Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics最新文献

Introduction: This study aimed to estimate all-cause mortality in patients after a first-episode mania (FEM) and examine whether six guideline-recommended medications can reduce mortality.

Methods: The cohort included population-based FEM samples and matched controls from Taiwan, spanning 2007 to 2018. The primary outcomes assessed were all-cause/suicide-related mortality, while the secondary outcome focused on mortality associated with pharmacological treatments. We compared mortality in post-FEM patients and age-/sex-matched controls without any diagnosed bipolar disorders and patients with and without psychopharmacological treatment using Cox regression analysis, respectively. Statistics were presented with time-to-event adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: The study included 54,092 post-FEM patients and 270,460 controls, totaling 2,467,417 person-years of follow-up. Post-FEM patients had higher risks of all-cause mortality (AHR 2.38, 95% CI: 2.31-2.45) and suicide death (10.80, 5.88-19.84) than controls. Lithium (0.62, 0.55-0.70), divalproex (0.89, 0.83-0.95), and aripiprazole (0.81, 0.66-1.00) were associated with reduced all-cause mortality compared to non-users. There were no significant all-cause mortality differences for quetiapine (0.95, 0.89-1.01), risperidone (0.92, 0.82-1.02), and paliperidone (1.24, 0.88-1.76) users. When accounting for drug action onset times in sensitivity analyses, only lithium significantly reduced all-cause mortality (AHR range 0.65-0.72). There were 35 and 16 suicide deaths in post-FEM patients and controls, respectively. No drug had a significant effect on suicide deaths (lithium: 6; divalproex: 7; aripiprazole: 0; quetiapine: 10; risperidone: 4; paliperidone: 1).

Conclusion: Post-FEM patients had a higher risk of all-cause/suicide-related mortality, and lithium treatment might reduce all-cause mortality.

Introduction: Complex PTSD (CPTSD) is a relatively new condition in ICD-11. This pilot randomised controlled trial aimed to compare a four-module intervention developed to target all symptoms of ICD-11 CPTSD, namely Enhanced Skills in Affective and Interpersonal Regulation (ESTAIR) with treatment as usual (TAU). The purpose of the study was to assess feasibility, safety, acceptability, and preliminary outcomes at the end of treatment and 3-month follow-up.

Methods: A total of N = 56 eligible veterans with CPTSD were randomised to either ESTAIR (n = 28) or TAU (n = 28). Linear mixed models were conducted to assess CPTSD severity, the primary outcome, as measured by the International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ).

Results: Treatment dropout in ESTAIR and TAU was low and equivalent (18% vs. 11%; χ2 (1) = 1.19, p = 0.275), and study retention was high, supporting the feasibility of the study. No serious adverse effects and very few adverse effects occurred, none of which were deemed related to the study. ESTAIR provided significantly greater reduction in CPTSD severity across time for ITQ PTSD (p < 0.001) and DSO (p < 0.001) symptoms. CPTSD pre-to-post effect sizes for ESTAIR were large (PTSD d = 1.78; DSO d = 2.00). Remission of probable CPTSD diagnosis at post-treatment was substantially greater in ESTAIR compared to TAU with only 13.6% versus 84% (p < 0.001) retaining the diagnosis.

Conclusion: A trial of ESTAIR versus TAU for the treatment of ICD-11 CPTSD indicates the potential efficacy of ESTAIR as well as its feasibility, safety, and acceptability.

Clinical interviewing is the basic method to understand how a person feels and what are the presenting complaints, obtain medical history, evaluate personal attitudes and behavior related to health and disease, give the patient information about diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment, and establish a bond between patient and physician that is crucial for shared decision making and self-management. However, the value of this basic skill is threatened by time pressures and emphasis on technology. Current health care trends privilege expensive tests and procedures and tag the time devoted to interaction with the patient as lacking cost-effectiveness. Instead, the time spent to inquire about problems and life setting may actually help to avoid further testing, procedures, and referrals. Moreover, the dialogue between patient and physician is an essential instrument to increase patient's motivation to engage in healthy behavior. The aim of this paper was to provide an overview of clinical interviewing and its optimal use in relation to style, flow and hypothesis testing, clinical domains, modifications according to settings and goals, and teaching. This review points to the primacy of interviewing in the clinical process. The quality of interviewing determines the quality of data that are collected and, eventually, of assessment and treatment. Thus, interviewing deserves more attention in educational training and more space in clinical encounters than it is currently receiving.

Introduction: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) may cause withdrawal at dose decrease, discontinuation, or switch. Current diagnostic methods (e.g., DSM) do not take such phenomenon into account. Using a new nosographic classification of withdrawal syndromes due to SSRI/SNRI decrease or discontinuation [by Psychother Psychosom. 2015;84(2):63-71], we explored whether DSM is adequate to identify DSM disorders when withdrawal occurs.

Methods: Seventy-five self-referred patients with a diagnosis of withdrawal syndrome due to discontinuation of SSRI/SNRI, diagnosed via the Diagnostic Clinical Interview for Drug Withdrawal 1 - New Symptoms of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors or Serotonin-Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitors (DID-W1), and at least one DSM-5 diagnosis were analyzed.

Results: In 58 cases (77.3%), the DSM-5 diagnosis of current mental disorder was not confirmed when the DID-W1 diagnosis of current withdrawal syndrome was established. In 13 cases (17.3%), the DSM-5 diagnosis of past mental disorder was not confirmed when criteria for DID-W1 diagnosis of lifetime withdrawal syndrome were met. In 3 patients (4%), the DSM-5 diagnoses of current and past mental disorders were not confirmed when the DID-W1 diagnoses of current and lifetime withdrawal syndromes were taken into account. The DSM-5 diagnoses most frequently mis-formulated were current panic disorder (50.7%, n = 38) and past major depressive episode (18.7%, n = 14).

Conclusion: DSM needs to be complemented by clinimetric tools, such as the DID-W1, to detect withdrawal syndromes induced by SSRI/SNRI discontinuation, decrease, or switch, following long-term use.

Background: The effectiveness of psychological interventions is undisputed. But while in other fields of health care the safety of interventions is studied alongside effectiveness, adverse events (AEs) have only recently been assessed in clinical studies of psychological interventions. This critical review summarizes the definition, assessment and current research status of AEs of psychological interventions.

Summary: AEs are defined as any untoward event or unfavorable change that occurs in the course of a psychological intervention. AEs that are caused by the intervention can be classified into side effects of correctly applied treatment, malpractice (i.e., incorrectly applied treatment) and unethical conduct (e.g., sexual abuse). Ideally, they are assessed by independent raters or alternatively by self-report questionnaires that should also cover serious adverse events (SAEs, e.g., suicide attempts or self-injurious behaviors). About 1 to 2 in 3 patients report at least 1 AE and results of meta-analyses suggest that treatments might differ in frequency and/or severity of AE and in treatment acceptability (measured as dropout rates).

Key messages: Measures of AEs and SAEs as well as more nuanced descriptions of dropout should be included in all clinical studies of psychological interventions. If this happens, we might learn that psychological interventions differ with respect to AEs, SAEs and acceptability. As many psychological interventions are about equally effective, they might one day be chosen based on differences in their safety profile rather than their differential effectiveness. Ideally, reducing AEs might also lead to more effective interventions.

Introduction: There is a significant demand for interventions that reduce distress related to auditory verbal hallucinations (AVHs). AVH distress is associated with the way voice hearers relate with AVHs. We aimed to establish the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to demonstrate that adding "Relating Therapy" (RT) to treatment as usual (TAU) is superior to TAU in reducing AVH distress.

Methods: We conducted a multicenter, parallel, single-blind, randomized controlled feasibility trial in five mental health centers in Germany. Participants were ≥19 years of age, had persistent and distressing AVHs, and had a diagnosis of a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder. RT was delivered over a maximum of 16 sessions within 5 months. Blind assessments were conducted at baseline and at 5 and 9 months. Feasibility outcomes were the number of patients recruited and retained, and safety and therapist adherence. The primary endpoint was the distress factor score of the AVH subscale of the Psychotic Symptoms Rating Scales at 9 months.

Results: Eighty-five of 177 enrolled participants were randomized into RT + TAU (n = 43) or TAU (n = 42). Feasibility was excellent with 87% retention at 9 months, 86% reaching treatment uptake criteria, 98% therapist adherence, and no unexpected serious adverse reactions. Compared to TAU, RT + TAU showed nonsignificant trends toward less AVH distress (b = -2.40, SE = 1.52, p = 0.121, 90% CI (-4.94 to 0.15) and stronger improvement on all but one of the secondary outcomes.

Conclusion: A randomized controlled trial of RT is feasible, safe, and well accepted. Our results provide an encouraging basis to further test the efficacy of RT in a definitive multicenter trial.