Prolonged grief disorder in ICD-11 and DSM-5-TR:Challenges and controversies

Prolonged grief disorder has recently been added to the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5, Text Revision. This historical development is often presented as a linear process culminating in the inclusion of valid, clinically relevant prolonged grief disorder criteria in diagnostic handbooks. The present contribution provides an overview of work contradicting this dominant narrative. First, I show that the developmental history of prolonged grief disorder has been nonlinear and that this yields questions on generalizability and problems with measurement of the newest criteria sets. Second, I highlight an important gap in the validity evidence: the distinction of prolonged grief disorder from normal grief. Third, I discuss concerns relating to the societal effects of the inclusion of prolonged grief disorder in diagnostic handbooks, including the medicalization of grief, development and adverse effects of pharmacotherapy and stigmatization. A more realistic, balanced view on the history, validity and societal impact of prolonged grief disorder appears appropriate. I recommend stringent validation of assessment instruments for prolonged grief disorder, convergence of criteria-sets, closing gaps in validity evidence and developing strategies to mitigate the negative effects of grief diagnoses.</p

COVID-19, natural, and unnatural bereavement:Comprehensive comparisons of loss circumstances and grief severity

BACKGROUND: Acute grief appears more severe after COVID-19 deaths than natural deaths. Prolonged grief disorder (PGD) also appears prevalent following COVID-19 deaths. Researchers hypothesize that specific loss characteristics and pandemic-related circumstances may precipitate more severe grief following COVID-19 deaths compared to (other) natural deaths. Systematic research on these hypotheses may help identify those most at risk for severe grief reactions, yet it is scant. OBJECTIVE: To compare loss characteristics, loss circumstances, and grief levels among people bereaved due to COVID-19, natural, and unnatural causes. METHODS: Adults bereaved through COVID-19 (n = 99), natural causes (n = 1006), and unnatural causes (n = 161) completed an online survey. We administered self-report measures of demographic variables (i.e., age, gender), loss characteristics (i.e., time since loss, relationship with the deceased, intensive care admission, expectedness of death), loss circumstances (i.e., saying goodbye appropriately, COVID-19 infection, quarantine, financial setbacks, social support satisfaction, altered funeral arrangements, funeral satisfaction), and prolonged grief symptoms. RESULTS: COVID-19 deaths (vs. other deaths) more often were parental deaths and less often child deaths. COVID-19 deaths (vs. natural deaths) were more often unexpected and characterized by an inability to say goodbye appropriately. People bereaved due to COVID-19 (vs. other deaths) were more often infected and quarantined. COVID-19 deaths (vs. other deaths) more often involved intensive care admission and altered funeral arrangements. COVID-19 deaths yielded higher grief levels than natural deaths (but not unnatural deaths). Expectedness of the death and the inability to say goodbye appropriately explained this effect. CONCLUSIONS: Bereavement due to COVID-19 is characterized by a unique set of loss characteristics and circumstances and elevated grief levels. Improving opportunities to say goodbye before and after death (e.g., by means of rituals) may provide an important means to prevent and reduce severe grief following COVID-19 deaths. HIGHLIGHTS: COVID-19 deaths have unique loss characteristics and circumstances and elicit more severe grief than natural deaths. Death expectedness and the ability to say goodbye appropriately appear important in understanding, preventing and treating grief following COVID-19 deaths

Grief Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic:Multiple Group Comparisons

CONTEXT: Grief researchers are concerned that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic will precipitate increases in severe, persistent, and disabling grief, termed prolonged grief disorder or persistent complex bereavement disorder. We recently demonstrated that higher grief levels are experienced after COVID-19-related bereavement than natural bereavement. Death circumstances during the pandemic (e.g., reduced social support, limited opportunities for death rituals) may also hamper the grief process for non-COVID-19-related bereavement, yet no quantitative research has specifically addressed this issue. OBJECTIVES: To test if grief severity is higher during than before the lockdown after non-COVID-19-related bereavement. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey including questions on sociodemographic and loss-related variables and a grief measure was conducted among a sample of 1600 bereaved adults (78% females), participating before (n = 731) or during (n = 869) the pandemic, including people who had experienced a loss before the pandemic (n = 456) or during the pandemic (n = 200) recently (five months ago or less). RESULTS: No significant differences emerged between grief levels in people participating before or during the pandemic. However, being recently bereaved during the pandemic elicited more severe grief than before it (d = 0.17; d = 0.18). Effects remained significant after controlling analyses for relevant loss-related variables. CONCLUSION: Among all bereaved persons, grief severity was no different during the pandemic compared with before the pandemic. However, experiencing a recent loss during the pandemic elicited more severe acute grief reactions than before the pandemic, suggesting that dealing with loss may be more difficult during this ongoing health crisis

When Thinking Impairs Sleep : Trait, Daytime and Nighttime Repetitive Thinking in Insomnia

We like to thank Dorien van Baar, Lisette van Breen, Rachel Renet, Marlene Stone, Britt van Hest, and Noraly Dekkers for their help with the data acquisition.Peer reviewedPublisher PD