Assuntos
Alcoolismo , Transtornos de Ansiedade , Transtornos do Humor , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Inibidores Seletivos de Recaptação de Serotonina , Humanos , Inibidores Seletivos de Recaptação de Serotonina/uso terapêutico , Canadá , Transtornos de Ansiedade/tratamento farmacológico , Transtornos do Humor/tratamento farmacológico , Alcoolismo/complicaçõesAssuntos
Estimulantes do Sistema Nervoso Central , Metanfetamina , Psicoses Induzidas por Substâncias , Transtornos Psicóticos , Humanos , Metanfetamina/efeitos adversos , Transtornos Psicóticos/etiologia , Estimulantes do Sistema Nervoso Central/efeitos adversos , Psicoses Induzidas por Substâncias/etiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Psychiatric illness complicates the assessment of alcohol and sedative withdrawal (ASW). This study measured the diagnostic characteristics of the Revised Clinical Institute Withdrawal Alcohol Assessment (CIWA-Ar) and the Brief Alcohol Withdrawal Scale (BAWS) compared with a reference standard in patients with psychiatric illness and evaluated their administration time. METHODS: This prospective quality improvement (QI) project conducted in November, 2016 evaluated 35 consecutive unique patients in psychiatric settings. Each patient was evaluated on 1 occasion, sequentially by 2 independent examiners with the CIWA-Ar and BAWS. A Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition diagnosis of ASW derived after medical record review by 2 psychiatrists blind to the screening results served as a reference standard. Psychometric properties of the CIWA-Ar and BAWS were measured against the reference. RESULTS: Nineteen (54%) patients had ASW diagnosis by the reference standard. The sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI]) of the CIWA-Ar was 47% (25%-71%) at a cut-off score ≥8; sensitivity of the BAWS was 79% (54%-94%) at a cut-off score ≥3. Specificity (95% CI) for CIWA-Ar and BAWS was 88% (62%-98%) and 88% (62%-98%), respectively. Administration times (interquartile range) for the CIWA-Ar and BAWS were 120 (60-180) and 65 (50-75) seconds, respectively. Receiver operator characteristic area under the curve for CIWA-Ar was 0.77 and for BAWS was 0.76 (Pâ=â0.86). CONCLUSION: Both instruments performed similarly in assessing for mild to moderate ASW in a sample of patients with psychiatric illness. The BAWS took 65âseconds to administer-almost half as much time as the CIWA-Ar.