Feasibility, acceptability and clinical utility of the Cultural Formulation Interview: mixed-methods results from the DSM-5 international field trial.

BackgroundThere is a need for clinical tools to identify cultural issues in diagnostic assessment.AimsTo assess the feasibility, acceptability and clinical utility of the DSM-5 Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) in routine clinical practice.MethodMixed-methods evaluation of field trial data from six countries. The CFI was administered to diagnostically diverse psychiatric out-patients during a diagnostic interview. In post-evaluation sessions, patients and clinicians completed debriefing qualitative interviews and Likert-scale questionnaires. The duration of CFI administration and the full diagnostic session were monitored.ResultsMixed-methods data from 318 patients and 75 clinicians found the CFI feasible, acceptable and useful. Clinician feasibility ratings were significantly lower than patient ratings and other clinician-assessed outcomes. After administering one CFI, however, clinician feasibility ratings improved significantly and subsequent interviews required less time.ConclusionsThe CFI was included in DSM-5 as a feasible, acceptable and useful cultural assessment tool.

How Do Clinicians Prefer Cultural Competence Training? Findings from the DSM-5 Cultural Formulation Interview Field Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study's objective is to analyze training methods clinicians reported as most and least helpful during the DSM-5 Cultural Formulation Interview field trial, reasons why, and associations between demographic characteristics and method preferences. METHOD: The authors used mixed methods to analyze interviews from 75 clinicians in five continents on their training preferences after a standardized training session and clinicians' first administration of the Cultural Formulation Interview. Content analysis identified most and least helpful educational methods by reason. Bivariate and logistic regression analysis compared clinician characteristics to method preferences. RESULTS: Most frequently, clinicians named case-based behavioral simulations as "most helpful" and video as "least helpful" training methods. Bivariate and logistic regression models, first unadjusted and then clustered by country, found that each additional year of a clinician's age was associated with a preference for behavioral simulations: OR = 1.05 (95 % CI: 1.01-1.10; p = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Most clinicians preferred active behavioral simulations in cultural competence training, and this effect was most pronounced among older clinicians. Effective training may be best accomplished through a combination of reviewing written guidelines, video demonstration, and behavioral simulations. Future work can examine the impact of clinician training satisfaction on patient symptoms and quality of life.

Perspectives of family members participating in cultural assessment of psychiatric disorders: findings from the DSM-5 International Field Trial.

Despite the important roles families play in the lives of many individuals with mental illness across cultures, there is a dearth of data worldwide on how family members perceive the process of cultural assessment as well as to how to best include them. This study addresses this gap in our knowledge through analysis of data collected across six countries as part of a DSM-5 Field Trial of the Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI). At clinician discretion, individuals who accompanied patients to the clinic visit (i.e. patient companions) at the time the CFI was conducted were invited to participate in the cultural assessment and answer questions about their experience. The specific aims of this paper are (1) to describe patterns of participation of patient companions in the CFI across the six countries, and (2) to examine the comparative feasibility, acceptability, and clinical utility of the CFI from companion perspectives through analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data. Among the 321 patient interviews, only 86 (at four of 12 sites) included companions, all of whom were family members or other relatives. The utility, feasibility and acceptability of the CFI were rated favourably by relatives, supported by qualitative analyses of debriefing interviews. Cross-site differences in frequency of accompaniment merit further study.

Does the Cultural Formulation Interview for the fifth revision of the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5) affect medical communication? A qualitative exploratory study from the New York site.

OBJECTIVES: Cross-cultural mental health researchers often analyze patient explanatory models of illness to optimize service provision. The Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) is a cross-cultural assessment tool released in May 2013 with DSM-5 to revise shortcomings from the DSM-IV Outline for Cultural Formulation (OCF). The CFI field trial took place in 6 countries, 14 sites, and with 321 patients to explore its feasibility, acceptability, and clinical utility with patients and clinicians. We sought to analyze if and how CFI feasibility, acceptability, and clinical utility were related to patient-clinician communication. DESIGN: We report data from the New York site which enrolled 7 clinicians and 32 patients in 32 patient-clinician dyads. We undertook a data analysis independent of the parent field trial by conducting content analyses of debriefing interviews with all participants (n = 64) based on codebooks derived from frameworks for medical communication and implementation outcomes. Three coders created codebooks, coded independently, established inter-rater coding reliability, and analyzed if the CFI affects medical communication with respect to feasibility, acceptability, and clinical utility. RESULTS: Despite racial, ethnical, cultural, and professional differences within our group of patients and clinicians, we found that promoting satisfaction through the interview, eliciting data, eliciting the patient's perspective, and perceiving data at multiple levels were common codes that explained how the CFI affected medical communication. We also found that all but two codes fell under the implementation outcome of clinical utility, two fell under acceptability, and none fell under feasibility. CONCLUSION: Our study offers new directions for research on how a cultural interview affects patient-clinician communication. Future research can analyze how the CFI and other cultural interviews impact medical communication in clinical settings with subsequent effects on outcomes such as medication adherence, appointment retention, and health condition.

Barriers to implementing the DSM-5 cultural formulation interview: a qualitative study.

The Outline for Cultural Formulation (OCF) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) marked an attempt to apply anthropological concepts within psychiatry. The OCF has been criticized for not providing guidelines to clinicians. The DSM-5 Cultural Issues Subgroup has since converted the OCF into the Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) for use by any clinician with any patient in any clinical setting. This paper presents perceived barriers to CFI implementation in clinical practice reported by patients (n = 32) and clinicians (n = 7) at the New York site within the DSM-5 international field trial. We used an implementation fidelity paradigm to code debriefing interviews after each CFI session through deductive content analysis. The most frequent patient threats were lack of differentiation from other treatments, lack of buy-in, ambiguity of design, over-standardization of the CFI, and severity of illness. The most frequent clinician threats were lack of conceptual relevance between intervention and problem, drift from the format, repetition, severity of patient illness, and lack of clinician buy-in. The Subgroup has revised the CFI based on these barriers for final publication in DSM-5. Our findings expand knowledge on the cultural formulation by reporting the CFI's reception among patients and clinicians.

Rethinking Interpreter Functions in Mental Health Services.

Interpreters improve access to care for patients with limited English proficiency (LEP), but some studies have reported poorer cultural understanding, relationship quality, and patient satisfaction than with language-concordant care. Use of interpreter roles beyond linguistic conversion (clarifier, cultural broker, or advocate/mediator) may enhance interpreter-mediated care by improving cultural understanding and the therapeutic alliance. As reported in this column, pilot data on interpreter-mediated evaluations of 25 psychiatric outpatients with LEP support this position. The authors found that clarification of the interpreter's role and the session structure improved provider-interpreter collaboration, with two perceived benefits: improved assessment through elicitation of clinically relevant information and stronger therapeutic alliance through "emotion work." Strategies for effectively enhancing provider-interpreter collaboration are discussed.

The development of the DSM-5 Cultural Formulation Interview-Fidelity Instrument (CFI-FI): a pilot study.

This paper reports on the development of the Cultural Formulation Interview-Fidelity Instrument (CFI-FI) which assesses clinician fidelity to the DSM-5 Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI). The CFI consists of a manualized set of standard questions that can precede every psychiatric evaluation. It is based on the DSM-IV Outline for Cultural Formulation, the cross-cultural assessment with the most evidence in psychiatric training. Using the New York sample of the DSM-5 CFI field trial, two independent raters created and finalized items for the CFI-FI based on six audio-taped and transcribed interviews. The raters then used the final CFI-FI to rate the remaining 23 interviews. Inter-rater reliability ranged from .73 to 1 for adherence items and .52 to 1 for competence items. The development of the CFI-FI can help researchers and administrators determine whether the CFI has been implemented with fidelity, permitting future intervention research.