Broaching sexual health topics during a doctor-patient encounter in ambulatory psychiatric care

 WSTĘP: Trudności w sferze seksualnej są częstym problemem pacjentów psychiatrycznych. Zarówno psychopatologia niektórych zaburzeń i chorób psychicznych, jak i efekty niepożądane wielu leków stosowanych w psychiatrii mogą negatywnie wpływać na sferę seksualną pacjenta. Celem niniejszego badania było określenie, w jakim stopniu lekarze psychiatrzy podejmują z pacjentami rozmowę na temat sfery seksualnej oraz jakie są oczekiwania pacjentów w tym zakresie.MATERIAŁ I METODY: 615 ambulatoryjnych pacjentów psychiatrycznych oceniło swoją postawę do lekarza prowadzącego, umiejętność psychiatry do taktownego wprowadzenia tematów związanych ze sferą seksualną oraz swoje oczekiwania w zakresie takiej rozmowy. Badanie zostało przeprowadzone w 10 spośród 30 losowo wybranych poradni zdrowia psychicznego w północno-wschodniej Polsce.WYNIKI: Pacjenci ujawniali pozytywną postawę do leczących ich psychiatrów. Ponad połowa ankietowanych ujawniła, że psychiatra nie omawia z nimi sfery seksualnej. Jedna czwarta badanych chciałaby rozmawiać podczas wizyty u psychiatry o swoim życiu seksualnym, jedna czarta nie była pewna, czy chce ten temat podejmować. Gotowość pacjentów do podejmowania w rozmowie tematów seksualnych była istotnie związana z wprowadzaniem przez lekarza tego tematu do rozmowy.WNIOSKI: Psychiatra jako osoba dominująca w diadzie lekarz−pacjent ma wpływ na kształtowanie relacji z pacjentem i wprowadzanie do rozmowy tematów związanych ze sferą seksualną. Taktowne poruszanie przez psychiatrę tematów dotyczących funkcjonowania seksualnego pacjenta zwiększa jego gotowość do rozmowy na ten temat. Introduction: Difficulties in sexual functioning are a frequent problem for psychiatric patients. Both the psychopathology of some psychiatric diseases as well as the side effects of medication used in psychiatry may adversely affect the patient’s sexual functioning. The aim of this study was to investigate to what extent psychiatrists raise sexual matters with patients during their encounters in psychiatric ambulatory care and what the patients’ expectations in this area are.Material and methods: 615 psychiatric outpatients responded to the anonymous questionnaire regarding their attitudes towards their psychiatrists, their evaluation of the doctors’ ability to tactfully address sexual matters during the encounter and their expectations from such an interaction. The study was conducted in 10 out of 30 randomly chosen public mental health clinics in north-eastern Poland.Results: In general, patients expressed a positive attitude towards their therapists. Over half of the study group revealed that the psychiatrist did not discuss with them their sexual health concerns. A quarter of the patients surveyed would have liked to talk about their sex life during their encounter with the psychiatrist whereas a quarter were not certain if they wanted to address the subject. The patient’s readiness to discuss sexual health issues was significantly correlated with the initiation of this topic by the doctor.Conclusions: The psychiatrist as the dominant person in the doctor–patient dyad has a considerable influence on the shape of the patient’s relationship with the therapist and the initiation of sexual health topics during the doctor-patient encounter. The tactful introduction of the topic of the patient’s sexual functioning by the psychiatrist increases the patient’s willingness to discuss their sexual health concerns

Variability and magnitude of brain glutamate levels in schizophrenia:a meta and mega-analysis

Glutamatergic dysfunction is implicated in schizophrenia pathoaetiology, but this may vary in extent between patients. It is unclear whether inter-individual variability in glutamate is greater in schizophrenia than the general population. We conducted meta-analyses to assess (1) variability of glutamate measures in patients relative to controls (log coefficient of variation ratio: CVR); (2) standardised mean differences (SMD) using Hedges g; (3) modal distribution of individual-level glutamate data (Hartigan’s unimodality dip test). MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to September 2022 for proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) studies reporting glutamate, glutamine or Glx in schizophrenia. 123 studies reporting on 8256 patients and 7532 controls were included. Compared with controls, patients demonstrated greater variability in glutamatergic metabolites in the medial frontal cortex (MFC, glutamate: CVR = 0.15, p &lt; 0.001; glutamine: CVR = 0.15, p = 0.003; Glx: CVR = 0.11, p = 0.002), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (glutamine: CVR = 0.14, p = 0.05; Glx: CVR = 0.25, p &lt; 0.001) and thalamus (glutamate: CVR = 0.16, p = 0.008; Glx: CVR = 0.19, p = 0.008). Studies in younger, more symptomatic patients were associated with greater variability in the basal ganglia (BG glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.003, symptoms: z = 0.007, p = 0.02) and temporal lobe (glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.02), while studies with older, more symptomatic patients associated with greater variability in MFC (glutamate with age: z = 0.01, p = 0.02, glutamine with symptoms: z = 0.01, p = 0.02). For individual patient data, most studies showed a unimodal distribution of glutamatergic metabolites. Meta-analysis of mean differences found lower MFC glutamate (g = −0.15, p = 0.03), higher thalamic glutamine (g = 0.53, p &lt; 0.001) and higher BG Glx in patients relative to controls (g = 0.28, p &lt; 0.001). Proportion of males was negatively associated with MFC glutamate (z = −0.02, p &lt; 0.001) and frontal white matter Glx (z = −0.03, p = 0.02) in patients relative to controls. Patient PANSS total score was positively associated with glutamate SMD in BG (z = 0.01, p = 0.01) and temporal lobe (z = 0.05, p = 0.008). Further research into the mechanisms underlying greater glutamatergic metabolite variability in schizophrenia and their clinical consequences may inform the identification of patient subgroups for future treatment strategies.</p

Variability and magnitude of brain glutamate levels in schizophrenia:a meta and mega-analysis

Glutamatergic dysfunction is implicated in schizophrenia pathoaetiology, but this may vary in extent between patients. It is unclear whether inter-individual variability in glutamate is greater in schizophrenia than the general population. We conducted meta-analyses to assess (1) variability of glutamate measures in patients relative to controls (log coefficient of variation ratio: CVR); (2) standardised mean differences (SMD) using Hedges g; (3) modal distribution of individual-level glutamate data (Hartigan’s unimodality dip test). MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to September 2022 for proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) studies reporting glutamate, glutamine or Glx in schizophrenia. 123 studies reporting on 8256 patients and 7532 controls were included. Compared with controls, patients demonstrated greater variability in glutamatergic metabolites in the medial frontal cortex (MFC, glutamate: CVR = 0.15, p &lt; 0.001; glutamine: CVR = 0.15, p = 0.003; Glx: CVR = 0.11, p = 0.002), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (glutamine: CVR = 0.14, p = 0.05; Glx: CVR = 0.25, p &lt; 0.001) and thalamus (glutamate: CVR = 0.16, p = 0.008; Glx: CVR = 0.19, p = 0.008). Studies in younger, more symptomatic patients were associated with greater variability in the basal ganglia (BG glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.003, symptoms: z = 0.007, p = 0.02) and temporal lobe (glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.02), while studies with older, more symptomatic patients associated with greater variability in MFC (glutamate with age: z = 0.01, p = 0.02, glutamine with symptoms: z = 0.01, p = 0.02). For individual patient data, most studies showed a unimodal distribution of glutamatergic metabolites. Meta-analysis of mean differences found lower MFC glutamate (g = −0.15, p = 0.03), higher thalamic glutamine (g = 0.53, p &lt; 0.001) and higher BG Glx in patients relative to controls (g = 0.28, p &lt; 0.001). Proportion of males was negatively associated with MFC glutamate (z = −0.02, p &lt; 0.001) and frontal white matter Glx (z = −0.03, p = 0.02) in patients relative to controls. Patient PANSS total score was positively associated with glutamate SMD in BG (z = 0.01, p = 0.01) and temporal lobe (z = 0.05, p = 0.008). Further research into the mechanisms underlying greater glutamatergic metabolite variability in schizophrenia and their clinical consequences may inform the identification of patient subgroups for future treatment strategies.</p

Variability and magnitude of brain glutamate levels in schizophrenia:a meta and mega-analysis

Glutamatergic dysfunction is implicated in schizophrenia pathoaetiology, but this may vary in extent between patients. It is unclear whether inter-individual variability in glutamate is greater in schizophrenia than the general population. We conducted meta-analyses to assess (1) variability of glutamate measures in patients relative to controls (log coefficient of variation ratio: CVR); (2) standardised mean differences (SMD) using Hedges g; (3) modal distribution of individual-level glutamate data (Hartigan’s unimodality dip test). MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to September 2022 for proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) studies reporting glutamate, glutamine or Glx in schizophrenia. 123 studies reporting on 8256 patients and 7532 controls were included. Compared with controls, patients demonstrated greater variability in glutamatergic metabolites in the medial frontal cortex (MFC, glutamate: CVR = 0.15, p &lt; 0.001; glutamine: CVR = 0.15, p = 0.003; Glx: CVR = 0.11, p = 0.002), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (glutamine: CVR = 0.14, p = 0.05; Glx: CVR = 0.25, p &lt; 0.001) and thalamus (glutamate: CVR = 0.16, p = 0.008; Glx: CVR = 0.19, p = 0.008). Studies in younger, more symptomatic patients were associated with greater variability in the basal ganglia (BG glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.003, symptoms: z = 0.007, p = 0.02) and temporal lobe (glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.02), while studies with older, more symptomatic patients associated with greater variability in MFC (glutamate with age: z = 0.01, p = 0.02, glutamine with symptoms: z = 0.01, p = 0.02). For individual patient data, most studies showed a unimodal distribution of glutamatergic metabolites. Meta-analysis of mean differences found lower MFC glutamate (g = −0.15, p = 0.03), higher thalamic glutamine (g = 0.53, p &lt; 0.001) and higher BG Glx in patients relative to controls (g = 0.28, p &lt; 0.001). Proportion of males was negatively associated with MFC glutamate (z = −0.02, p &lt; 0.001) and frontal white matter Glx (z = −0.03, p = 0.02) in patients relative to controls. Patient PANSS total score was positively associated with glutamate SMD in BG (z = 0.01, p = 0.01) and temporal lobe (z = 0.05, p = 0.008). Further research into the mechanisms underlying greater glutamatergic metabolite variability in schizophrenia and their clinical consequences may inform the identification of patient subgroups for future treatment strategies.</p

Variability and magnitude of brain glutamate levels in schizophrenia:a meta and mega-analysis

Glutamatergic dysfunction is implicated in schizophrenia pathoaetiology, but this may vary in extent between patients. It is unclear whether inter-individual variability in glutamate is greater in schizophrenia than the general population. We conducted meta-analyses to assess (1) variability of glutamate measures in patients relative to controls (log coefficient of variation ratio: CVR); (2) standardised mean differences (SMD) using Hedges g; (3) modal distribution of individual-level glutamate data (Hartigan’s unimodality dip test). MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to September 2022 for proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) studies reporting glutamate, glutamine or Glx in schizophrenia. 123 studies reporting on 8256 patients and 7532 controls were included. Compared with controls, patients demonstrated greater variability in glutamatergic metabolites in the medial frontal cortex (MFC, glutamate: CVR = 0.15, p &lt; 0.001; glutamine: CVR = 0.15, p = 0.003; Glx: CVR = 0.11, p = 0.002), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (glutamine: CVR = 0.14, p = 0.05; Glx: CVR = 0.25, p &lt; 0.001) and thalamus (glutamate: CVR = 0.16, p = 0.008; Glx: CVR = 0.19, p = 0.008). Studies in younger, more symptomatic patients were associated with greater variability in the basal ganglia (BG glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.003, symptoms: z = 0.007, p = 0.02) and temporal lobe (glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.02), while studies with older, more symptomatic patients associated with greater variability in MFC (glutamate with age: z = 0.01, p = 0.02, glutamine with symptoms: z = 0.01, p = 0.02). For individual patient data, most studies showed a unimodal distribution of glutamatergic metabolites. Meta-analysis of mean differences found lower MFC glutamate (g = −0.15, p = 0.03), higher thalamic glutamine (g = 0.53, p &lt; 0.001) and higher BG Glx in patients relative to controls (g = 0.28, p &lt; 0.001). Proportion of males was negatively associated with MFC glutamate (z = −0.02, p &lt; 0.001) and frontal white matter Glx (z = −0.03, p = 0.02) in patients relative to controls. Patient PANSS total score was positively associated with glutamate SMD in BG (z = 0.01, p = 0.01) and temporal lobe (z = 0.05, p = 0.008). Further research into the mechanisms underlying greater glutamatergic metabolite variability in schizophrenia and their clinical consequences may inform the identification of patient subgroups for future treatment strategies.</p

Variability and magnitude of brain glutamate levels in schizophrenia:a meta and mega-analysis

Glutamatergic dysfunction is implicated in schizophrenia pathoaetiology, but this may vary in extent between patients. It is unclear whether inter-individual variability in glutamate is greater in schizophrenia than the general population. We conducted meta-analyses to assess (1) variability of glutamate measures in patients relative to controls (log coefficient of variation ratio: CVR); (2) standardised mean differences (SMD) using Hedges g; (3) modal distribution of individual-level glutamate data (Hartigan’s unimodality dip test). MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to September 2022 for proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) studies reporting glutamate, glutamine or Glx in schizophrenia. 123 studies reporting on 8256 patients and 7532 controls were included. Compared with controls, patients demonstrated greater variability in glutamatergic metabolites in the medial frontal cortex (MFC, glutamate: CVR = 0.15, p &lt; 0.001; glutamine: CVR = 0.15, p = 0.003; Glx: CVR = 0.11, p = 0.002), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (glutamine: CVR = 0.14, p = 0.05; Glx: CVR = 0.25, p &lt; 0.001) and thalamus (glutamate: CVR = 0.16, p = 0.008; Glx: CVR = 0.19, p = 0.008). Studies in younger, more symptomatic patients were associated with greater variability in the basal ganglia (BG glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.003, symptoms: z = 0.007, p = 0.02) and temporal lobe (glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.02), while studies with older, more symptomatic patients associated with greater variability in MFC (glutamate with age: z = 0.01, p = 0.02, glutamine with symptoms: z = 0.01, p = 0.02). For individual patient data, most studies showed a unimodal distribution of glutamatergic metabolites. Meta-analysis of mean differences found lower MFC glutamate (g = −0.15, p = 0.03), higher thalamic glutamine (g = 0.53, p &lt; 0.001) and higher BG Glx in patients relative to controls (g = 0.28, p &lt; 0.001). Proportion of males was negatively associated with MFC glutamate (z = −0.02, p &lt; 0.001) and frontal white matter Glx (z = −0.03, p = 0.02) in patients relative to controls. Patient PANSS total score was positively associated with glutamate SMD in BG (z = 0.01, p = 0.01) and temporal lobe (z = 0.05, p = 0.008). Further research into the mechanisms underlying greater glutamatergic metabolite variability in schizophrenia and their clinical consequences may inform the identification of patient subgroups for future treatment strategies.</p

Variability and magnitude of brain glutamate levels in schizophrenia: a meta and mega-analysis

Glutamatergic dysfunction is implicated in schizophrenia pathoaetiology, but this may vary in extent between patients. It is unclear whether inter-individual variability in glutamate is greater in schizophrenia than the general population. We conducted meta-analyses to assess (1) variability of glutamate measures in patients relative to controls (log coefficient of variation ratio: CVR); (2) standardised mean differences (SMD) using Hedges g; (3) modal distribution of individual-level glutamate data (Hartigan’s unimodality dip test). MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to September 2022 for proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) studies reporting glutamate, glutamine or Glx in schizophrenia. 123 studies reporting on 8256 patients and 7532 controls were included. Compared with controls, patients demonstrated greater variability in glutamatergic metabolites in the medial frontal cortex (MFC, glutamate: CVR = 0.15, p &lt; 0.001; glutamine: CVR = 0.15, p = 0.003; Glx: CVR = 0.11, p = 0.002), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (glutamine: CVR = 0.14, p = 0.05; Glx: CVR = 0.25, p &lt; 0.001) and thalamus (glutamate: CVR = 0.16, p = 0.008; Glx: CVR = 0.19, p = 0.008). Studies in younger, more symptomatic patients were associated with greater variability in the basal ganglia (BG glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.003, symptoms: z = 0.007, p = 0.02) and temporal lobe (glutamate with age: z = −0.03, p = 0.02), while studies with older, more symptomatic patients associated with greater variability in MFC (glutamate with age: z = 0.01, p = 0.02, glutamine with symptoms: z = 0.01, p = 0.02). For individual patient data, most studies showed a unimodal distribution of glutamatergic metabolites. Meta-analysis of mean differences found lower MFC glutamate (g = −0.15, p = 0.03), higher thalamic glutamine (g = 0.53, p &lt; 0.001) and higher BG Glx in patients relative to controls (g = 0.28, p &lt; 0.001). Proportion of males was negatively associated with MFC glutamate (z = −0.02, p &lt; 0.001) and frontal white matter Glx (z = −0.03, p = 0.02) in patients relative to controls. Patient PANSS total score was positively associated with glutamate SMD in BG (z = 0.01, p = 0.01) and temporal lobe (z = 0.05, p = 0.008). Further research into the mechanisms underlying greater glutamatergic metabolite variability in schizophrenia and their clinical consequences may inform the identification of patient subgroups for future treatment strategies

Markers of Schizophrenia—A Critical Narrative Update

Schizophrenia is a long-term mental disease, associated with functional impairment. Therefore, it is important to make an accurate diagnosis and implement the proper treatment. Biomarkers may be a potential tool for these purposes. Regarding advances in biomarker studies in psychosis, the current symptom-based criteria seem to be no longer sufficient in clinical settings. This narrative review describes biomarkers of psychosis focusing on the biochemical (peripheral and central), neurophysiological, neuropsychological and neuroimaging findings as well as the multimodal approach related with them. Endophenotype markers (especially neuropsychological and occulomotor disturbances) can be currently used in a clinical settings, whereas neuroimaging glutamate/glutamine and D2/D3 receptor density changes, as well as immunological Th2 and PRL levels, seem to be potential biomarkers that need further accuracy tests. When searching for biochemical/immunological markers in the diagnosis of psychosis, the appropriate time of body fluid collection needs to be considered to minimize the influence of the stress axis on their concentrations. In schizophrenia diagnostics, a multimodal approach seems to be highly recommended

How do patients perceive ambulatory psychiatric care and what are their needs?

Introduction and objective The quality of a doctor-patient relationship plays a vital role in all fields of medicine. In the case of psychiatry, this role is special as it provides the foundation for the whole therapeutic process. The aim of this study was to investigate the patient’s perspective on psychiatric visits: patient’s attitudes towards the psychiatrist, patient’s view of the patient-psychiatrist relationship, and the patient’s needs and expectations from this relationship. Material and Methods 615 psychiatric outpatients responded to the anonymous questionnaires connected with their attitudes towards the psychiatrist, evaluation of the doctor, and expectations from psychiatric care. The study was conducted in 10 out of 30 public centres for psychiatric care in north-eastern Poland. Results Generally, the patients liked and positively evaluated their psychiatrists. Patient’s liking for the doctor was connected with the feeling that the doctor also liked the patient, as well as with perceiving the doctor as competent and willing to meet the patient. The longer the treatment with a particular psychiatrist and the rarer need to consult the doctor, the more positive attitude and evaluation of the doctor patients had. According to the patients, the most significant expectations were associated with both conversation with the doctor and receiving emotional support. Conclusions The key phase for forming the patient-psychiatrist relationship was the first stage of cooperation in which patients created their attitudes towards the doctor without modifying them at further stages. Thus, further studies on learning and developing the ability to establish the relationship with the patient, inspiring the patient’s trust and making psychiatric appointments comfortable from the first meeting, will be highly valuabl

Depressive and Neurocognitive Disorders in the Context of the Inflammatory Background of COVID-19

The dysfunctional effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection on the nervous system are established. The manifestation of neuropsychiatric symptoms during and after infection is influenced by the neuroinvasive and neurotrophic properties of SARS-CoV-2 as well as strong inflammation characterised by a specific “cytokine storm”. Research suggests that a strong immune response to a SARS-CoV-2 infection and psychological stressors related to the pandemic may cause chronic inflammatory processes in the body with elevated levels of inflammatory markers contributing to the intensification of neurodegenerative processes. It is suggested that neuroinflammation and associated central nervous system changes may significantly contribute to the etiopathogenesis of depressive disorders. In addition, symptoms after a COVID-19 infection may persist for up to several weeks after an acute infection as a post-COVID-19 syndrome. Moreover, previous knowledge indicates that among SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) group antidepressants, fluoxetine is a promising drug against COVID-19. In conclusion, further research, observation and broadening of the knowledge of the pathomechanism of a SARS-CoV-2 infection and the impact on potential complications are necessary. It is essential to continue research in order to assess the long-term neuropsychiatric effects in COVID-19 patients and to find new therapeutic strategies