New category proposal for DSM-5: “Simple Somatic Symptom Disorder”

New category proposal for DSM-5: “Simple Somatic Symptom Disorder”

Shortlink: http://wp.me/p5foE-3gz

The most recent proposals of the DSM-5 “Somatic Symptoms Disorders” Work Group plus two key Disorder Description and Rationale PDF documents can be read on the APA’s DSM-5 Development site here:

http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/SomatoformDisorders.aspx

The two key Somatic Symptoms Disorders Work Group Draft Proposal documents:

  Descriptions document version 1/14/11  Revised Disorder Descriptions: Version 1/14/11

    Revised Justification of Criteria Version 1/31/11

On 16 January, I reported on my Dx RevisionWatch site that the page for current DSM-5 proposals for the revision of the DSM-IV categories and diagnostic criteria for “Somatoform Disorders” had been updated on 14 January, with a new category proposal calledSimple Somatic Symptom Disorder”.

This proposal is in addition to the recommendations of the Somatic Symptom Disorders Work Group, published in February 2010, for grouping a number of existing Somatoform categories under a common rubric “Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder (CSSD)” and does not replace “CSSD”.

For full details see Dx Revision Watch Post #56: http://wp.me/pKrrB-St

[Information superceded by second and third DSM-5 draft.]

Update @ 7 February 2011

The Justification of Criteria document has now been revised by the SSD Work Group to incorporate the new proposal for SSSD and some further revisions, and is replaced by a document designated DRAFT 1/31/11.

I shall be monitoring the DSM-5 Development website and if there are any further revisions to either document before the DSM-5 beta is published I will update this site.

Two key Somatic Symptoms Disorders Work Group Draft Proposal documents:

    Revised Justification of Criteria Version 1/31/11

  Descriptions document version 1/14/11 Revised Disorder Descriptions: Version 1/14/11

According to the APA’s DSM-5 Development Timeline, beta draft proposals are scheduled to be published by the DSM-5 Task Force in May-June, with a public review period of only around a month. The public review and comment period for the first draft, last year, had been around ten weeks.

The following patient organisations have been alerted to these revisions and sent copies of the key documents:

UK patient organisations:

Heather Walker, Action for M.E.
Neil Riley, Chair, Board of Trustees, ME Association
25% ME Group
Invest in ME
Jane Colby, The Young ME Sufferers Trust

US patient organisations and professionals:

Dr Alan Gurwitt, Massachusetts Chronic Fatigue and Immune Dysfunction Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalopathy and Fibromyalgia Association (Mass. CFIDS/ME & FM)
Dr Kenneth Friedman, IACFS/ME
Jennie Spotila, CFIDS Association of America
Dr Lenny Jason

International patient organisations and professionals:

ESME (European Society for ME)
Dr Eleanor Stein, Canada

Changes to ME agenda WordPress site

Changes to ME agenda WordPress site

Shortlink: http://wp.me/p5foE-3bP

Yesterday, I posted a House of Lords Written Question that has been tabled by the Countess of Mar, on 21 October, in which questions are raised about the ethical approval of the Dr Esther Crawley led Lightning Process pilot study in children. A Written Answer is expected on 4 November and I shall publish that answer here.

There have also been some developments with the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) which I am not involved in, myself, but I will report on those developments as more information becomes available.

I maintain several WordPress sites and I shall continue to post alerts on this site to new material published on my Dx Revision Watch site – the concept for which developed out of research and awareness raising undertaken throughout 2009 around the forthcoming revisions of two important international disease classification systems: the (APA) American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) and the World Health Organization International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD).

Other than that, I do not intend to post further material on ME agenda site.

I don’t like the nonsense that passes for rational discourse so often in our society. I am very much bothered by the inaccuracies, ambiguities, code words, slogans, catch phrases, public relation devices, sweeping generalizations, and stereotypes, which are used (consciously or otherwise) to influence people.

I am bothered by the inability of many to recognize these for what they are. I am bothered by the way people fudge issues, or are unable to clarify them, sometimes because they are inhibited by “collegiality” and other forms of intimidation (sometimes subtle, sometimes not). Most people put up with the nonsense without doing anything about it (unable or unwilling, for whatever reason – inertia, lack, of energy, lack of interest, lack of time, etc.), often falling into cynicism and despair.

I am bothered by the misinformation which gets disseminated uncritically through the media and by the obstructions which prevent correct information from being disseminated. These obstructions come about in many ways – personal, institutional, through self-imposed inhibitions, through external inhibitions, through outright dishonesty, through incompetence – the list is a long one.

I am bothered by the way misinformation, disguised as scholarship, is used in social, political, and educational contexts to affect policy decisions.

I am bothered by the way misinformation is accepted uncritically, and by the way people are unable to recognize it or reject it.

              Serge Lang The File: Case Study in Correction 1977-1979 (1981)

Summary: ICD-11 Alpha Draft and iCAT (PVFS, ME and CFS)

Summary: ICD-11 Alpha Draft and iCAT (PVFS, ME and CFS)

Shortlink: http://wp.me/p5foE-2Ur

Compiled by Suzy Chapman Dx Revision Watch

May be republished if published in full, unedited and with source acknowledged. 

A version of this report was published on Co-Cure on 11 June 2010.

The information in this summary relates to proposals for ICD-11. It does not apply to ICD-10-CM, the forthcoming US “Clinical Modification” of ICD-10, scheduled for implementation in October 2013.

This report provides a summary of the material published on Dx Revision Watch site on 7 June that included screenshots from the iCAT, the wiki-like collaborative authoring platform through which ICD-11 is being drafted.

 

To view proposals as they currently stand, see the 12 screenshots here:

PVFS, ME, CFS: the ICD-11 Alpha Draft and iCAT Collaborative Authoring Platform, 7 June 2010, Post # 46: http://wp.me/pKrrB-KK

 

Presentation of an alpha draft to the WHA:

A hard copy “snapshot” of the ICD-11 alpha draft, as it stood at that point, was presented by WHO at the 63rd World Health Assembly meeting, between 17 and 25 May.

According to page 38 of the document “ICD-11 Revision Project Plan”:

“WHO will consider endorsement of the alpha draft, after all concerns of RSG and the Classification TAGs have been duly taken into account. The alpha draft is a frozen state of development of the ICD-11 that will include a large part of the structural changes, and the majority of the definitions. The Alpha draft will be produced in a traditional print and electronic format. The Alpha Draft will also include a Volume 2 containing the traditional sections and including a section about the new features of ICD-11 in line with the style guide. An index for print will be available in format of sample pages. A fully searchable electronic index using some of the ontological features will demonstrate the power of the new ICD” [1].

The date by which WHO anticipates this stage should be reached is unconfirmed.

Caveat

For better understanding, it is important that the brief iCAT Glossary page is read in conjunction with the iCAT screenshots, especially the Glossary entries for ICD-10 Code, ICD Title, Definition, and for the Terms: Synonyms, Inclusions and Exclusions [2].

Read the iCAT Glossary here:
http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icatfiles/iCAT_Glossary.html

Secondly, it needs to be understood that the alpha draft is a “work in progress”. Not all content will have been compiled yet and entered into the iCAT and there are many blank fields awaiting population for all chapters and all categories. It also needs to be understood that some text already entered into the various “Details” fields may still be in the process of internal review.

Summary

In ICD-10, there is no textual content for the three terms “Postviral fatigue syndrome”, “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” and “Chronic fatigue syndrome” .

There are no definitions and the relationship between the three terms is not specified.

In ICD-11, categories will be defined through the use of multiple parameters: Title & Definition, Terms: Synonyms, Inclusions, Exclusions, Clinical Description, Signs and Symptoms, Diagnostic Criteria and so on, according to a common “Content Model” [3].

The level of detail currently visible in the iCAT isn’t sufficiently specific to enable me to present an unequivocal overview of current proposals for potential changes to hierarchy or for the specification of the relationships between the three terms of interest to us.

Based only on the information visible in the iCAT as it stood at 11 June 2010, it appears that instead of:

ICD-10: Volume 1: The Tabular List (version for 2007)

http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/?gg90.htm+g933

Chapter VI (6)

Diseases of the nervous system
(G00-G99)

[…]

Other disorders of the nervous system
(G90-99)

[…]

G93 Other disorders of brain

[…]

G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome
Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis

(with Chronic fatigue syndrome indexed to G93.3 in ICD-10: Volume 3: The Alphabetical Index)

what appears to be being proposed at this point for ICD-11 is that:

The classifications coded between G83.9 thru G99.8 in ICD-10 Chapter VI: Diseases of the nervous system, are being reorganised.

For ICD-11, Chapter 6, codings beyond G83.9 are represented by new parent classes numbered GA thru to GN;

example:

Chapter 6 VI Disorders of the nervous system

[…]
G80-G83 Cerebral palsy and other paralytic syndromes
GA Infections of the nervous system
GB Movement disorders and degenerative disorders
GC Dementias
GD Epilepsy and seizures
[…]
GN Other disorders of the nervous system

“GN Other disorders of the nervous system” is parent to five child classes which have been assigned the “Sorting labels” Gj90-Gj94.

(A Sorting label is a string that can be used to sort the children of a category. This is not the ICD code.)

Four of these five Gj9x classes have a complex hierarchy of child and grandchildren classes.

At Gj92, sits “Chronic fatigue syndrome”

“Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome” has no child classes of its own.

Next to “Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome” is an icon for “Category Notes and Discussions”.

There is one Category Note for Gj92 which records:

“[Reason for change]: Change in hierarchy for class: G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome. Parents added: (Gj90-Gj99 Other disorders of the nervous system). Parents removed: (G93 Other disorders of brain). New hierarchy”

(Note that the removal of the parent category “G93 Other disorders of brain” will affect a large number of categories classified under G93 in ICD-10, not just those at G93.3.)

In the iCAT production server, click on “Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome” and “Details for Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome” will display on the right of your screen (it may take a few seconds for the text to load). Or you can view the screenshots on my site: http://wp.me/pKrrB-KK

“Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome” is an ICD Title term with a Details page, a Definition and an Inclusions term (but with no Synonyms, Exclusions or other fields yet populated).

“Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” is listed under Inclusions (the relationship is not currently specified, eg “Synonym” or “Subclass” or whatever).

Extract: iCAT Glossary

http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icatfiles/iCAT_Glossary.html#inclusions

“Inclusion terms appear in the tabular list of the traditional print version and show users that entities are included in the relevant concept. All of the ICD-10 inclusion terms have been imported and accessible in the iCat. These are either synonyms of the category titles or subclasses which are not represented in the classification hierarchy. Since we have synonyms as a separate entity in our ICD-11 content model, the new synonyms suggested by the users should go into the synonyms section. In the future, iCat will provide a mechanism to identify whether an inclusion is a synonym or a subclass.”

————-

In the iCAT ICD Categories list, there is no Gj9x Sorting label listing for “Postviral fatigue syndrome” or “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” under “GN Other disorders of the nervous system” or under any other parent or child class, and consequently no Category Details display for either term.

(Whether this is because Inclusion terms would appear in the tabular list version but not in the iCAT version or whether this is because of proposed changes to the hierarchy and/or relationship between the three terms, cannot be determined from the information as it stands at 11 June.)

“Postviral fatigue syndrome” is not currently specified under Inclusions in “Details for Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome”.

Again, whether this is because “Postviral fatigue syndrome” would be accounted for in the tabular list version or whether this is because it may be being proposed that the term “Postviral fatigue syndrome” (which has lost its parent class “G93 Other disorders of brain”) should be subsumed into “Chronic fatigue syndrome”, with “Chronic fatigue syndrome” as the new ICD category Title, cannot be determined from the information as it currently stands.

Exclusions

If you pull up the iCAT Details for ICD-11 Chapter 5: F48.0 Neurasthenia (or view the screenshots on my site)

“postviral fatigue syndrome” is listed under Exclusions to Neurasthenia and is referenced thus:

“postviral fatigue syndrome”    G93.3 -> Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome

In iCAT Chapter 18: R53 Malaise and Fatigue

“fatigue syndrome postviral” [sic] is also listed under Exclusions, referenced

G93.3 -> Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome
 

But that in the absence of further information, it is currently unclear what the proposed hierarchical status of Postviral fatigue syndrome will be in relation to Chronic fatigue syndrome.

————-

When you click on the Category Notes icons for some other categories, the Notes are often more explicit, for example, the Category Note for:

GN Other disorders of the nervous system

> Gj90 Disorders of CSF pressure and flow
         > Gj90.0 Increased intracranial pressure disorders

Reads: [Reason for change]: Create class with name: Increased intracranial pressure disorders, parents: Disorders of CSF Pressure and Flow

replaces G93.5, G93.6, and G93.7

The Category Note for “Gj90 Disorders of CSF pressure and flow” records that this class has been created to replace:

G91, G92, G93.0, G93.2, G94.0, G94.1, G94.2, G96.0, G97.0, G97.1, G97.2

(which also gives an idea of the extent to which the structure of ICD-10 classifications between G90 – G99.8 is being reorganised.)

In the absence of an Alpha Draft, I shall be contacting the chair of the Topic Advisory Group for Neurology for further clarification.

**************************************************

So what can be said is that currently in the iCAT for ICD-11 drafting:

That under Chapter 6 (Neurology):

The parent class “G93 Other disorders of brain” is removed.

“Chronic fatigue syndrome” displays as a Title term in the Categories list.

It is a child to parent class “GN Other disorders of the nervous system”.

It has been assigned the “Sorting label” Gj92.

“Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome” has a Definition field populated.

It has an External Definitions field populated which includes definitions imported from other classification systems, the text of which includes “Also known as myalgic encephalomyelitis”.

It has “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” specified under Inclusions.

It has no Synonyms, Exclusions or other descriptor fields populated yet.

That at this point and as far as the iCAT version is concerned, neither “Postviral fatigue syndrome” nor “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” have been listed as ICD Title terms under the parent class “GN Other disorders of the nervous system” or under any other class.

That at this point and as far as the iCAT version is concerned, there is no accounting for “Postviral fatigue syndrome”, other than that “Postviral fatigue syndrome” is specified under Exclusions to Chapter 5 F48.0 Neurasthenia and to Chapter 18 R53 Malaise and fatigue and is referenced as

“postviral fatigue syndrome” G93.3 -> Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome

**************************************************

So please read the iCAT Glossary of Terms page, have a look at the screenshots and then have a poke around in the iCAT – you can’t break anything as members of the public have no editing rights [4].

I shall continue to monitor the iCAT production server closely and report on any changes to proposals for Category listings and on the progress of the population of content. (There has been no change since this report was compiled.)

And if you were thinking of getting a G93.3 tattoo done – well it might be best to hang on for a bit…

References:

[1] ICD-11 Revision Project Plan – Draft 2.0 (v March 10)
Describes the ICD revision process as an overall project plan in terms of goals, key streams of work, activities, products, and key participants:
http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/ICDRevisionProjectPlan_March2010.pdf

[2] iCAT Glossary
http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icatfiles/iCAT_Glossary.html

[3] Content Model Specifications and User Guide (v April 10)
Identifies the basic properties needed to define any ICD concept (unit, entity or category) through the use of multiple parameters:
http://tinyurl.com/ICD11ContentModelApril10

[4] iCAT production server and Demo and Training iCAT Platform:
https://sites.google.com/site/icd11revision/home/icat
iCAT production server: http://icat.stanford.edu/
Demo and Training iCAT Platform: http://icatdemo.stanford.edu /

Compiled by Suzy Chapman
http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com
https://meagenda.wordpress.com

US “Clinical Modification” ICD-10-CM: Clarification

US “Clinical Modification” ICD-10-CM: Clarification

Shortlink: http://wp.me/p5foE-2Ul

This post is intended to clarify any confusion between ICD-10, ICD-11 and the forthcoming US Clinical Modification of ICD-10 which will be known as ICD-10-CM.

The WHO published ICD-10 in 1992. The current version of ICD-10 (Version for 2007) is used in the UK and in many countries throughout the world.

ICD-10 is under revision and the development of the structure and content of ICD-11 has been underway since 2007. ICD-11 is scheduled for completion in 2014.

 

Clinical Modifications

Several countries are permitted to publish adaptations of the ICD called “Clinical Modifications” (sometimes known as “national modifications”).

Countries using Clinical Modifications of ICD-10 include Canada (ICD-10-CA), Australia (ICD-10-AM) and Germany (ICD-10-GM).

The United States currently uses an adaptation of the WHO’s now retired ICD-9, called ICD-9-CM, and has been slow to move onto ICD-10.

Rather than skip ICD-10 and move straight onto ICD-11 in 2014+, the US has been developing a modification of ICD 10 called ICD-10-CM which will replace ICD-9-CM.

ICD-10-CM is due for implementation in October 2013.

According to one report, the US should not expect to move on to ICD-11 (or a modification of ICD-11) until well after 2020, assuming that the ICD-11 Beta is published around the 2014-2015 projection:

Why move to ICD-10, if ICD-11 is on the horizon?
http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/why-move-icd-10-if-icd-11-horizon

 

What are the proposed classifications and codings for PVFS, (Benign) ME and Chronic fatigue syndrome for ICD-10-CM?

In March 2001, the document:

“A Summary of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Its Classification in the International Classification of Diseases Prepared by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, Office of the Center Director, Data Policy and Standards”

provided a concise “summary of the classification of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), ninth and tenth revisions, and their clinical modifications.”

That document is archived here: http://www.co-cure.org/ICD_code.pdf

In 2001, the proposal had been:

“In keeping with the placement in the ICD-10, chronic fatigue syndrome (and its synonymous terms) will remain at G93.3 in ICD-10-CM.”

So at that point, it was being proposed for the forthcoming US ICD-10-CM that PVFS, (Benign) ME and Chronic fatigue syndrome would be coded at G93.3, which would have placed all three terms in Chapter VI: Diseases of the nervous system (the Neurological chapter).

But the current proposals for ICD-10-CM propose classifying Chronic fatigue syndrome in Chapter 18, under R53 Malaise and fatigue, at R53.82.

The “R” codes are classified under

CHAPTER 18 (XVIII)
Symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings, not elsewhere classified (R00-R99)

This chapter includes symptoms, signs, abnormal results of clinical or other investigative procedures, and ill defined conditions regarding which no diagnosis classifiable elsewhere is recorded…

Note: this is not the ICD-10-CM Mental and Behavioural chapter, which is:

CHAPTER 5 (V)
Mental and behavioral disorders (F01-F99)
Includes: disorders of psychological development
Excludes2: symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical laboratory findings, not elsewhere classified (R00-R99)

which specifically excludes the R00-R99 codes.

So the current proposal for ICD-10-CM separates CFS and Postviral fatigue syndrome into mutually exclusive categories:

“Chronic fatigue, unspecified” and “Chronic fatigue syndrome not otherwise specified” appear in Chapter 18, under R53 Malaise and fatigue, at R53.82.

Whilst “Postviral fatigue syndrome” and “benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” appear in Chapter 6, under G93 Other disorders of brain, at G93.3.

At some point before October 2013, ICD-10-CM revision will be “frozen” for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and insurance companies to prepare for the October 1, 2013 implementation.

See Tom Sullivan at ICD10 Watch.com (no connection with my site) here:

CMS, CDC call for ICD-9 and ICD-10 code freeze
http://icd10watch.com/headline/cms-cdc-call-icd-9-and-icd-10-code-freeze

“CMS, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, along with CDC, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, proposed that both ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM/PCS code sets be frozen two years before the compliance deadline.

“What that means: As of October 1, 2011, only limited updates would be instituted into the code sets so that providers, payers, clearinghouses, and health IT vendors, will not have to simultaneously keep pace with code updates while also reconfiguring their existing systems for ICD-10-CM/PCS.” ICD10 Watch.com

During the last ten minutes of the CFSAC meeting on Monday, 10 May, Dr Lenny Jason raised his concerns with the committee that the placement of CFS in ICD-10-CM in the Chapter 18 “R” codes could be problematic.

Videocast of full CFSAC meeting here:
http://videocast.nih.gov/Summary.asp?File=15884

In August 2005, CFSAC had submitted the following recommendation to the Secretary:

http://www.hhs.gov/advcomcfs/recommendations/082005.html

“Recommendation 10: We would encourage the classification of CFS as a ‘Nervous System Disease,’ as worded in the ICD-10 G93.3.”

I suggest that US advocates with concerns about current proposals for the placement of CFS within ICD-10-CM keep a close eye on decisions about the date by which ICD-10-CM is to be frozen.

For the most recent ICD-10-CM proposals see:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd10cm.htm

The 2010 update of ICD-10-CM is now available and replaces the July 2009 version.

The file for the Tabular List is in a Zipped file which is not that easy to locate on the site. A non Zipped PDF can be downloaded from this site:

http://www.cms.gov/ICD10/12_2010_ICD_10_CM.asp#TopOfPage
http://www.cms.gov/ICD10/Downloads/6_I10tab2010.pdf

or open the PDF on my Dx Revision Watch site, here
http://dxrevisionwatch.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/i10tab2010.pdf

ICD-10-CM CHAPTER 18

Tabular List of Diseases and Injuries Page 1165 (Update for 2010)

R53 Malaise and fatigue

[…]

R53.8 Other malaise and fatigue

Excludes1: combat exhaustion and fatigue (F43.0)
congenital debility (P96.9)
exhaustion and fatigue due to:
depressive episode (F32.-)
excessive exertion (T73.3)
exposure (T73.2)
heat (T67.-)
pregnancy (O26.8-)
recurrent depressive episode (F33)
senile debility (R54)

R53.81 Other malaise

Chronic debility
Debility NOS
General physical deterioration
Malaise NOS
Nervous debility
Excludes1: age-related physical debility (R54)

R53.82 Chronic fatigue, unspecified

Chronic fatigue syndrome NOS
Excludes1: postviral fatigue syndrome (G93.3)

R53.83 Other fatigue

Fatigue NOS
Lack of energy
Lethargy
Tiredness

 

ICD-10-CM CHAPTER 6 Page 325 (Update for 2010)

Diseases of the nervous system (G00-G99)

Excludes2:

[…]
symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings, not elsewhere classified (R00-R94)

[…]

G93 Other disorders of brain

[…]

G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome

Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis
Excludes1: chronic fatigue syndrome NOS (R53.82)

For comparison:

German Modification ICD-10-GM
http://www.dimdi.de/static/de/klassi/diagnosen/icd10/htmlgm2010/block-g90-g99.htm

ICD-10-GM Version 2010

Kapitel VI
Krankheiten des Nervensystems
(G00-G99)

G93.- Sonstige Krankheiten des Gehirns

[…]

G93.3 Chronisches Müdigkeitssyndrom

Benigne myalgische Enzephalomyelitis
Chronisches Müdigkeitssyndrom bei Immundysfunktion
Postvirales Müdigkeitssyndrom

For comparison:

Canadian Modification ICD-10-CA

(Version 2009 of ICD-10-CA/CCI replaces version 2006)

http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispPage.jsp?cw_page=codingclass_e

Version 2009 ICD-10-CA Tabular List, Volume 1 PDF (4.9MB)
http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/en/downloads/ICD-10-CA_Vol1_2009.pdf

Version 2009 ICD-10-CA Alphabetical Index, Volume 2 PDF (4.3MB)
http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/en/downloads/ICD-10-CA_Vol2_2009.pdf

Chapter VI

Diseases of the nervous system
(G00-G99)

Other disorders of the nervous system
(G90-99)

[…]

G93 Other disorders of brain

[…]

G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome

Includes: Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis
Chronic fatigue syndrome

Excludes: fatigue syndrome NOS (F48.0)

For comparison with WHO ICD-10:

Current ICD-10 codings for the three terms are set out on my site, here, together with extracts from Chapter V (the “F” codes) and Chapter XVIII (the “R” codes):

http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/icd-11-me-cfs/

or go here for the full ICD-10 Volume 1: Tabular List

http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/

ICD-10 Version for 2007 online
http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/?gg90.htm+g933

Chapter VI

Diseases of the nervous system
(G00-G99)

Other disorders of the nervous system
(G90-99)

[…]

G93 Other disorders of brain

[…]

G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome
Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis

Note that in ICD-10, Chronic fatigue syndrome is not included in Volume 1: The Tabular List, Chapter VI under the parent term:

G93 Other Disorders of brain

but “Chronic fatigue syndrome” does appear in Volume 3: The Alphabetical Index, where it is indexed to G93.3.

In a forthcoming post, I shall be publishing important information about proposals for parent terms, classifications and codings in the ICD-11 Alpha Draft.

 

Related material:

ICD-9-CM

For information on the current codings in ICD-9-CM (US Clinical Modification) see the NAME U.S. page: WHO ICD Codes section

American Psychiatric Association on DSM-5

In a 10 December Press Release, the American Psychiatric Association said:

“Extending the timeline [for DSM-5] will allow more time for public review, field trials and revisions”

and

“The extension will also permit the DSM-5 to better link with the U.S. implementation of the ICD-10-CM codes for all Medicare/Medicaid claims reporting, scheduled for October 1, 2013. Although ICD-10 was published by the WHO in 1990, the “Clinical Modification” version (ICD- 10-CM) authorized by the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is not being implemented in the U.S. until 23 years later.

“The ICD-10-CM includes disorder names, logical groupings of disorders and code numbers but not explicit diagnostic criteria. The APA has already worked with CMS and CDC to develop a common structure for the currently in-use DSM-IV and the mental disorders section of the ICD- 10-CM.

“The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is published by the WHO for all member countries to classify diseases and medical conditions for international health care, public health, and statistical use. The WHO plans to release its next version of the ICD, the ICD-11, in 2014.

“APA will continue to work with the WHO to harmonize the DSM-5 with the mental and behavioral disorders section of the ICD-11. Given the timing of the release of both DSM-5 and ICD-11 in relation to the ICD-10-CM, the APA will also work with the CDC and CMS to propose a structure for the U.S. ICD-10 CM that is reflective of the DSM-5 and ICD-11 harmonization efforts. This will be done prior to the time when the ICD-10-CM revisions are “frozen” for CMS and insurance companies to prepare for the October 1, 2013, adoption.”

ICD-11 Alpha Draft, iCAT Collaborative Authoring Platform and PVFS, ME, CFS

ICD-11 Alpha Draft, iCAT Collaborative Authoring Platform and PVFS, ME, CFS

Shortlink: http://wp.me/p5foE-2Ui

The information in this report relates to proposals for ICD-11. It does not apply to ICD-10-CM, the forthcoming US “Clinical Modification” of ICD-10.

 

Whither the ICD-11 Alpha Draft?

According to documents published by the ICD Revision Steering Group (RSG) and the Agenda for the iCAMP2 and Revision Steering Group meeting on 19-23 April 2010, it was projected that an alpha draft for ICD-11 would be ready by 10 May 2010 [Key document 1a].

The RSG meeting Agenda proposed that the alpha draft should be presented to the World Health Assembly (WHA) between 17-25 May. A proposal for a press launch was also tabled for discussion.

It is understood that the ICD-11 alpha draft is being created for internal users, was not expected to be complete by May 2010, but released as a “work in progress” towards the beta stage. The beta draft for ICD-11 is scheduled for 2011, which will be subjected to systematic field trials and then made available for public comment.

10 May has come and gone, and there has been no public launch of an alpha draft or the iCAT – the wiki-like collaborative authoring platform through which ICD-11 is being drafted.

As the Minutes of the April RSG meeting are not yet available, it remains unclear how on target the alpha draft is or whether the goals for 2010 have had to be revised. (See Page 7, ICD-11 Revision Project Plan – Draft 2.0 for Project milestones and budget, and organizational overview.)

When the RSG does release information on the status of the alpha draft and the operational status of the iCAT, I will post an update.

In the meantime, I have raised a number of queries around the status of the alpha draft, whether the RSG intends to make a draft available for public viewing, at what point, and in what format(s). I have also asked for information about the availability of Topic Advisory Group proposal forms for stakeholder input, up to what stage in the development process timeline these might be used, and which stakeholders are going to be permitted to make use of proposal forms.

 

iCAT production server

In the posting ICD-11 Alpha Draft scheduled to launch between 10 and 17 May, 6 May, I reported that it is already possible to view a “Demo and Training iCAT Platform” and also access the iCAT production server.

I cautioned that until an official ICD-11 Alpha Draft is released, it cannot be determined how far the various Topic Advisory Groups have progressed with revising classifications and populating textual content according to a common “Content Model” for the ICD Chapters and categories of interest to us [Key document 1b].

I noted that the Demo and Training iCAT Platform, at that point, was sparsely populated for content and that the classifications and codings listed within the various chapters appeared to have been imported from ICD-10, with little discernable change – presumably as the starting point for the drafting process.

A revised Demo and Training iCAT Platform is now accessible, the content of which is also viewable on the iCAT production server and it is to these proposed revisions that I want to draw your attention.

Note that anyone can view the Demo and Training iCAT Platform and iCAT production server but only WHO, ICD Revision and IT personnel and the Managers and members of the various Topic Advisory Groups (TAGS)will have editorial access. External reviewers recruited by TAG Managers will also use the iCAT to upload reviews and comment on proposals and content.

I have compiled a series of screenshots and very brief notes on what is viewable at the moment for the chapters and categories of interest to us.

Note: Screenshots are taken from the Demo and Training iCAT Platform and iCAT production server as they stood at 24 May 2010. Alpha drafting is an ongoing process and what currently appears may be subject to revision, refinement and additions before an official Alpha Draft is released. Not all the classification and content work currently undertaken may have been entered into the iCAT.

Note also that when viewing the iCAT in your browser, the left hand side of the screen displays the ICD Categories listings with the category Definition, Term, Clinical Description, Diagnostic Criteria etc displaying on the right of the screen. Because this view is too wide to display on my website template, the screenshots have had to be split in two. On your screen the iCAT will look like this:

 

When you have read this report and familiarised yourself with the way the iCAT functions, I suggest you poke around – you can’t break anything as members of the public have no editing access.

All screenshots as they stood at 24 May 2010

A wiki-like Collaborative Authoring Tool (known as the iCAT)) is being used for the initial authoring of the alpha draft.

The iCAT production server and Demo and Training iCAT Platform can be accessed here:

https://sites.google.com/site/icd11revision/home/icat

iCAT production server at: http://icat.stanford.edu/

Demo and Training iCAT Platform at: http://icatdemo.stanford.edu/

Load either (they may take a minute or more to load and appear less inclined to hang in Firefox).

One loaded, you will be presented with an Entry Page – this is the My ICD Tab

Welcome to iCAT – the Initial ICD 11 Collaborative Authoring Tool!

Select the ICD Content Tab and ICD Categories by chapter will populate down the left side of the screen.

Scroll down and open up the + next to 06 VI Diseases of the nervous system

ICD Categories:

 

Scroll down and note that ICD-10 codings between G83.9 and G99.8 are being reorganised and have been assigned the labels GA thru GN (some of which, like GN, are parent categories with child and grandchildren categories).

Open up the + next to GN Other disorders of the nervous system

which is a parent to category Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome

(Note: Gj92 is known as a “Sorting label”. A Sorting label is a string that can be used to sort the children of a category. This is not the ICD code.)

Note that Postviral fatigue syndrome and Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis are not currently accounted for in the ICD Categories List as children of the parent category GN Other disorders of the nervous system. Only Chronic fatigue syndrome is listed and assigned the Sorting Label “Gj92”. [See Glossary: Inclusions]

 

 

Click on the double speech bubble icon next to Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome which will display 1 Category Discussion Note (Click Expand to display the full note. Discussion Notes can also be accessed via the Category Notes and Discussions Tab, from which the screenshot below, orginates).

Discussion Note for Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome:

This Discussion Note records a Change in hierarchy for class: G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome because its parent category (G93 Other disorders of brain) is removed.

Note that the removal of the parent G93 Other disorders of brain will affect other categories also classified under G93 in ICD-10, not just G93.3. Open up the double speech bubble icons next to other category listings and you can view the Discussion Notes on proposed restructuring for other G8x and G9x categories.

Next, with the ICD Content Tab selected, click on Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome and the Details for Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome will display on the right side of the screen. Allow a few moments for the text in the boxes to load.

With the Title & Definition Tab selected (the Tab may read Definition only, depending on whether you are viewing the iCAT production server or the Demo iCAT), you can view the

Details for Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome

To view a Glossary of Terms page, which defines the terms in the Tabs click on the blue question mark icons which will load the iCAT Glossary.

Content for Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome:

[See Glossary: Definition] The full text of External Definitions (imported from affiliate classification publications) which is partly hidden in the screenshot, is appended at end of this post. According to discussion on the iCAT Users Google Group, it is proposed that External Definitions might be given less prominence when displaying in the iCAT.

 

Now click on the Terms Tab.

Terms for Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome:

Benign myalagic encephalomyelitis currently appears listed under Inclusions to Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome.

Note that Postviral fatigue syndrome is not listed under Inclusions and that Synonyms and Exclusions for Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome have yet to be populated. [See Glossary: Synonyms, Inclusions, Exclusions]

Very few of the other Content Tabs have been populated but it is envisaged that they will be in due course.

I provide no screenshots for Benign myalagic encephalomyelitis or Postviral fatigue syndrome because these are not listed in the ICD Categories List. [See Glossary: ICD Title, Synonyms, Inclusions, Exclusions]

Extract from the iCAT Glossary

6. Inclusions

Short definition: Inclusion terms are either synonyms of the category titles or subclasses which are not represented in the classification hierarchy.

Details: Inclusion terms appear in the tabular list of the traditional print version and show users that entities are included in the relevant concept. All of the ICD-10 inclusion terms have been imported and accessible in the iCat. These are either synonyms of the category titles or subclasses which are not represented in the classification hierarchy. Since we have synonyms as a separate entity in our ICD-11 content model, the new synonyms suggested by the users should go into the synonyms section. In the future, iCat will provide a mechanism to identify whether an inclusion is a synonym or a subclass.

7. Exclusions

Short definition: Exclusion terms help users eliminate entities that should be assigned to a different ICD category because of differences in meaning or terminology.

Details: Exclusion terms help users eliminate entities that should be assigned to a different ICD category because of differences in meaning or terminology.

 

I am including some screenshots of other Chapters which will be of interest.

Chapter 5 (V) Somatoform Disorders at F45 (currently same as or near ICD-10):

 

Neurasthenia remains in Chapter 5 (V) at F48.0:

 

Inclusions and Exclusions for Neurasthenia:

 

Chapter 18 (XVIII) displaying R53 Malaise and fatigue (this is the Chapter under which the US Clinical Modification, ICD-10-CM, proposes classifying Chronic fatigue syndrome, at R53.82):

 

Inclusions and Exclusions for R53 Malaise and fatigue:

 

Here are the two Category discussion Notes that appear directly beneath 06 VI Diseases of the nervous system (no ICD10 concepts from Chapter 06 VI are currently moved into either of these “holding pens”).

1 Discussion Note for: Needing a decision to be made

 

1 Discussion Note for: To be retired

________________________________________________________________________

  

External Definitions: (Imported from affiliate classification publications, these remain the same as my 6 May posting.)

External Definitions for Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome

A syndrome of unknown etiology. Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is a clinical diagnosis characterized by an unexplained persistent or relapsing chronic fatigue that is of at least six months duration, is not the result of ongoing exertion, is not substantially alleviated by rest, and results in substantial reduction of previous levels of occupational, educational, social or personal activities. Common concurrent symptoms of at least six months duration include impairment of memory or concentration, diffuse pain, sore throat, tender lymph nodes,headaches of a new type, pattern, or severity, and nonrestorative sleep. The etiology of CFS may be viral or immunologic. Neurasthenia and fibromyalgia may represent related disorders. Also known as myalgic encephalomyeltis.

Ontology ID UMLS/NC12007_05
E

distinctive syndrome characterized by chronic fatigue, mild fever, lymphadenopathy, headache, myalgia, arthralgia, depression, and memory loss: candidate eitiological agents include Epstein-Barr and other herpesviruses.

Ontology ID UMLS/CSP2006

A syndrome characterized by persistent or recurrent fatigue, diffuse musculoskeletal pain, sleep disturbances, and subjective cognitive impairment of 6 months duration or longer. Symptoms are not caused by ongoing exertion; are not relieved by rest; and result in a substantial reduction of previous levels of occupational, educational, social or personal activities. Minor alterations of immune, neuroendocrine, and automatic function may be associated with this syndrome. There is also considerable overlap between this condition and FIBROMYALGIA.
(From Semin Neurol 1998;18(2):237-42: Ann Intern Med 1994 Dec 15;121(12):953-9)

Ontology ID UMLS/MSH2008_2
008_02_04

 

Based only on the information visible in the iCAT as it stood at 24 May 2010, it appears that instead of:

ICD-10 (version for 2007) Tabular List

http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/?gg90.htm+g933

Chapter VI (6)

Diseases of the nervous system
(G00-G99)

[…]

Other disorders of the nervous system
(G90-99)

[…]

G93 Other disorders of brain

[…]

G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome
Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis

(with Chronic fatigue syndrome indexed to G93.3 in Volume 3: The Alphabetical Index)

that what may be being proposed at this point is:

that G83.9-G99.8 codes in ICD-10 Chapter VI: Diseases of the nervous system are being restuctured;

that G93 Other disorders of brain is removed as a parent category for G93.x codings;

that GN Other disorders of the nervous system

is now the parent to a large number of categories previously classified between G83.9 and G99.8

that GN Other disorders of the nervous system is the parent to

Gj92 (Sorting label) Chronic fatigue syndrome

that Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome is included in ICD-11 Chapter 06 VI Diseases of the nervous system (Neurology chapter) in the ICD Categories list as an ICD Title term;

that there is currently displaying no Gj9x Sorting label (or any other Sorting label) listing for Postviral fatigue syndrome or Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis in ICD Categories list or any Category Details for either term;

(Whether this is because Inclusion terms appear in the tabular list of the traditional print version but not in the iCAT version, or because of proposed hierarchy changes to the relationship between these three terms or because text remains to be entered into the iCAT for these two terms, cannot be determined from the information available at 10 June – please refer to Glossary of Terms which sets out the relationships between an ICD Title and its inclusion in the iCAT Categories list and between an ICD Title and its Synonyms, Inclusions and Exclusions.)

that Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome is an ICD Title term with a Details page, a Definition and an Inclusion term (but with no Synonyms or Exclusions or other fields yet populated);

that Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis is listed as an Inclusion to Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome

that Chapter 5 V Details for F48.0 Neurasthenia specifies
“postviral fatigue syndrome” as an Exclusion with References

G93.3 -> Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome

that Chapter 18 XVIII Details for R53 Malaise and Fatigue specifies
“fatigue syndrome postviral” [sic] as an Exclusion with References

F48.0 -> F48.0 Neurasthenia,
G93.3 -> Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome

but that in the absence of further information, it is currently unclear what the proposed hierarchical status of Postviral fatigue syndrome and Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis will be in relation to Chronic fatigue syndrome, and in relation to each other.

I shall continue to monitor the iCAT production server closely and report on any changes to proposals for Category listings and on the progress of the population of content.

 

[1] Key documents:

a) ICD-11 Revision Project Plan – Draft 2.0 (v March 10) [PDF format]
Describes the ICD revision process as an overall project plan in terms of goals, key streams of work, activities, products, and key participants.

b) Content Model Specifications and User Guide (v April 10)
Identifies the basic properties needed to define any ICD concept (unit, entity or category) through the use of multiple parameters.

c) Alpha Drafting Workflow (v 06.10.09)
Sets out lines of responsibility between the various contributors for the alpha drafting phase.

d) Further documents eg Style Guide, ICD-11 Conventions:
ICD Revision Google site

ICD-11 Alpha Draft: launch scheduled 10 – 17 May

ICD-11 Alpha Draft: launch scheduled 10 – 17 May

Shortlink: http://wp.me/p5foE-2Sg

Note that until the ICD-11 Alpha Draft is released, it cannot be determined how far the various Topic Advisory Groups have progressed with proposals for revising ICD-10 classifications or with populating definitions and other content according to the ICD Content Model. Proposals for revision of classifications and textual content may differ from the examples on the Demo and Training iCAT platform as it appeared on the date this report was compiled (accessed 06.05.10).

The ICD-11 Alpha Draft and iCAT (Initial ICD-11 Collaborative Authoring Tool) is anticipated to be launched by the WHO between 10 and 17 May.  See this Dx Revision Watch report

Also note that information in this report applies to the revision of ICD-10 towards ICD-11. Countries using a “Clinical Modification” of ICD, for example, Canada (ICD-10-CA), the USA (implementing ICD-10-CM, in October 2013), Australia (ICD-10 AM) and Germany (ICD-10-GM) should refer to their specific national modification of ICD.

DSM-5 submissions collated on Dx Revision Watch site

DSM-5 submissions collated on Dx Revision Watch site

Shortlink: http://wp.me/p5foE-2S0

The American Psychiatric Association (APA) public review and comment period on its draft proposals for diagnostic criteria for DSM-5 closed on 20 April.

I have been collating copies of submissions on a dedicated page on my Dx Revision Watch site, here:

http://wp.me/PKrrB-AQ

Patient organisations, professionals and advocates who submitted comments and responses to the draft proposals are invited to provide copies of their submissions for publication.  Forward copies to me.agenda@virgin.net or via the Dx Revision Watch Contact form.

International patient organisations submissions:

Whittemore Peterson Institute, Steungroep CFS Netherlands, CFS Associazione Italiana, ME Association, Action for M.E., Invest in ME, Mass. CFIDS/ME & FM, The CFIDS Association of America, Vermont CFIDS Association, IACFSME, The 25% ME Group

Patient advocate submissions:

Suzy Chapman UK (2), Tammie Page M.A. US, LH Seth US, Patient advocate US, John Mizelle, Therapist US, Peter Kemp UK, Ian McLachlan UK, Andrew US, Mary M. Schweitzer PhD US

On 20 April, the APA issued this News Release:

http://tinyurl.com/DSM5reviewcloses

or open PDF here:  APA Closes Public Comment Period for DSM-5 Release No. 10-31

For Information Contact:

Eve Herold, 703-907-8640

press@psych.org  Release No. 10-31

Jaime Valora, 703-907-8562

jvalora@psych.org

EMBARGOED For Release Until: April 20, 2010, 12:01 AM EDT

APA Closes Public Comment Period for Draft Diagnostic Criteria for DSM-5

DSM-5 Work Groups to Review Comments

ARLINGTON, Va. (April 20, 2010) -The American Psychiatric Association received 6,400 comments on a draft of the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders during a 2½ month public comment period, which ends today.

“This period of public review and comment of diagnostic criteria is unprecedented in both the field of psychiatry and in medicine,” said Alan F. Schatzberg, M.D., president of the American Psychiatric Association. “It demonstrates the APA’s commitment to an inclusive and transparent process of development for DSM-5.”

The criteria have been available for comment since they were published online on Feb. 10. The draft criteria will continue to be available for review on the DSM-5 Web site, www.dsm5.org , and updates to the draft will be posted on an ongoing basis. The public will have another opportunity to comment on the criteria and any changes after the first round of field trials.

A number of clinicians, researchers and family and patient advocates participated in the public comment period, contributing more than 6,400 comments on various aspects of DSM-5.

All comments submitted via the Web site were assigned to a topic-specific expert from one of the thirteen DSM-5 work groups for review. In their review, work group members will note submissions that need additional consideration from the work group as a whole. Upon evaluation from the entire work group, draft criteria may be revised.

For example, the Eating Disorders Work Group has proposed additional revisions to criteria for Anorexia Nervosa and Bulimia Nervosa based on comments received.

“The goal of DSM-5 is to create an evidence-based manual that is useful to clinicians and represents the best science available,” said David J. Kupfer, M.D., DSM-5 Task Force chair.

“The comments we received provide the task force and work groups with additional information and perspectives, ensuring that we have fully considered the impact any changes would have on clinical practice and disorder prevalence, as well as other real-world implications of revised criteria.”

Most of the comments that were submitted were diagnosis-specific, while nearly one-fourth were general. Distribution of the comments varied across the 13 work groups.

The work groups with the largest number of submitted comments include:

. Neurodevelopmental Disorders Work Group (23% of comments)

. Anxiety Disorders Work Group (15% of comments)

. Psychosis Disorder Work Group (11% of comments)

. Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders (10% of comments)

Following a review of all submitted comments and possible revisions to the draft criteria, the APA will begin a series of field trials to test some of the proposed diagnostic criteria in clinical settings. The proposed criteria will continue to be reviewed and refined over the next two years.

Final publication of DSM-5 is planned for May 2013

[Ends]

Invest in ME submission to DSM-5 draft proposals

Invest in ME submission to DSM-5 draft proposals

Shortlink: http://wp.me/p5foE-2RJ

Invest in ME submission

The American Psychiatric Association has recently called for comments to be forwarded regarding their draft proposal for DSM-V (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is the standard classification of mental disorders used by mental health professionals in the United States and contains a listing of diagnostic criteria for every psychiatric disorder recognized by the U.S. healthcare system).

Included in DSM-V is a section entitled Complex Somatic Symptom Disorders.

Considering that psychiatrists in the UK have caused such harm to people with ME and their families over the past generation Invest in ME decided that input needed to be made to the APA regarding this section.

Below is Invest in ME’s response – submitted on 19th April 2010.

The CSSD criteria are described here –

[Content superceded by third DSM-5 draft criteria.]

The link to the APA web page – entitled DSM-5: The Future of Psychiatric Diagnosis is at –

http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=368  

Submission – to the American Psychiatric Association on DSM-V

Invest in ME is an independent UK charity campaigning for bio-medical research into Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME or ME/CFS), as defined by WHO-ICD-10-G93.3 – (also referred to as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) – although in this letter we shall use the term ME/CFS).

Even though we are not mental health professionals or represent people with mental health disorders we feel it important to comment on the draft proposal of DSM-V.

This response should be seen against the backdrop of the devastation caused by some psychiatrists in the UK regarding their treatment of people with ME/CFS and their promotion of false perceptions about the disease to the public, healthcare authorities and government.

When a generation of patients have been adversely affected by misinformation promoted by a section of psychiatrists in the UK and when the field of psychiatry has been brought into disrepute by these same psychiatrists then it is of paramount importance that the American Psychiatric Association are aware of the dangers inherent in establishing incorrect categories of disorders which are based on poor science, vested interests or which do not serve the patients for whom they must surely be priority in all healthcare provision.

We are especially concerned about the criteria described in the new category of Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder which seems to lump together many illnesses. It cannot be helpful for clinicians or researchers to have such a variety of patients under one category especially when very little is known of the pathophysiology of these conditions placed in this category.

In the CSSD Criteria B there are terms used which are subjective and not measurable – such as “health concerns” and “catastrophising”.

Based on our experience with the treatment of an organic illness such as ME/CFS our concern is that there is a great danger of mis- or missed diagnoses when looking at this category and its diagnostic criteria.

Not all physical illnesses can be easily determined without extensive investigations and this category may allow clinicians to miss brain tumours, rare cancers and other illnesses which are difficult to diagnose.

The criteria are very vague and allow too much subjectivity.

In fact, ME/CFS could mistakenly be placed in this category if one were to ignore the huge volume of biomedical research and evidence which shows it to be an organic illness and if one were to use only the broad CSSD criteria to diagnose.

Such an action would be a major and costly mistake.

The patients we are concerned with suffer from Myalgic Encephalomyelitis which is a neurological disease but all too often these patients are being treated as if they had a somatoform illness.

Parents of children with ME are restricted in visiting their severely ill children in hospital or worse still the children are taken away from their families as the healthcare professional believes it is the family that is keeping the child ill.

Severely ill grown ups with this disease are denied usual medical care and threatened with sectioning if they are too ill to care for themselves and ask for help.

This not only sets patient against healthcare professional but also is a waste of resources and of lives. In the UK the profession of psychiatry also suffers as psychiatrists are often derided as uncaring, unscientific and unprofessional. The possibility of litigation ensuing against psychiatrists who cause such damage should also not be forgotten.

A broad unspecific category such as the proposed Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder does not help patients who need an honest and clear diagnosis. Any illness lacking a diagnostic test is in danger of being put into this non specific category which helps no one.

We are at least thankful that the APA has not attempted to repeat the major mistake being made by prominent UK psychiatrists in attempting to classify Myalgic Encephalomyelitis in amongst Complex Somatic Symptom Disorders.

Such a course of action would create another source of conflict between patients and the field of psychiatry and lead to unnecessary loss of health, potential loss of life and possible legal actions being taken against those professional organizations and/or individuals who use incorrect guidance for their diagnoses,

Yours Sincerely,

Kathleen McCall

Chairman Invest in ME
Charity Nr 1114035

Invest in ME
PO Box 561
Eastleigh SO50 0GQ
Hampshire
England

Mary Schweitzer letter to the APA on Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder (CSSD)

Mary Schweitzer letter to the APA on Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder (CSSD)

Shortlink: http://wp.me/p5foE-2RD

Mary Schweitzer

13 April 2010

There are only a few days left to comment on the proposed new category of Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder (CSSD) for the APA’s new DSM-5. To read about the proposed new classification, go to the following website:

http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=368

Instructions for comments are on the bottom of the page. You have to register, but that’s not difficult.

We have only until April 20 to leave a comment.

Many organizations connected to ME and CFS advocacy have sent testimony – all should. This could be very dangerous. To begin with, psychiatric treatment is not going to help the biomedical foundation of the disease, so the misdiagnosis would lead to maltreatment. But there are other concerns as well. If “CFS” was promoted as the psychological illness CSSD, patients would be subject to the restrictions insurance companies place on mental disorders. Most health insurance plans do not cover more than a few doctor’s visits per year for a mental illness, if they cover any at all; most disability insurance plans only cover mental illnesses for 3-5 years, if they cover them at all. This is, of course, a great injustice to those with mental illnesses. But that injustice would not be improved by adding patients with “CSSD” to the mix.

My own comments can be found here:

http://slightlyalive.blogspot.com/2010/04/my-letter-to-apa-on-cssd.html

Mary Schweitzer