Historique
Article de Périodique
From DSM-IV to DSM-5 alcohol use disorder: An overview of epidemiological data (2015)
Auteur(s) :
BARTOLI, F. ;
CARRA, G. ;
CROCAMO, C. ;
CLERICI, M.
Année
2015
Page(s) :
46-50
Sous-type de document :
Revue de la littérature / Literature review
Langue(s) :
Anglais
Domaine :
Alcool / Alcohol
Discipline :
PRO (Produits, mode d'action, méthode de dépistage / Substances, action mode, screening methods)
Résumé :
Introduction: The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) has made several changes to criteria for alcohol use disorder (AUD). The objective of this systematic review is to assess if new DSM-5 diagnostic criteria will increase the prevalence rates of AUD in clinical and non-clinical samples as compared with DSM-IV criteria.
Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and PsycINFO (via ProQuest) electronic databases, with no language restrictions. We included studies with data available on both DSM-IV (and DSM-IV-TR) and DSM-5 AUD in samples of adults, estimating from each study an expected increase in prevalence rates with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results: Twelve studies were included in this review. Seven studies showed an increase, two no substantial difference, and three a decrease in AUD prevalence according to DSM-5 diagnostic criteria, with differences in rates (95% CIs) varying between -12.4% (-27.4 to +5.6%) and +61.3% (+46.7 to +77.3%). Additional analyses provided confirmatory results.
Conclusions: DSM-5 diagnostic criteria seem to inflate prevalence rates of AUD as compared with DSM-IV. The increasing likelihood of a DSM-5 AUD diagnosis may be explained by the amount of DSM-IV ‘diagnostic orphans’ which are more prevalent than DSM-IV single-criterion alcohol abuse individuals. Further research should be aimed to study if similar trends are detectable also for other substance use disorders that experienced similar changes in DSM-5 diagnostic criteria.
Highlights:
We assessed the epidemiological impact of DSM-5 criteria for AUD.
We reviewed available studies with data on both DSM-IV and DSM-5 AUD.
DSM-5 may imply an increase in prevalence rates of AUD.
Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and PsycINFO (via ProQuest) electronic databases, with no language restrictions. We included studies with data available on both DSM-IV (and DSM-IV-TR) and DSM-5 AUD in samples of adults, estimating from each study an expected increase in prevalence rates with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results: Twelve studies were included in this review. Seven studies showed an increase, two no substantial difference, and three a decrease in AUD prevalence according to DSM-5 diagnostic criteria, with differences in rates (95% CIs) varying between -12.4% (-27.4 to +5.6%) and +61.3% (+46.7 to +77.3%). Additional analyses provided confirmatory results.
Conclusions: DSM-5 diagnostic criteria seem to inflate prevalence rates of AUD as compared with DSM-IV. The increasing likelihood of a DSM-5 AUD diagnosis may be explained by the amount of DSM-IV ‘diagnostic orphans’ which are more prevalent than DSM-IV single-criterion alcohol abuse individuals. Further research should be aimed to study if similar trends are detectable also for other substance use disorders that experienced similar changes in DSM-5 diagnostic criteria.
Highlights:
We assessed the epidemiological impact of DSM-5 criteria for AUD.
We reviewed available studies with data on both DSM-IV and DSM-5 AUD.
DSM-5 may imply an increase in prevalence rates of AUD.
Affiliation :
Division of Psychiatry, Faculty of Brain Sciences, University College London, London, UK