CHAPTER
12
Rating Scales and Alternative Diagnostic Systems
THERE are many ways to describe and measure distress. For example, a person may speak of having an ataque de nervios, whereas a practitioner may describe him as having a panic attack. Although the person and the practitioner may be describing the same experience, they are accounting for it in different ways. Typically, practitioners account for distress as a symptom of disease—that is, a pathological abnormality in the structure and function of body organs and systems—whereas patients account for distress as illness—that is, their personal experience of abnormality. Psychiatrists and other mental health practitioners currently account for mental distress as neither illness nor disease but rather as disorder. To name a collection of distressing symptoms as a disorder is an attempt to account for both pathological abnormalities and the effects of those abnormalities on a particular patient.
DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association 2013) mental disorders are diagnostic labels rather than discrete biological phenomena. These diagnoses are provisional formulas for helping a person effect a change he could not make on his own. Within a particular diagnosis, there are very different experiences of symptoms and functional impairment. One older adult with panic attacks may need only to be taught breathing techniques, whereas another may need hospitalization and an extended course of therapy. One way to account for these differences in a patient’s experience of a mental disorder is to use rating scales. Another is to use alternative diagnostic systems to describe the distress differently.
Rating Scales
Because we cannot yet diagnose and monitor most mental illnesses through physical means such as functional imaging, genetic testing, or blood serum tests, rating scales are important clinical aids to mental health care. Individual item responses on a standardized rating scale can be used to guide a clinical conversation (e.g., “You indicated that you sometimes have thoughts that you would be better off dead. Can you tell me more about that?”). Numerical scores on rating scales identify symptoms, guide diagnostic assessments, establish the severity of a disorder, and track the progress of patient care. Collecting these scale results over time will also enable measurement-based care, which refers to adjusting a patient’s treatment plan until a measurable symptom target is reached.
We follow a few principles when considering how to use rating scales:
- Select scales that are research validated for age, condition, language, and (ideally) culture.
- Use broad-based screening scales to detect the likelihood of any disorder being present.
- Use a more specific rating scale to investigate a particular problem.
- Select brief rating scales to enhance patient cooperation and ease of implementation.
- Reserve longer rating scales for specialty settings.
- Remember that rating scales cannot make diagnoses—they are aids, not replacements, for clinician assessment.
- Recall that rating scale results depend on the reliability of the reporter and his interpretation.
There are hundreds of rating scales available; to assist your practice, we have listed in Table 12–1 the scales that we find especially helpful in the evaluation and care of older persons with mental distress. Many of these rating scales are (or can be) built into an electronic health record, which allows you to follow a patient’s condition more objectively.
Scale (common abbreviation) | Indication | Number of items | Reference/URL |
Neurocognitive disorders | |||
Clock Drawing Test (CDT) | Assesses executive and visuospatial function | 1 | |
Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) | Assesses presence of delirium | 9 | http://www.hospitalelderlifeprogram.org/ |
Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) | Detects executive dysfunction affecting cognition and motor behavior | 6 | |
Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) | Assesses dementia-related behavioral symptoms | 10, 12 | http://npitest.net/about-npi.html |
Depression | |||
Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) | Self-reporting depression screen | 30 | |
Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) | Self-reporting depression screen | 9 | |
Executive functioning | |||
Executive Interview (EXIT) | Assesses executive function | 25 | |
Quick Executive Interview (Quick EXIT) | Assesses executive function | 14 | Larson and Heinemann 2010 |
Global mental status | |||
Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) | Assesses cognitive function and screens for dementia | 30 | |
Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) | Detects mild cognitive impairment | 30 | |
Psychotic disorders | |||
Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) | Assesses presence and severity of psychotic symptoms | 18 | |
Substance use | |||
Alcohol-Related Problems Survey (ARPS) | Assesses alcohol use | 20 | |
Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) | Identifies problematic alcohol use | 10 | https://www.drugabuse.gov |
Short Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test—Geriatric Version (SMAST-G) | Screens for and detects problematic alcohol use | 10 |
In addition, DSM-5 provides severity rating scales for many disorders. Most are specific to a particular disorder, and some include a narrative description to indicate that a particular disorder is mild, moderate, or severe. For some diagnoses, such as alcohol use disorder, severity depends on the number of criteria endorsed by a patient. For other diagnoses, such as a neurocognitive disorder, severity is measured by the degree to which a patient requires support. When appropriate, the severity ratings refer to specific measurements external to the mental status examination. For example, grading the severity of central sleep apnea depends, in part, on the extent of associated oxygen desaturation.