid, paranoid personality disorders had better specificity Except item 7 with invalid item-differentiation, IPDE had better validity Conclusion: Obsessive-compulsive, avoidant, dependent, histrionic, borderline, antisocial, schizoid, paranoid personality disorders had better inner homogeneity and discerning diagnose function IPDE had better diagnostic value

关 键 词：人格障碍 检测工具 效度 比较研究 

分 类 号：R749.91[医药卫生—神经病学与精神病学]