Search

Objective The aim of the present study was to provide clinical consensus and evidence regarding initial treatment strategies for the pharmacological treatment of social anxiety disorder (SAD) in Korea. Methods We prepared a questionnaire to derive a consensus from clinicians regarding their preference for the pharmacological treatment of SAD in Korea. Data regarding medication regimens and psychotropic drugs used during initial treatment, the doses used, and the pharmacological treatment duration were obtained. Responses were obtained from 66 SAD experts, and their opinions were classified into three categories (first-line, second-line, third-line) using a chi-square analysis. Results Clinicians agreed upon first-line regimens for SAD involving monotherapy with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or the serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) venlafaxine, or combined therapy using antidepressants with betablockers or benzodiazepines on a standing or as-needed basis. First-line psychotropic drug choices for initial treatment included the following: escitalopram, paroxetine, sertraline, venlafaxine, and propranolol. The medication dosage used by domestic clinicians was found to be comparable with foreign guidelines. Domestic clinicians tended to make treatment decisions in a shorter amount of time and preferred a similar duration of maintenance treatment for SAD when compared with foreign clinicians. Conclusion This study may provide significant information for developing SAD pharmacotherapy guidelines in Korea, especially in the early stage of treatment.

Aim: Normal individuals are risk averse for decisions framed as gains but risk taking for decisions framed as losses. This framing effect is supposed to be attenuated in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. We investigated the effects of highlighting rewards versus highlighting punishments on the risky decision-making of AD patients. Method: Fourteen mild to moderate AD patients (Mini-Mental Status Examination score, 11–23; Clinical Dementia Rating, 1–2) and 16 healthy volunteers were recruited for the study. Subjects completed a computerized task on risky decision-making in which mathematically equivalent dilemmas were presented in terms of opportunities to gain monetary rewards (‘positive frame’) or avoid suffering losses (‘negative frame’). Results: As expected, AD patients chose more risky options under the positive frame than the negative frame, contrary to the control group (Z =−2.671, P= 0.007). The normal difference in the distribution of risky choices between positively and negatively framed dilemmas was significantly reduced in the AD group after we adjusted for years of education, mean age and depression (F= 5.321, P= 0.030). Deliberation time did not differ significantly between the two groups. Conclusion: These results suggest that AD patients making high-risk choices is associated with attenuated sensitivity to the emotional frames that highlight rewards or punishments, possibly reflecting altered evaluations of prospective gains and losses.

Normal individuals are risk averse for decisions framed as gains but risk taking for decisions framed as losses. This framing effect is supposed to be attenuated in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. We investigated the effects of highlighting rewards versus highlighting punishments on the risky decision-making of AD patients.Fourteen mild to moderate AD patients (Mini-Mental Status Examination score, 11-23; Clinical Dementia Rating, 1-2) and 16 healthy volunteers were recruited for the study. Subjects completed a computerized task on risky decision-making in which mathematically equivalent dilemmas were presented in terms of opportunities to gain monetary rewards ('positive frame') or avoid suffering losses ('negative frame').As expected, AD patients chose more risky options under the positive frame than the negative frame, contrary to the control group (Z =-2.671, P= 0.007). The normal difference in the distribution of risky choices between positively and negatively framed dilemmas was significantly reduced in the AD group after we adjusted for years of education, mean age and depression (F= 5.321, P= 0.030). Deliberation time did not differ significantly between the two groups.These results suggest that AD patients making high-risk choices is associated with attenuated sensitivity to the emotional frames that highlight rewards or punishments, possibly reflecting altered evaluations of prospective gains and losses.