Use of Video Conferencing for Psychiatric and Forensic Evaluations

Abstract

This study investigated whether the quality of results from video interviews is comparable with that of in-person interviews. Interrater reliabilities for two video conference interview conditions were compared with those for in-person interviews with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-Anchored Version and the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication, given to 72 forensic inpatients. The video conditions included in-person and remote interviewers. In the first condition, an in-person interviewer administered the instruments, with remote observation and scoring. The second condition entailed remote administration and an in-person observer. The third condition used an in-person interviewer and observer. Good to excellent reliabilities resulted from all conditions with intraclass correlations of .69 to .82. Results suggest that providers can expect remote interviews to provide clinical information similar to that obtained by in-person interviews.