Longitudinal Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Stress and Occupational Well-Being of Mental Health Professionals: An International Study.

BACKGROUND: Increased levels of occupational stress among health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic have been documented. Few studies have examined the effects of the pandemic on mental health professionals despite the heightened demand for their services. METHOD: A multilingual, longitudinal, global survey was conducted at 3 time points during the pandemic among members of the World Health Organization's Global Clinical Practice Network. A total of 786 Global Clinical Practice Network members from 86 countries responded to surveys assessing occupational distress, well-being, and posttraumatic stress symptoms. RESULTS: On average, respondents' well-being deteriorated across time while their posttraumatic stress symptoms showed a modest improvement. Linear growth models indicated that being female, being younger, providing face-to-face health services to patients with COVID-19, having been a target of COVID-related violence, and living in a low- or middle-income country or a country with a higher COVID-19 death rate conveyed greater risk for poor well-being and higher level of stress symptoms over time. Growth mixed modeling identified trajectories of occupational well-being and stress symptoms. Most mental health professions demonstrated no impact to well-being; maintained moderate, nonclinical levels of stress symptoms; or showed improvements after an initial period of difficulty. However, some participant groups exhibited deteriorating well-being approaching the clinical threshold (25.8%) and persistently high and clinically significant levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms (19.6%) over time. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that although most mental health professionals exhibited stable, positive well-being and low stress symptoms during the pandemic, a substantial minority of an already burdened global mental health workforce experienced persistently poor or deteriorating psychological status over the course of the pandemic.

The Network Structure of ICD-11 Disorders Specifically Associated with Stress: Adjustment Disorder, Prolonged Grief Disorder, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, and Complex Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.

INTRODUCTION: The ICD-11 includes a new grouping for "disorders specifically associated with stress" that contains revised descriptions of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and adjustment disorder (AjD) and new diagnoses in the form of complex PTSD (CPTSD) and prolonged grief disorder (PGD). These disorders are similar in that they each require a life event for the diagnosis; however, they have not yet been assessed together for validity within the same sample. We set out to test the distinctiveness of the four main ICD-11 stress disorders using a network analysis approach. METHODS: A population-based, cross-sectional design. A nationally representative sample of adults from the Republic of Ireland aged 18 years and older (N = 1,020) completed standardized measures of PTSD, CPTSD, AjD, and PGD. A network analysis was conducted at the symptom level. Outcome measures included the International Trauma Questionnaire, the Inventory of Complicated Grief, and the International Adjustment Disorder Questionnaire. RESULTS: Consistent with the taxonomic structure of the ICD-11, our results showed that although the four conditions clustered independently at the disorder level, the specific symptoms of PTSD, CPTSD, PGD, and AjD clustered together very strongly but more strongly than with symptoms of the other disorders. The majority (61%) of the variation in each symptom could be explained by its neighboring symptoms. The strongest transdiagnostically connecting symptom was "startle response." DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Mental health professionals caring for people who have experienced a range of stressors and traumatic life events can be confident in diagnosing these conditions that have clear diagnostic boundaries. Interventions addressing stress-associated disorders should be based on diagnostic assessment to ensure close fit between symptoms and treatment.

Diagnostic classification of irritability and oppositionality in youth: a global field study comparing ICD-11 with ICD-10 and DSM-5.

BACKGROUND: Severe irritability has become an important topic in child and adolescent mental health. Based on the available evidence and on public health considerations, WHO classified chronic irritability within oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) in ICD-11, a solution markedly different from DSM-5's (i.e. the new childhood mood diagnosis, disruptive mood dysregulation disorder [DMDD]) and from ICD-10's (i.e. ODD as one of several conduct disorders without attention to irritability). In this study, we tested the accuracy with which a global, multilingual, multidisciplinary sample of clinicians were able to use the ICD-11 classification of chronic irritability and oppositionality as compared to the ICD-10 and DSM-5 approaches. METHODS: Clinicians (N = 196) from 48 countries participated in an Internet-based field study in English, Spanish, or Japanese and were randomized to review and use one of the three diagnostic systems. Through experimental manipulation of validated clinical vignettes, we evaluated how well clinicians in each condition could identify chronic irritability versus nonirritable oppositionality, episodic bipolar disorder, dysthymic depression, and normative irritability. RESULTS: Compared to ICD-10 and DSM-5, ICD-11 led to more accurate identification of severe irritability and better differentiation from boundary presentations. Participants using DSM-5 largely failed to apply the DMDD diagnosis when it was appropriate, and they more often applied psychopathological diagnoses to developmentally normative irritability. CONCLUSIONS: The formulation of irritability and oppositionality put forth in ICD-11 shows evidence of clinical utility, supporting accurate diagnosis. Global mental health clinicians can readily identify ODD both with and without chronic irritability.

Can Clinicians Use Dimensional Information to Make a Categorical Diagnosis of Paraphilic Disorders? An ICD-11 Field Study.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of paraphilic disorder is a complicated clinical judgment based on the integration of information from multiple dimensions to arrive at a categorical (present/absent) conclusion. The recent update of the guidelines for paraphilic disorders in ICD-11 presents an opportunity to investigate how mental health professionals use the diagnostic guidelines to arrive at a diagnosis which thereby can optimize the guidelines for clinical use. AIM: This study examined clinicians' ability to use the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for paraphilic disorders which contain multiple dimensions that must be simultaneously assessed to arrive at a diagnosis. METHODS: The study investigated the ability of 1,263 international clinicians to identify the dimensions of paraphilic disorder in the context of written case vignettes that varied on a single dimension only. OUTCOMES: Participants provided diagnoses for the case vignettes along with dimensional ratings of the degree of presence of five dimensions of paraphilic disorder (arousal, consent, action, distress, and risk). RESULTS: Across a series of analyses, clinicians demonstrated a clear ability to recognize and appropriately integrate the dimensions of paraphilic disorders; however, there was some evidence that clinicians may over-diagnose non-pathological cases. CLINICAL TRANSLATION: Clinicians would likely benefit from targeted training on the ICD-11 definition of paraphilic disorder and should be cautious of over-diagnosing. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This study represents a large international sample of health professionals and is the first to examine clinicians' ability to apply the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for paraphilic disorders. Important limitations include not generalizing to all clinicians and acknowledging that results may be different in direct clinical interactions vs written case vignettes. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that clinicians appear capable of interpreting and implementing the diagnostic guidelines for paraphilic disorders in ICD-11. Keeley JW, Briken P, Evans SC, et al. Can Clinicians Use Dimensional Information to Make a Categorical Diagnosis of Paraphilic Disorders? An ICD-11 Field Study. J Sex Med 2021;18:1592-1606.

The ICD-11 classification of gender incongruence of adolescence and adulthood: adequacy among transgender people in Lebanon.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the adequacy of the then proposed International Classification of Diseases version 11 (ICD-11) diagnostic guidelines for Gender Incongruence of Adolescence and Adulthood in a sample of transgender people accessing multi-disciplinary health care services at specialised organisations in Lebanon. The cross-sectional study reported here was part of the ICD-11 field test studies that took place in several countries. Twenty-eight Arab transgender adults residing in Lebanon were recruited after giving consent to participate in a structured interview with a mental health professional. The questions asked of them consisted of the following: socio-demographic data; medical history related to gender identity; experiences of gender incongruence; psychological distress; rejection; violence; and functional impairment. Results showed that Arab transgender individuals living in Lebanon report being the victims of violence, abuse, discrimination and rejection from family, peers and society in general. As a result, they develop psychological distress that is better explained by the social context in which they live, rather than by their transgender identity. Reformulating ICD-10 Transsexualism as Gender Incongruence of Adolescence and Adulthood in ICD-11 and moving this diagnosis out of the chapter on mental disorders chapter would be favourable to the Lebanese sample.

Taxonomy and utility in the diagnostic classification of mental disorders.

OBJECTIVE: One strategy for improving the clinical utility of mental health diagnostic systems is to better align them with how clinicians conceptualize psychopathology in practice. This approach was used in International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11) development, but its underlying assumption-a link between taxonomic "fit" and clinical utility-remains untested. METHODS: Using data from global mental health clinician samples (combined N = 5404), we investigated the association between taxonomic fit and clinical utility in mental disorder categories. RESULTS: The overall association between fit and utility was positive (r = 0.19) but statistically not different from zero (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.06, 0.43) in this small sample (N = 39 ICD/DSM categories). However, a positive association became clear after correcting for outliers (r = 0.34 [0.05, 0.58] or higher). Further insights were apparent for specific diagnoses given their locations in the scatterplot. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest a positive link between taxonomic fit and clinical utility in mental disorder diagnoses, highlighting future research directions.

Mental, behavioral and neurodevelopmental disorders in the ICD-11: an international perspective on key changes and controversies.

An update of the chapter on Mental, Behavioral and Neurodevelopmental Disorders in the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) is of great interest around the world. The recent approval of the 11th Revision of the ICD (ICD-11) by the World Health Organization (WHO) raises broad questions about the status of nosology of mental disorders as a whole as well as more focused questions regarding changes to the diagnostic guidelines for specific conditions and the implications of these changes for practice and research. This Forum brings together a broad range of experts to reflect on key changes and controversies in the ICD-11 classification of mental disorders. Taken together, there is consensus that the WHO's focus on global applicability and clinical utility in developing the diagnostic guidelines for this chapter will maximize the likelihood that it will be adopted by mental health professionals and administrators. This focus is also expected to enhance the application of the guidelines in non-specialist settings and their usefulness for scaling up evidence-based interventions. The new mental disorders classification in ICD-11 and its accompanying diagnostic guidelines therefore represent an important, albeit iterative, advance for the field.

Accuracy of diagnostic classification and clinical utility assessment of ICD-11 compared to ICD-10 in 10 mental disorders: findings from a web-based field study.

In this web-based field study, we compared the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of 10 selected mental disorders between the ICD-11 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines (CDDG) and the ICD-10 CDDG using vignettes in a sample of 928 health professionals from all WHO regions. On average, the ICD-11 CDDG displayed significantly higher diagnostic accuracy (71.9% for ICD-11, 53.2% for ICD-10), higher ease of use, better goodness of fit, higher clarity, and lower time required for diagnosis compared to the ICD-10 CDDG. The advantages of the ICD-11 CDDG were largely limited to new diagnoses in ICD-11. After limiting analyses to diagnoses existing in ICD-11 and ICD-10, the ICD-11 CDDG were only superior in ease of use. The ICD-11 CDDG were not inferior in diagnostic accuracy or clinical utility compared to the ICD-10 CDDG for any of the vignettes. Diagnostic accuracy was consistent across WHO regions and independent of participants' clinical experience. There were no differences between medical doctors and psychologists in diagnostic accuracy, but members of other health professions had greater difficulties in determining correct diagnoses based on the ICD-11 CDDG. In sum, there were no differences in diagnostic accuracy for diagnoses existing in ICD-10 and ICD-11, but the introduction of new diagnoses in ICD-11 has improved the diagnostic classification of some clinical presentations. The favourable clinical utility ratings of the ICD-11 CDDG give reason to expect a positive evaluation by health professionals in the implementation phase of ICD-11. Yet, training in ICD-11 is needed to further enhance the diagnostic accuracy.

How service users and carers understand, perceive, rephrase, and communicate about "depressive episode" and "schizophrenia" diagnoses: an international participatory research.

BACKGROUND: For ICD-11, the WHO emphasized the clinical utility of communication and the need to involve service users and carers in the revision process. AIMS: The objective was to assess whether medical vocabulary was accessible, which kinds of feelings it activated, whether and how users and carers would like to rephrase terms, and whether they used diagnosis to talk about mental health experiences. METHOD: An innovative protocol focused on two diagnoses (depressive episode and schizophrenia) was implemented in 15 different countries. The same issues were discussed with users and carers: understanding, feelings, rephrasing, and communication. RESULTS: Most participants reported understanding the diagnoses, but associated them with negative feelings. While the negativity of "depressive episode" mostly came from the concept itself, that of "schizophrenia" was largely based on its social impact and stigmatization associated with "mental illness". When rephrasing "depressive episode", a majority kept the root "depress*", and suppressed the temporal dimension or renamed it. Almost no one suggested a reformulation based on "schizophrenia". Finally, when communicating, no one used the phrase "depressive episode". Some participants used words based on "depress", but no one mentioned "episode". Very few used "schizophrenia". CONCLUSION: Data revealed a gap between concepts and emotional and cognitive experiences. Both professional and experiential language and knowledge have to be considered as complementary. Consequently, the ICD should be co-constructed by professionals, service users, and carers. It should take the emotional component of language, and the diversity of linguistic and cultural contexts, into account.

The classification of feeding and eating disorders in the ICD-11: results of a field study comparing proposed ICD-11 guidelines with existing ICD-10 guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) is used globally by 194 WHO member nations. It is used for assigning clinical diagnoses, providing the framework for reporting public health data, and to inform the organization and reimbursement of health services. Guided by overarching principles of increasing clinical utility and global applicability, the 11th revision of the ICD proposes major changes that incorporate empirical advances since the previous revision in 1992. To test recommended changes in the Mental, Behavioral, and Neurodevelopmental Disorders chapter, multiple vignette-based case-controlled field studies have been conducted which examine clinicians' ability to accurately and consistently use the new guidelines and assess their overall clinical utility. This manuscript reports on the results from the study of the proposed ICD-11 guidelines for feeding and eating disorders (FEDs). METHOD: Participants were 2288 mental health professionals registered with WHO's Global Clinical Practice Network. The study was conducted in Chinese, English, French, Japanese, and Spanish. Clinicians were randomly assigned to apply either the ICD-11 or ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines for FEDs to a pair of case vignettes designed to test specific clinical questions. Clinicians selected the diagnosis they thought was correct for each vignette, evaluated the presence of each essential feature of the selected diagnosis, and the clinical utility of the diagnostic guidelines. RESULTS: The proposed ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines significantly improved accuracy for all FEDs tested relative to ICD-10 and attained higher clinical utility ratings; similar results were obtained across all five languages. The inclusion of binge eating disorder and avoidant-restrictive food intake disorder reduced the use of residual diagnoses. Areas needing further refinement were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines consistently outperformed ICD-10 in distinguishing cases of eating disorders and showed global applicability and appropriate clinical utility. These results suggest that the proposed ICD-11 guidelines for FEDs will help increase accuracy of public health data, improve clinical diagnosis, and enhance health service organization and provision. This is the first time in the revision of the ICD that data from large-scale, empirical research examining proposed guidelines is completed in time to inform the final diagnostic guidelines.

Dimensional analysis of depressive, anxious and somatic symptoms presented by primary care patients and their relationship with ICD-11 PHC proposed diagnoses.

BACKGROUND: A study conducted as part of the development of the Eleventh International Classification of Mental Disorders for Primary Health Care (ICD-11 PHC) provided an opportunity to test the relationships among depressive, anxious and somatic symptoms in PHC. METHOD: Primary care physicians participating in the ICD-11 PHC field studies in five countries selected patients who presented with somatic symptoms not explained by known physical pathology by applying a 29-item screening on somatic complaints that were under study for bodily stress disorder. Patients were interviewed using the Clinical Interview Schedule-Revised and assessed using two five-item scales that measure depressive and anxious symptoms. Structural models of anxious-depressive symptoms and somatic complaints were tested using a bi-factor approach. RESULTS: A total of 797 patients completed the study procedures. Two bi-factor models fit the data well: Model 1 had all symptoms loaded on a general factor, along with one of three specific depression, anxiety and somatic factors [x2 (627) = 741.016, p < 0.0011, RMSEA = 0.015, CFI = 0.911, TLI = 0.9]. Model 2 had a general factor and two specific anxious depression and somatic factors [x2 (627) = 663.065, p = 0.1543, RMSEA = 0.008, CFI = 0.954, TLI = 0.948]. CONCLUSIONS: These data along with those of previous studies suggest that depressive, anxious and somatic symptoms are largely different presentations of a common latent phenomenon. This study provides support for the ICD-11 PHC conceptualization of mood disturbance, especially anxious depression, as central among patients who present multiple somatic symptoms.

Current Legal Situation for Patients with Paraphilic disorders and Implications of the ICD-11 for Paraphilic Disorders for Germany.

INTRODUCTION: Recently the guidelines for the diagnosis of paraphilic disorders in the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Eleventh Revision (ICD-11), have been published. AIM: This article analyzes legal, regulatory, and policy issues relevant to the potential effects of the changes for the classification of paraphilic disorders in the ICD-11 in Germany. METHODS: A forensic and a legal expert in Germany worked with other international experts to conduct this evaluation using an assessment guide provided by the World Health Organization. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Possible effects of the changes for the classification of paraphilic disorders in the ICD-11 on forensic practice, health systems, adjudication of individuals who have committed a sexual offense, and the provision of treatment in Germany. RESULTS: Results highlight the special situation of medical confidentiality in the German health system that facilitates the establishment of preventive networks for the treatment of pedophilic patients. The ICD-11 guidelines will help to clarify the boundary between pedophilic disorder and crimes of child sexual abuse. These will also establish a boundary with other paraphilic diagnostic concepts. We describe the central construct of criminal responsibility in the German legal system in relation to paraphilic disorders, the prominent role of expert witnesses, and the differences in the conceptualization of medical confidentiality within the health care system and within the legal system. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The ICD-11 proposals for paraphilic disorders provide a clearer differentiation, as compared with ICD-10, between variants of normal sexual behavior and sexual behavior that involves a non-consenting person or entity. Particular patterns of sexual preference that are not of relevance to public health, the health care system, or the legal system, such as masochism and fetishism, will no longer be named psychiatric entities and will, therefore, be regarded as private behaviors and destigmatized. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: The assessment shows the specific legal situation in Germany for the treatment of paraphilic patients in a sexual medicine, psychiatric, and legal discourse. However, it was done only by a small number of experts. CONCLUSION: A conclusion of the analysis was that the more specific and narrower definitions in the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines, compared with those in ICD-10, particularly for pedophilic disorder and coercive sexual sadism disorder, will result in a reduction in false-positive diagnoses. It is unlikely that significant unintended and negative consequences will occur as a result of implementing the ICD-11 guidelines for paraphilic disorders. Briken P, Boetticher A, Krueger RB, et al. Current Legal Situation for Patients with Paraphilic disorders and Implications of the ICD-11 for Paraphilic Disorders for Germany. J Sex Med 2019;16:1615-1622.

Forensic Implications of the New Classification of ICD-11 Paraphilic Disorders in Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: The World Health Organization (WHO) Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse appointed a Working Group on Sexual Disorders and Sexual Health in order to revise and propose changes to ICD-10 categories. AIM: Analyze ethical and legal implications in Brazil of the proposed ICD-11 diagnostic criteria for paraphilic disorders. METHODS: A forensic working group of Brazilian experts in collaboration with representatives of WHO reviewed the proposed modifications to the classification of Disorders of Sexual Preference in ICD-10 (F65), which is recommended to be replaced by Paraphilic Disorders in ICD-11. Proposals were reviewed through a medicolegal lens, using a legal and policy analysis guide put forth by WHO. The premise of this review was to understand that, although the ICD classification is intended to provide a basis for clinical and statistical health interventions, medical diagnostics may also be entangled in the complex legal, normative, and political environment of various countries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The most important proposed change to this section is to limit the concept of paraphilic disorders primarily to patterns of sexual arousal involving a focus on others who are unwilling or unable to consent, but this change has not affected the ethical and legal aspects of psychiatric functioning in the Brazil. RESULTS: Because Brazilian criminal law is directed toward criminal behavior and not to specific psychiatric diagnoses, the changes proposed for ICD-11 are not expected to create obstacles to health services or to modify criminal sentencing. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Although ICD-11 has a number of changes in its content, there are no significant clinical implications in the Brazilian context, but a better clarity of conceptual definitions and diagnostic criteria. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: The study is conducted with people from different Brazilian states, which is important for a comprehensive view. On the other hand, considering that it is a very heterogeneous country, there is the limitation that an even wider scope of the study is not possible. CONCLUSION: In the Brazilian context, the new guidelines for paraphilic disorders contribute to clinical utility and are not expected to create difficulties related to the legal, social, and economic consequences of sexual offenses in the country. Abdalla-Filho E, de Jesus Mari J, Diehl A, et al. Forensic Implications of the New Classification of ICD-11 Paraphilic Disorders in Brazil. J Sex Med 2019; 16:1814-1819.

Legal and Policy Implications in Mexico of Changes in ICD-11 Paraphilic Disorders.

INTRODUCTION: The World Health Organization (WHO) has made substantial changes to the classification of paraphilic disorders for the Eleventh Revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11), recently approved by the World Health Assembly. The most important is to limit paraphilic disorders primarily to persistent and intense patterns of atypical sexual arousal involving non-consenting individuals, manifested through persistent sexual thoughts, fantasies, urges, or behaviors, that have resulted in action or significant distress. AIM: To analyze the legal, regulatory, and policy implications of the changes in the ICD-11 classification of paraphilic disorders for forensic practice, health systems, adjudication of sex offenders, and the provision of treatment in Mexico. METHODS: An expert Mexican advisory group was appointed to conduct this evaluation following an assessment guide provided by the WHO. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The WHO assessment guide covered (i) laws related to sexual behaviors; (ii) the relationship between legal and clinical issues for non-forensic health professionals; (iii) implications of mental disorder classification for forensic practice; (iv) other implications of ICD-11 paraphilic disorders proposals; and (v) contextual issues. RESULTS: A variety of factors in Mexico make it highly unlikely that appropriate, evidence-based treatments for paraphilic disorders will be provided to those who need them, even if they seek treatment voluntarily and have not committed a crime. Mexican law focuses on the punishment of specific sexual behaviors rather than on underlying disorders. A paraphilic disorder would not be considered sufficient grounds for exemption from criminal responsibility. The application and scope of mental health evaluations in Mexican legal proceedings are quite limited, and individuals who commit sexual crimes almost never undergo forensic evaluations to establish the presence of paraphilic disorders. Psychiatric services may be mandated for sex offenders in highly specific circumstances but cannot exceed the duration of the criminal sentence. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Evaluation and treatment guidelines should be developed based on international evidence and standards and promulgated for use with individuals with paraphilic disorders in forensic and non-forensic poopulations. The much greater specificity and operationalization of the ICD-11 guidelines as compared with the ICD-10 guidelines provide a better basis for identification and case formulation. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: Major strengths of this analyses were that it was conducted to facilitate international comparability across several participating countries and the fact that it was conducted by a diverse multidisciplinary group representing various relevant legal, forensic and and clinical sectors. A limitation was that it was only possible to examine relevant federal laws and those of Mexico City rather than those of all 32 Mexican states. CONCLUSION: The descriptions of paraphilic disorders in the ICD-11 could support substantial improvements in the treatment of individuals with paraphilic disorders and the adjudication of sex offenders in Mexico, but specific changes in Mexican law would be required. Martínez-López JNI, Robles R, Fresán A, et al. Legal and Policy Implications in Mexico of Changes in ICD-11 Paraphilic Disorders. J Sex Med 2019;16:1623-1637.

Alcohol Use Disorders in ICD-11: Past, Present, and Future.

The Eleventh Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) was formally published in May 2019. Alcohol use disorders form a key part of the section of Disorders due to Substance Use and Addictive Behaviours. This review describes and discusses the alcohol diagnoses within this section of ICD-11, including Alcohol Dependence, Harmful Pattern of Use of Alcohol, and entities such as Alcohol Intoxication, Alcohol Withdrawal, and several alcohol-induced mental disorders, and briefly covers Hazardous Alcohol Use, which is listed separately as a health risk factor. We summarize the historical background to the development of these diagnoses, including work within the World Health Organization since the 1970s, and the corresponding diagnoses in the current ICD-10. The process by which ICD-11 diagnoses have been made is described and may be summarized as a conceptual-pragmatic-confirmatory one. The available empirical data supporting the ICD-11 diagnoses are presented, particularly in relation to the diagnostic guidelines for Alcohol Dependence. Comparison is made with the corresponding diagnoses in ICD-10 and their nearest counterparts in the fourth and fifth editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Field testing of the ICD-11 diagnoses is currently in progress. A plea is made for matching of diagnoses, diagnostic guidelines/criteria, and the assessment tools intended to capture these diagnoses.

Experiences of gender incongruence and the relationship between social exclusion, psychological distress, and dysfunction among South African transgender adults: A field-study for ICD-11.

BACKGROUND: The classification of sexuality-related conditions and conditions relating to transgender identity has generated controversy. Growing evidence suggests that the distress and dysfunction reported by transgender individuals is more likely associated with social exclusion, stigmatization, and violence than as a result of gender incongruence per se. Our study aimed to explore the experiences of South African transgender individuals through: 1) their self-reported accounts of gender incongruence, and 2) associations between their experiences of social exclusion and violence, and their reports of psychological distress and dysfunction during adolescence. METHODS: Our sample of 57 South African transgender adults completed a structured interview, in English, including questions related to experiences of gender incongruence duration, distress, dysfunction, social exclusion, and violence. RESULTS: Many transgender individuals reported having experienced an intense desire to be a different gender, with all noting discomfort with several aspects of their bodies. Importantly, psychological distress and dysfunction were significantly associated with social exclusion (most commonly perpetuated by family and friends) and not with gender incongruence per se. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds to the growing evidence that experiences of social exclusion play a significant role in the psychological distress and dysfunction reported by transgender persons.

[Web-based field studies on diagnostic classification and code assignment of mental disorders: comparison of ICD-11 and ICD-10]. / Internetbasierte Untersuchungen zur diagnostischen Klassifikation und Kodierung psychischer Störungen im Vergleich von ICD-11 und ICD-10.

The German Society for Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy (DGPPN,) conducted a comprehensive field study (principal investigator WG) funded by the German Federal Ministry of Health in cooperation with 4 other German medical societies in the field of mental health (DGPM, DGPPR, DeGFS, DGfS) * to support WHO's development of the ICD-11 (Chapters 6 and 17). The objective of the web-based field study was to compare ICD-10 and ICD-11 (beta draft) for selected mental disorders, regarding consistency, accuracy and assessment of utility. The first study (TP1) focused on the diagnostic classification and the second (TP2) on assignment of diagnostic codes.In TP1, clinicians used either the ICD-10 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines (CDDG) version or a draft version of the ICD-11 CDDG to evaluate 10 case vignettes in a randomized study implemented through the WHO GCPN **. As hypothesized, consistency was in favor of the ICD-11 (p = .02; n = 319 expert participants) though there was some variability across the different diagnostic categories. In addition, time for diagnosis was shorter (p = .01) and clinicians' judgment of utility (ease of use; goodness of fit) was better for ICD-11 (p = .047 and p < .001 respectively).TP2 focused on consistency of diagnostic code assignment for 25 short case descriptions (including explicit diagnosis and additional clinical information) using both ICD-10 and ICD-11 in a randomized web-based field study which was run on the WHO ICD-FiT *** platform. Based on 531 code assignments by120 expert clinicians, consistency for ICD-11 was significantly lower compared to ICD-10 (71 % vs. 82 %, p < .001) contrary to study hypothesis, and time required was significantly higher for ICD-11 (p < .001). Nevertheless, utility assessments were in favor of ICD-11 (p < .005).In summary, in TP1, given vignettes with more complex clinical descriptions more similar to clinical cases, ICD-11 showed advantages in the consistency of correct diagnoses among clinicians, time required to reach a diagnosis, and clinicians' ratings of clinical utility. These results provide evidence for quality improvement of the diagnostic process due to the revision of the more complete diagnostic guidelines for ICD-11. In the coding task of TP2, coding by clinicians using the ICD-10 was more consistent and faster than coding using the ICD-11. This may be a result of the greater complexity for coding use of the ICD-11 (e. g., due to 'post-coordination'), as well as greater familiarity with the ICD-10 system (which German clinicians currently use) and lack of practice with the new ICD-11 codes and tools. In spite of this, users assessed the ICD-11 system as more useful than the ICD-10, in part also because of ICD-11's more systematic and comprehensive coding tools. In addition, time needed for coding improved with practice, indicating need for intense education and training initiatives when ICD-11 is adopted and implemented into clinical practice.

Proposals for Paraphilic Disorders in the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Eleventh Revision (ICD-11).

The World Health Organization is currently developing the 11th revision of the International Classifications of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11), with approval of the ICD-11 by the World Health Assembly anticipated in 2018. The Working Group on the Classification of Sexual Disorders and Sexual Health (WGSDSH) was created and charged with reviewing and making recommendations for categories related to sexuality that are contained in the chapter of Mental and Behavioural Disorders in ICD-10 (World Health Organization 1992a). Among these categories was the ICD-10 grouping F65, Disorders of sexual preference, which describes conditions now widely referred to as Paraphilic Disorders. This article reviews the evidence base, rationale, and recommendations for the proposed revisions in this area for ICD-11 and compares them with DSM-5. The WGSDSH recommended that the grouping, Disorders of sexual preference, be renamed to Paraphilic Disorders and be limited to disorders that involve sexual arousal patterns that focus on non-consenting others or are associated with substantial distress or direct risk of injury or death. Consistent with this framework, the WGSDSH also recommended that the ICD-10 categories of Fetishism, Fetishistic Transvestism, and Sadomasochism be removed from the classification and new categories of Coercive Sexual Sadism Disorder, Frotteuristic Disorder, Other Paraphilic Disorder Involving Non-Consenting Individuals, and Other Paraphilic Disorder Involving Solitary Behaviour or Consenting Individuals be added. The WGSDSH's proposals for Paraphilic Disorders in ICD-11 are based on the WHO's role as a global public health agency and the ICD's function as a public health reporting tool.

Primary care physicians' use of the proposed classification of common mental disorders for ICD-11.

Background: The World Health Organization is revising the classification of common mental disorders in primary care for ICD-11. Major changes from the ICD-10 primary care version have been proposed for: (i) mood and anxiety disorders; and (ii) presentations of multiple somatic symptoms (bodily stress syndrome). This three-part field study explored the implementation of the revised classification by primary care physicians (PCPs) in five countries. Methods: Participating PCPs in Brazil, China, Mexico, Pakistan and Spain were asked to use the revised classification, first in patients that they suspected might be psychologically distressed (Part 1), and second in patients with multiple somatic symptoms causing distress or disability not wholly attributable to a known physical pathology, or with high levels of health anxiety (Part 2). Patients referred to Part 1 or Part 2 underwent a structured diagnostic interview. Part 3 consisted of feedback from PCPs regarding the classification. Results: In Part 1, anxious depression was the most common disorder among referred patients. PCPs assigned the highest severity ratings to anxious depression, and the next highest to current depression; current anxiety was rated as least severe. Considerable overlap was found between bodily stress syndrome (BSS) and health anxiety (HA). The psychiatric interview recorded higher rates of mood and anxiety disorders diagnoses among patients with BSS than did PCPs. PCPs' satisfaction with the revised classification was high. Conclusions: Results generally supported the inclusion of the new categories of anxious depression, BSS and HA for ICD-11 PHC and suggested that PCPs could implement these categories satisfactorily.

[In-patient hospital care of selected sexual disorders : An analysis of data from the German Federal Statistical Office from 2000 to 2014]. / Stationäre Krankenhausbehandlungen ausgewählter sexueller Störungen : Eine Analyse der Daten des Statistischen Bundesamts von 2000 bis 2014.

BACKGROUND: Patients with the ICD-10 sexual disorders F52, F64, F65, and F66 are treated by a variety of medical disciplines. Until now, there has been a paucity of data regarding which sexual disorders are treated by means of in-patient hospital care and whether changes have occurred over time. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to examine how many patients with sexual disorders that are classified by ICD-10 chapter V (F) as "mental" are treated as in-patients. METHODS: Diagnosis data regarding German hospital care, which have been published annually since 2000 by the German Federal Statistical Office (Destatis), are analysed. RESULTS: Since 2000, the number of in-patients with disorders of gender identity (F64) has increased 2.6-fold. Hospital treatment of sexual dysfunctions (F52) as a primary diagnosis is decreasing, whereas a significantly higher number of in-patients are treated with F52 as a secondary diagnosis. In-patients with F64 are mostly treated in urology and gynaecology departments or by surgeons, and 76.0-81.1% of F52 cases in urology. In-patients with paraphilic disorders (F65) or psychological and behavioral disorders associated with sexual development and orientation (F66) are rarely but almost exclusively treated in psychiatric or psychotherapeutic departments. DISCUSSION: The data indicate that most in-patient hospital treatment for primary diagnoses of sexual disorders are somatic treatments for erectile dysfunction (F52.2) and transsexualism (F64.0). Owing to a steady increase in cases with F64.0 diagnoses, a growth in demand for competence in sexual medicine can be noted, especially in the surgical disciplines. Causes of the distribution and the increase in in-patient numbers are discussed. Further research is required, particularly concerning the treatment of in-patients with F52 and F64 secondary diagnoses.