Assessing social functioning in youth at clinical high-risk for psychosis.
Assessing social functioning in youth at clinical high-risk for psychosis.
复制标题
评估临床精神病高危青少年的社会功能。
DOI：
10.1016/j.schres.2020.12.017
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Lecomte,Tania
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Addington,Jean;Santesteban-Echarri,Olga;Braun,Amy;Lecomte,Tania
已经确定的是，处于精神病临床高风险（CHR）的青少年已经有社会功能受损，社会功能的下降已被确定为过渡的预测因素，第三，许多CHR个体表现出社会功能困难，与他们是否过渡到精神病无关。由于大多数功能量表的设计是为了评估精神分裂症患者的社会功能，因此开发了整体功能量表：社会（GF: S）来专门检查CHR青年的社会功能。虽然这是一个很好的量表，被认为是衡量CHR青少年社会功能的黄金标准，但GF: S并没有提供具体的细节，说明哪些困难可能在治疗中得到解决。在早期精神病领域也有类似的担忧，即社会功能测量不一定能很好地解决经历过首次精神病发作的年轻患者的担忧。因此，我们开发了首发社会功能量表（FESFS）来测量首发精神病（FEP）患者在首发诊所接受服务的社会功能，以捕捉随时间的变化。此外，FESFS已被确定为唯一包含社交媒体和新技术部分的工具（Bjornestad et al., 2019）。我们的目的是确定在CHR样本中使用FESFS是否会增加我们对该人群社会功能的了解。我们的第一个目标是比较FESFS上的评分和GF: S上的评分，以确定量表是否涉及不同的领域。其次，我们比较了FESFS与FEP样本的CHR评分，因为FESFS尚未用于CHR或年龄小于18岁的人群。（PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2022 APA，版权所有）
It has been well established that youth at clinical high-risk (CHR) of psychosis already have impaired social functioning, that a decline in social functioning has been identified as a predictor of transition, and thirdly, that many CHR individuals demonstrate difficulties in social functioning independently of whether they transition to psychosis. Since the majority of functioning scales were designed to assess social functioning in schizophrenia patients, the Global Functioning Scale: Social (GF: S) was developed to specifically examine social functioning in CHR youth. Although an excellent scale and considered the gold standard measure of social functioning for CHR youth, the GF: S does not provide specific details of where difficulties might be that could possibly be addressed in treatment. There were similar concerns in the early psychosis field in that social functioning measures did not necessarily address well the concerns of younger patients who had experienced their first episode of psychosis. Thus, the First Episode Social Functioning Scale (FESFS) was developed to measure social functioning in first episode psychosis (FEP) individuals receiving services in first-episode clinics to capture change over time. In addition, the FESFS has been identified as the only tool comprising a section on social media and new technologies (Bjornestad et al., 2019). Our objective was to determine if using the FESFS in a CHR sample would add to our knowledge about the social functioning of this population. Our first aim was to compare ratings on the FESFS with ratings on the GF: S to determine if the scales were tapping different domains. Secondly, we compared CHR ratings on the FESFS with those of a FEP sample since the FESFS has not been used in CHR or with a population younger than 18.(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)