University of Tübingen / Medizinisches Begutachtungsinstitut
Medicolegal Assesmment
Born in 1958. 1978 – 1984 study of medicine. 1991 qualification as Neurologist. 1996 qualification as Psychiatrist. 2002 associate Professor of Psychiatry University of Tübingen. 2001 founding of Medizinisches Begutachtungsinstitut Tübingen. Memberships: German Neuroscience Society, German Neurological Society, European Psychiatric Association, German Society for Traffic Medicine, Society for interdisciplinary medicolegal assessment (FGIMB).

Moderator of 1 Session

Session Type
Educational
Date
Sun, 05.06.2022
Session Time
10:00 - 11:30
Room
Hall D
Session Description
The social model of illness has been patients present with problems and try to recover. As understanding of disease has developed, the realisation that not all presentations are medically explicable has increased. With unprecedented demand on health services, understanding the existence of secondary gain as a driver for presentation is important. The scope of the problem, various means to identify inconsistencies, and solutions from across northern Europe will be explored.
Session Icon
Fully Live

Presenter of 1 Presentation

The validity of clinicians’ diagnoses: Is it bread and butter?

Session Type
Educational
Date
Sun, 05.06.2022
Session Time
10:00 - 11:30
Room
Hall D
Session Icon
Fully Live
Lecture Time
10:51 - 11:08

Abstract

Abstract Body

Major depression has become one of the most frequent diagnoses in Germany. It is also quite prominent in cases referred for medicolegal assessment in insurance, compensation or disability claims. This report evaluates the validity of clinicians’ diagnoses of major depression in a sample of claimants. In 2015, n = 127 consecutive cases were examined for medicolegal assessment. All had been diagnosed with major depression by clinicians. All testees underwent a psychiatric interview, a physical examination, they answered questionnaires for depressive symptoms according to DSM-5, embitterment disorder, post-concussion syndrome (PCS) and unspecific somatic complaints. Performance and symptom validity tests were administered. Only 31% of the sample fulfilled the diagnostic criteria for DSM-5 major depression according to self-report, while none did so according to psychiatric assessment. Negative response bias was found in 64% of cases, feigned neurologic symptoms in 22%. Symptom exaggeration was indiscriminate rather than depression-specific. By self-report (i.e. symptom endorsement in questionnaires), 64% of the participants qualified for embitterment disorder and 93% for PCS. In conclusion, clinicians’ diagnoses of depression seem frequently erroneous. The reasons are improper assessment of the diagnostic criteria, confusion of depression with bereavement or embitterment and a failure to assess for response bias.

Hide