Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T17:33:24.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The split version of Global Assessment of Functioning scale – application and utility in remitted psychotic patients

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2020

S. Andric ,
M. Mihaljevic ,
T. Mirjanic  and
N. Maric
S. Andric
Affiliation:
University of Belgrade, Faculty of Medicine, Dpt. for Research and Early Interventions in Psychiatry, Belgrade, Serbia
M. Mihaljevic
Affiliation:
Clinic for Psychiatry, Clinical Centre of Serbia, Research and Early Interventions in Psychiatry, Belgrade, Serbia
T. Mirjanic
Affiliation:
Special hospital for Psychiatric disorders Kovin, Psychosis, Kovin, Serbia
N. Maric
Affiliation:
Clinic for Psychiatry Clinical Center of Serbia, Research and Early Interventions in Psychiatry, Belgrade, Serbia

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

Current knowledge about the advantages of using split version of GAF scale – having separate Symptom (GAF-S) and Functioning (GAF-F) subscales is insufficient and has number of gaps. Present study analyzed the manner in which young adult remitted psychotic patients with different functional levels vary in their symptom severity and how GAF-F reflects presence/absence of well-known psychosis risk factors.

Methods

Sample comprised 37 remitted psychotic patients (56.8% male, 29.4 ± 6.1 years), categorized based on GAF-F scores into groups: ‘Moderate remission’ (GAF-F 41–60, n = 19) and “Good remission” (GAF-F > 61, n = 18). Participants were assessed using the GAF-S, WAIS-R, Nottingham Onset Schedule, Premorbid Adjustment and Brief Core Schema scales, childhood trauma and bullying questionnaires. Mann–Whitney and Student's t-tests were used to assess between-group differences.

Results

Groups did not differ in age, sex and education. When compared to “Good remission” group, “Moderate remission” group exhibited earlier illness’ onset (P = 0.01), greater symptom severity (P = 0.00), negative self-evaluation (P = 0.02), more childhood physical abuse (P = 0.01) and bullying (P = 0.01). Moreover, trend-like significances (P = 0.08) were observed for poorer adolescence adjustment and negative evaluation of others. There were no between-group differences regarding IQ and duration of untreated/treated illness.

Conclusions

GAF scale is in the continual use since early 1990, however, evidence of further development of the instrument itself is sparse. Present research is demonstrating that GAF-F scores reflect diverse factors related to psychosis risk, the illness’ course and quality of remission. Moreover, the results contribute to surmount some of the gaps in knowledge about the split version of GAF scale.

Disclosure of interest

The authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.

Type
e-Poster walk: Schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders–part 1
Information
European Psychiatry , Volume 41 , Issue S1: Abstract of the 25th European Congress of Psychiatry , April 2017 , pp. S185
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2017
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.