ObjectivesTo explore the using status of psychological assessment instruments including checklists, questionnaires and scales after earthquake, so as to provide baseline data for establishing a standard method and process in developing earthquake-related population psychological screening and assessment instruments in future. MethodsWe searched WanFang Data, CNKI, VIP, PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library and CiNii databases, as well as special websites about earthquake and disaster management from inception to July 30th, 2014 to collect studies evaluating the population psychological health conditions with assessment instruments after earthquakes. The earthquake countries/regions, the main assessment institutions, the time of assessment, the objects of assessment, and the instruments used were analyzed. ResultsA total of 794 studies were included, of which 87.4% were from mainland China, and 78.0% were related to the Wenchuan earthquake. Most of assessments were conducted by universities (47.9%) and hospitals (46.9%) in Sichuan, Beijing and Guangdong provinces of China. The psychological assessments conducted in the first year after quake were found in 537 studies (67.6%), of which 244 studies (45.4%) reported the psychological assessments results in the first month after quake. The top five assessment objects were children/teenagers, survivors, wounded, military rescuers, and medical staff. In the 794 included studies, a total of 217 instruments were used. In the 244 studies reported the assessment results in the first month after quake, a total of 73 instruments were used. 122 of the 244 studies reported only one instrument was used, and the other 122 of the 244 studies reported two or more instruments were used. Most of the instruments were translation versions and developed for mental disorders. The top 5 instruments were Symptom Checklist 90, Self-Rating Depression Scale, Self-Rating Anxiety Scale, PTSD Checklist-Civilian Version and Impact of Event Scale Revised, respectively. ConclusionAll the psychological assessment instruments are not developed for assessing earthquake-related psychological health problem, so a simple, economic, feasible and specialized instrument for earthquake-related population should be developed. It's needed to organize professionals to design a local guideline and training material for earthquake survivors and rescuers, and to establish a standardized, sustainable normal training base and trainer's team, so as to standardize the psychological aid work.
Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness, safety, applicability and economy of psychological assessment instruments including checklists, questionnaires and scales used in population exposed to earthquake. MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, VIP, WanFang Data, and CiNii databases, as well as special websites about earthquake and disaster management from inception to July 30th, 2014 to collect studies related to psychological assessment of population exposed to earthquake in the first month after quake. A descriptive analysis was conducted to analyze the positive detection rate of psychological problems, rate of informed consent, and effective response rate in population exposed to earthquake, as well as the cost of psychological assessment. ResultsA total of 67 studies were included which involved 4 instruments including Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90), Self-Reporting Questionnaire-20 (SRQ-20), Chinese Psychosomatic Health Scale-134 (CPSHS-134) and 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). SCL-90 was the most commonly used scale. Forty-five studies reported the positive detection rate of psychological problems in population exposed to earthquake. The positive detection rates by using SCL-90, GHQ-12 and SRQ-20 were 8.6% to 77.8%, 65.6% to 89.9% and 65.6% to 89.9%, respectively. Informed consent was reported in 27 studies, and effective response rate was reported in 20 studies with the highest one 99.56% for CPSHS-134. No study reported the cost of psychological assessment. ConclusionSCL-90, RQ-20, CPSHS-134 and GHQ-12 are mainly used instruments for assessing psychological problems in population exposed to earthquake in the first month after quake. The reporting of important information related to effectiveness, safety, applicability and economy of psychological assessment instruments is insufficient and not standardized. A concise and authoritative psychological assessment instrument for population exposed to earthquake is warranted.