Objective:A nationwide multi-center and large sample survey was conducted to compare the validity of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (Hypo-) Manic Episode with Mixed Features-DSM-5 Module (MINI-M) questionnaire and the Clinically Useful Depression Outcome Scale Supplemented with Questions for the DSM-5 Mixed Features Specifier (CUDOS-M) depression subscale in identifying mixed features in patients experiencing (hypo-) manic episodes.Methods:Using a convenience sampling method, 366 patients with bipolar disorder experiencing acute (hypo-) manic episodes who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were recruited. The diagnosis of "with mixed features" was based on the DSM-5 criteria for mixed features. The predictive validity of the MINI-M questionnaire and the CUDOS-M depression subscale to screen mixed features was analyzed using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Additionally, the difference in area under the ROC curve (AUC) between the two instruments was compared.Results:The AUC for the MINI-M questionnaire and the CUDOS-M depression subscale in screening mixed features were 0.79 (95 %CI=0.75-0.84) and 0.81 (95 %CI=0.77-0.86), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in AUC between the two measurements ( Z=-1.19, P>0.05). Among patients with acute (hypo-) manic episodes, 45.9% (168/366) presented with mixed features according to the DSM-5 criteria, while the corresponding figures were 43.7% (160/366) using the MINI-M questionnaire (total score≥3) and 42.1% (154/366) using the CUDOS-M depression subscale (total score≥20). Screening results were comparable among the three measures. Conclusion:Mixed features are common among patients experiencing acute (hypo-) manic episodes. The MINI-M questionnaire and the CUDOS-M depression subscale demonstrate equivalent validity in identifying mixed features.

Objective:A nationwide multi-center and large sample survey was conducted to compare the validity of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (Hypo-) Manic Episode with Mixed Features-DSM-5 Module (MINI-M) questionnaire and the Clinically Useful Depression Outcome Scale Supplemented with Questions for the DSM-5 Mixed Features Specifier (CUDOS-M) depression subscale in identifying mixed features in patients experiencing (hypo-) manic episodes.Methods:Using a convenience sampling method, 366 patients with bipolar disorder experiencing acute (hypo-) manic episodes who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were recruited. The diagnosis of "with mixed features" was based on the DSM-5 criteria for mixed features. The predictive validity of the MINI-M questionnaire and the CUDOS-M depression subscale to screen mixed features was analyzed using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Additionally, the difference in area under the ROC curve (AUC) between the two instruments was compared.Results:The AUC for the MINI-M questionnaire and the CUDOS-M depression subscale in screening mixed features were 0.79 (95 %CI=0.75-0.84) and 0.81 (95 %CI=0.77-0.86), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in AUC between the two measurements ( Z=-1.19, P>0.05). Among patients with acute (hypo-) manic episodes, 45.9% (168/366) presented with mixed features according to the DSM-5 criteria, while the corresponding figures were 43.7% (160/366) using the MINI-M questionnaire (total score≥3) and 42.1% (154/366) using the CUDOS-M depression subscale (total score≥20). Screening results were comparable among the three measures. Conclusion:Mixed features are common among patients experiencing acute (hypo-) manic episodes. The MINI-M questionnaire and the CUDOS-M depression subscale demonstrate equivalent validity in identifying mixed features.

Objective:This study investigates the difference in the detection rate and symptomatology between ICD-10 and DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for bipolar disorder with mixed states.Methods:Based on the Phase Ⅰ (2012) and Phase Ⅱ (2021) databases of National Bipolar Mania Pathway Survey (BIPAS), patients with bipolar disorder were included. General demographic data, clinical characteristics, symptomatic phenotypes, and mixed characteristics were retrieved. The detection rates and symptomatic performances of patients with or without mixed states in Phase Ⅰ and Ⅱ were compared using the chi-square test.Results:For patients with mixed states, the detection rate during Phase Ⅱ (2021) using DSM-5 (18.79%, 199/1 059) criteria was significantly higher than that during Phase Ⅰ (2012) using ICD-10 (6.78%, 199/2 934; χ 2=125.05, P<0.001). Whether using ICD-10 or DSM-5 criteria, patients with mixed states had a significantly higher frequency of multiple symptomatic manifestations. Conclusion:The DSM-5 diagnostic criteria generate a high detection rate for bipolar disorder with mixed states. The clinical phenotypes of bipolar disorder with mixed states vary significantly using different diagnostic tools.

Objective:This study investigates the difference in the detection rate and symptomatology between ICD-10 and DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for bipolar disorder with mixed states.Methods:Based on the Phase Ⅰ (2012) and Phase Ⅱ (2021) databases of National Bipolar Mania Pathway Survey (BIPAS), patients with bipolar disorder were included. General demographic data, clinical characteristics, symptomatic phenotypes, and mixed characteristics were retrieved. The detection rates and symptomatic performances of patients with or without mixed states in Phase Ⅰ and Ⅱ were compared using the chi-square test.Results:For patients with mixed states, the detection rate during Phase Ⅱ (2021) using DSM-5 (18.79%, 199/1 059) criteria was significantly higher than that during Phase Ⅰ (2012) using ICD-10 (6.78%, 199/2 934; χ 2=125.05, P<0.001). Whether using ICD-10 or DSM-5 criteria, patients with mixed states had a significantly higher frequency of multiple symptomatic manifestations. Conclusion:The DSM-5 diagnostic criteria generate a high detection rate for bipolar disorder with mixed states. The clinical phenotypes of bipolar disorder with mixed states vary significantly using different diagnostic tools.

This paper describes the design process and implementation process of electronic film system. The establishment of electronic film system allowed us to aggressively reduce film use and costs and to demonstrate a positive return.
Medical Records Systems, Computerized ; Radiology Information Systems ; instrumentation ; X-Ray Film

It's a effective way to promote the quality of the laboratory in hospital by passing the ISO15189.This paper introduces the changes made in rebuilding the LIS according to the certified documents of the ISO15189.
Accreditation ; Hospital Information Systems ; organization & administration ; Laboratories, Hospital ; organization & administration ; Quality Control

Objective: To explore Five-Factor Model personality traits of OCD patients who also diagnosed with personality disorders. Methods:SCID-I/P was administrated to diagnose OCD patients. PDQ+4 and PDI-IV were then administrated to 44 OCD subjects to determine whether they also suffered from personality disorders. FFM (five factor model of personality) of the subjects were measured with NEO-PI-R.Results: 32 of 44 (72%) OCD patients also met DSM-IV-TR criteria for personality disorder. Subjects with PDs demonstrated high Neuroticism (67.9?7.7), low Extraversion (39.0?10.2), low Agreeableness (42.6?7.7), low Conscientiousness (39.3?12.4), and normal Openness to Experience (45.9?8.8). Subjects without PDs, however, scored normally except for low Openness to Experiences (38.3?13.4).Conclusion: Deviant FFM characters of OCD patients with PDs suggesting that they often experience neglect emotion, introversion, and interpersonal confliction. Low openness to experiences of subjects without PDs indicates that they lack of curiosity, have relatively narrow interest and conservative ideas.