Abstract
The Committee for Examinations (CFE) have recently advised that
as from 2016, DSM-5 will be used across all summative assessments (Psychotherapy Written Case, Written Examinations and OSCE). The CFE also supported the use of the ICD classificatory system ...
We are concerned that this effectively mandates the use of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5 (DSM 5) in clinical work, postgraduate teaching and examinations, with only a sop to International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10).
Given the extent of criticism of the 947 page DSM 5 by eminent psychiatrists in terms of its classificatory approach (Frances, 2014; Krueger and Eaton, 2015), of specific sections (Malhi and Berk, 2015), of the needs of the world’s clinicians (Reed et al., 2011) and of psychiatric research (Insel, 2014), this is surprising. Furthermore, both the Australian and New Zealand governments are committed to recording and reporting health data in terms of ICD-10.
What is to be gained from early adoption of a contentious classification designed primarily to serve the needs of US psychiatrists? Are we still hung up on an ‘All the way with LBJ’ philosophy? Or could we adopt an international perspective and use ICD-10 until some nations and/or the WHO change their diagnostic recording requirements?
Presumably the College is committed to evidence based practice and training psychiatrists to be work-ready – expert in the classification system expected by our two governments? We suggest the CFE reconsider their decision.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.