Violence in Mental Disorders and Community Sample: an evolutionary model related with dominance in social relationships

The major risk determinants of violence are to be young and male, to have low socioeconomic status and suffering substance abuse. This is true whether it occurs in the context of a concurrent mental illness or not; i.e., mental disorders are neither necessary, nor sufficient causes for violence. Intense motivation is a facilitating factor for violence in clinical and non clinical samples. This explains why ‘normal’ people, are implicated in planned violence at higher rates than mentally ill (e.g. in criminal acts against property). However mentally ill patients are more easily implicated in impulsive violence or in violence without obvious cause due to veiled motivation fuelled by unidentified symptoms. Subjective or real awareness of competitive disadvantage increases motivation for violence (e.g. paranoid, narcissistic symptoms, etc.). Many psychiatric disorders as antisocial disorder, borderline, schizophrenia, have most of the factors that facilitate the appearance of violence. Antisocial disorder is a good model to study determinants of violence in normal samples as it is present in young males that do not have any psychotic symptom, have stable symptomatology, self control under scrutiny, and their motivations are similar to normal samples. Our evolutionary model suggests that there is a non random association of genetic factors (genes, pseudogenes, promoting areas, etc.), that is, a genetic cluster (cluster DO), whose phylogenetic function is to motivate to be the dominant in social relationships. To be the dominant is a major psychological feature present in many social groups of animals, included primates. DO cluster have sense from an evolutionary viewpoint: when expressed in no pathological way it increases inclusive fitness (transmission of the genes of a person genotype whether by oneself or by relatives reproduction). Features of cluster DO in humans are expressed differently according to sex, age, moral education, level of intelligence, etc. Cluster DO has higher phenotypical expression in males and young people. Primary antisocial personality disorder and other related disorders (cluster B personality disorders, disocial, defiant disorder, etc.), are a pathological manifestation of this cluster DO. Some other genetic clusters that causes the genetic liability to some disorders (e.g. attention deficit disorder) are non random associated with cluster DO, thus explaining clinical comorbidity. According to our model, motivation for dominance usually prevails over motivation for material benefit or antinormative behaviour, this explains some incongruent behaviour in antisocial patients not elucidated by other models. Along with the primary expressed feature of dominance of cluster DO there are other secondary features that have been identified by psychobiological studies: novelty seeking, intolerance for frustration, impulsiveness, fearless, aggressiveness, higher threshold for activation of the sympathetic system, lack of empathy, egoism, non acceptance of rules, defiant and rebellious behaviour, manipulation in social interactions, selfishness and deficits in altruism or in social co-operation

Response to methylphenidate by adult and pediatric patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: the Spanish multicenter DIHANA study.

Journal Article;BACKGROUND The purpose of this multicenter Spanish study was to evaluate the response to immediate-release methylphenidate by children and adults diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), as well as to obtain information on current therapy patterns and safety characteristics. METHODS This multicenter, observational, retrospective, noninterventional study included 730 patients aged 4-65 years with a diagnosis of ADHD. Information was obtained based on a review of medical records for the years 2002-2006 in sequential order. RESULTS The ADHD predominantly inattentive subtype affected 29.7% of patients, ADHD predominantly hyperactive-impulsive was found in 5.2%, and the combined subtype in 65.1%. Overall, a significant lower Clinical Global Impression (CGI) score and mean number of DSM-IV TR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth Edition, Text Revision) symptoms by subtype were found after one year of treatment with immediate-release methylphenidate; CGI decreased from 4.51 to 1.69, symptoms of inattention from 7.90 to 4.34, symptoms of hyperactivity from 6.73 to 3.39, and combined subtype symptoms from 14.62 to 7.7. Satisfaction with immediate-release methylphenidate after one year was evaluated as "very satisfied" or "satisfied" by 86.90% of the sample; 25.75% of all patients reported at least one adverse effect. At the end of the study, 41.47% of all the patients treated with immediate-release methylphenidate were still receiving it, with a mean time of 3.80 years on therapy. CONCLUSION Good efficacy and safety results were found for immediate-release methylphenidate in patients with ADHD.Ye