Search

In Denmark, 42% of homeless people suffer from dual diagnosis, i.e. the co-occurrence of a substance use of alcohol and/or illegal substances and another psychiatric disorder. Dual diagnosis homeless patients often cause differential diagnostic difficulties and fail to receive effective treatment. A solid grasp of the role of substance use in these patients may inform the diagnostic decision and contribute to improve their treatment. Today, knowledge of these issues remains scarce. The purpose of this study was to explore substance use in homeless patients with mental disorders and their subjective perspectives on their substance use. 44 homeless dual diagnosis patients were included in the study. They were examined in interviews focusing on their substance use and their subjective perspective on their substance use. The most frequently used substances were cannabinoids (70.5%) and alcohol (45.5%), followed by cocaine, sedative/hypnotics, and amphetamine. The finding suggests that substance use in dual diagnosis homeless patients is a complex phenomenon with most patients (56.8%) using multiple substances. While substance use seems to contribute to keep the patients homeless, substance use was also reported to play an important role in coping with life on the streets by offering social contact and some relief from a desperate situation. Substance use, mental disorder, and homelessness seem to be closely entangled, reinforcing each other and making it difficult to help these vulnerable patients. Diagnostic overshadowing may cause delays in adequate diagnosis and treatment of this group of patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Hypothesis The idea that a disorder of the basic self is a central feature in schizophrenia has recently been corroborated in a meta-analysis and a systematic review. Manifestations of the self-disorder can be systematically explored with the Examination of Anomalous Self-Experience (EASE). In this study, we examined the factorial structure of EASE, and diagnostic efficacy of EASE. We hypothesized that EASE will have a monofactorial structure as an instability of the basic self will result in multiple deformations of self-experience which would be meaningfully interrelated as aspects of a unifying Gestalt. Design EASE data for 226 patients suffering from various mental disorders were analyzed under a confirmatory factor analysis framework (CFA). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated for the total EASE sums, and sensitivity and specificity values for prediction of schizophrenia spectrum disorders based on different cut-offs were obtained. Results Fit indices for the CFA model: RMSEA = 0.036, SRMR = 0.100, CFI = 0.983, TLI = 0.981. The AUC value was 0.946 (95% confidence interval: 0.919–0.974). Sensitivity as well as specificity for schizophrenia spectrum disorders were high. Conclusion Our results lend support for EASE exhibiting a monofactorial structure and the notion of self-disorders as a central phenotypic feature of schizophrenia spectrum disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim was to examine the general outcome of schizophrenia after 20 years or more.Methods: Using the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression on long-term follow-up studies of schizophrenia up until April 21, 2021. We included prospective studies with at least 20 years of follow-up on patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, and the studies had to include face-to-face clinical evaluation. We examined outcome in three nested groups: 'recovery', 'good or better' (including also 'recovery'), and 'moderate or better' (including also 'recovery' and 'good or better'). We used random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression to examine mean estimates and possible moderators.Results: We identified 1089 records, which were screened by two independent researchers. 14 prospective studies (1991 patients) published between 1978 and 2020 were found eligible. The studies used a range of different scales and definitions for outcome, and some used the same definitions for different outcomes. To compare outcome across studies, we designed and applied a unified template for outcome definitions and cutoffs, based on earlier studies' recommendations. Our meta-analysis found that 24.2 % had 'recovered' (n = 246, CI: 20.3-28.0 %), 35.5 % had a 'good or better' outcome (n = 766, CI: 26.0-45.0%), and 59.7% had 'moderate or better' outcome (n = 1139, CI: 49.3-70.1 %).Conclusions: The results contribute to debunk the myth that schizophrenia inevitably has a deteriorating course. Recovery is certainly possible. Schizophrenia remains, however, a severe and complex mental disorder, exhibiting a limited change in prognosis despite >100 years of research and efforts to improve treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little is known about which factors actually motivate individuals with psychosis to seek help or how psychosis may complicate the help-seeking process. The aim of this article is to examine the steps of this process and how psychopathological experiences might affect and interfere with it. In this qualitative study we interviewed nine patients with a first episode of psychosis. The interviews were transcribed and analysed according to the principles of thematic analysis using inductive as well as deductive methods. The crucial step in help-seeking behaviour seemed to be for the patients to identify the kind of problem they were facing. None of them clearly recognized their psychotic or otherwise anomalous experiences as symptoms of a mental disorder, and most of them did not seriously question the reality status of these experiences. For most of the patients it was an untenable social situation that caused them to seek help. When they did seek help the majority did not initially contact the psychiatric services. It seems paradoxical to expect patients who experience symptoms of psychosis for the first time to be able to unambiguously identify them as being exactly that and accordingly seek out psychiatric help, as diminished insight into illness is an inherent feature of psychosis. However, the phenomenon of 'double bookkeeping' seemed to provide an opening for seeking help from psychiatry in spite of compromised insight. This observation should be included in everyday clinical work and in future information campaigns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The MMPI-2 classified first episode psychosis patients more accurately than the SCID. • The results point to increased diagnostic accuracy if the MMPI-2 is added to the SCID. • The SCID demonstrated high specificity but low sensitivity for identifying non-affective psychosis in a first-admission sample. • The Goldberg Index, revised for the MMPI-2, was validated as a measure distinguishing psychotic from non-psychotic psychiatric patients. We aimed to evaluate the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) as a potential means of improving on the SCID's diagnostic efficacy. 76 first-admission patients were assigned DSM-IV consensus diagnoses by two experienced psychiatrists using all available information, then dichotomized into non-affective psychosis and other mental illness groups. The patients were also given the SCID and the MMPI-2. The diagnostic performance of the MMPI-2 was compared to that of the SCID to assess both diagnostic accuracy and incremental validity. MMPI-2 scales 8 (Schizophrenia) and BIZ (Bizarre Mentations) correctly identified 58% and 56% respectively of non-affective psychotic patients. The Goldberg Index had an overall correct classification rate of 70%, but only identified 49% of the psychosis group. The SCID had a correct classification rate of 66% but correctly identified only 25% of the non-affective psychosis patients. Three MMPI-2 scales combined with the SCID resulted in an overall correct classification rate of 73%, and identification of 66% of the non-affective psychosis patients. The results suggest that the MMPI-2 may identify early psychosis at least as well as the SCID. Furthermore, using a combination of the MMPI-2 and the SCID shows incremental validity over using the SCID alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Self-disorders have been hypothesized to be an underlying and trait-like core feature of schizophrenia-spectrum disorders and a certain degree of temporal stability of self-disorders would therefore be expected. The aim of the study was to examine the persistence of self-disorders measured by the Examination of Anomalous Self Experiences over a time span of 5 years. 48 patients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders were thoroughly assessed for psychopathology at baseline and 5 years later. Self-disorders were assessed by the Examination of Anomalous Self Experiences. The level of self-disorders was same at the two occasions for the full Examination of Anomalous Self Disorders and for four out of the five domains. For one domain, the level of self-disorders increased slightly from baseline to follow-up. The correlations between baseline and follow-up were moderate. 9 out of the 13 most-frequently rated items at baseline showed equal frequencies at follow-up. The baseline level of self-disorders predicted global symptomatic, but not functional outcome. Self-disorders measured by the Examination of Anomalous Self Experiences show a high level of temporal persistence over 5 years and predict symptomatic outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim The notion of a disordered self as a core disturbance of schizophrenia was proposed in many foundational texts. Recent studies, spurred by the development of the Examination of Anomalous Self- Experience ( EASE), seem to indicate that self-disorders are a specific manifestation of schizophrenia vulnerability. Follow-up studies of help-seeking, prodromal and first-admission patients have demonstrated the utility of self-disorders for predicting later schizophrenia-spectrum disturbance. We wished to extend these findings by gauging the predictive value of self-disorders in a premorbid, non-clinical population at high risk for schizophrenia. Methods Children from the Copenhagen High- Risk Project with high-genetic risk for schizophrenia ( N = 212) were assessed premorbidly (average age = 15), and diagnostically re-evaluated after 10 and 25 years. Since the EASE was not available at the time of premorbid assessment, we hypothesized that a proxy scale drawn from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory ( MMPI) could distinguish those who later developed a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder ( N = 68) from those who remained healthy ( N = 64). The Self- Disorder Scale comprised 32 items whose content suggested an aspect of self-disorder as measured by the EASE. Results Premorbid Self-Disorder Scale scores significantly predicted lifetime schizophrenia-spectrum diagnosis in the high-risk cohort. Although there was considerable item overlap between the new scale and an existing MMPI scale (psychoticism), the overlap did not account for the Self-Disorder Scale's predictive efficacy. Conclusion The results support the notion of self-disorders as a core vulnerability feature in schizophrenia, detectable premorbidly in those developing later schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Most symptoms are not specific for any diagnosis. • All patients had symptoms of depression and most had symptoms of anxiety. • Symptom counting is not a valid way to make diagnoses. • Differential-diagnosis is best made by combining diagnostic criteria with Gestaltic considerations. In everyday clinical work, psychiatrists encounter patients who present with symptoms spanning several diagnostic categories, e.g., showing signs of a psychosis, depression, and anxiety. This raises the critical question of which symptoms hold precedence over other and, by extension, which diagnosis is the right diagnosis. ICD-10 and DSM-5 do not provide unambiguous answers to this question and therefore psychiatry remains exposed to diagnostic disagreement with consequences for treatment and research. We explored symptom distribution in a sample of 98 first-admission psychiatric patients. We extracted and categorized singular symptoms into symptom domains: anxiety, mania, delusions, hallucinations, first-rank symptoms, and negative symptoms. Most symptoms were seen in most disorders. We found symptoms of depression and anxiety in almost all patients. Thus, just counting symptoms do not seem to be a valid way to make diagnoses. We elaborately discuss these issues in the context of the differential-diagnosis between schizophrenia and depression. Finally, we suggest that a combination of a criteria- and Gestalt-based approach to diagnosing mental disorders may contribute to counteract some of the current differential-diagnostic confusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]