The Use of Humor in Serious Mental Illness: A Review

There is now a relatively good understanding of the broad range of direct and indirect effects of humor and laughter on perceptions, attitudes, judgments and emotions, which can potentially benefit the physical and psychological state. This article presents a review and discussion of the use of humor and laughter in treating people with serious mental illness, distinguishing between clinical papers on individual and group psychotherapy, and empirical research reports describing humor and laughter interventions. In spite of the exponential growth of the field over the last 30 years, I conclude that empirical studies are still lacking, the studies that do exist have major methodological shortcomings, and the field is in dire need of further investigation

Revolving-door Patients in a Public Psychiatric Hospital in Israel: Cross Sectional Study

Aim To study social, demographic, clinical, and forensic profiles of frequently re-hospitalized (revolving-door) psychiatric patients. Methods The study included all patients (n = 183) who were admitted to our hospital 3 or more times during a 2- year period from 1999 through 2000. We compared these patients to 2 control groups of patients who were admitted to our hospital in the same period. For comparison of forensic data, we compared them with all non revolving- door patients (n = 1056) registered in the computerized hospital database and for comparison of medical and clinical data we compared them with a random sample of non revolving-door patients (n = 98). The sample was sufficiently large to yield high statistical power (above 98%). We collected data on the legal status of the hospitalizations (voluntary or involuntary) and social, demographic, clinical, and forensic information from the forensic and medical records of revolving-door and non revolving-door patients. Results In the period 1999-2000, 183 revolving-door patients accounted for 771 (37.8%, 4.2 admissions per patient) and 1056 non revolving-door patients accounted for 1264 (62.5%, 1.2 admissions per patient) of the 2035 admissions to our hospital. Involuntary hospitalizations accounted for 23.9% of revolving-door and 76.0% of non revolvingdoor admissions. Revolving-door patients had significantly shorter mean interval between hospitalizations, showed less violence, and were usually discharged contrary to medical advice. We found no differences in sex, marital status, age, ethnicity, diagnoses, illegal drug and alcohol use, or previous suicide-attempts between the groups. Conclusions Revolving-door patients are not necessarily hospitalized for longer time periods and do not have more involuntarily admissions. The main difference between revolving- door and non revolving-door patients is greater self-management of the hospitalization process by shortening the time between voluntary re-admission and discharge against medical advice

Trauma history predicts depression and posttraumatic stress symptoms better than a psychiatric diagnosis: Comparing wartime, routine time, and early COVID-19 in Israel

Individuals with a psychiatric diagnosis and those with a history of trauma are at high risk for depression and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) following exposure to new traumatic events. Nevertheless, research is scarce on how having both a psychiatric diagnosis and a trauma history affect reactions to new traumatic events, and how different trauma types may affect individuals with a psychiatric diagnosis. We thus examined whether different stressful contexts (War and COVID-19) affected individuals with and without a psychiatric diagnosis differentially and whether results might be explained by prior trauma exposure. In the same cohort, we assessed depression and PTSS during wartime (2014), routine time (2016), and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020) in a sample with (n = 89) and without (n = 104) a self-reported psychiatric diagnosis. This cohort was recruited during the 2014 Israel-Gaza War using social media, snowballing and outreach to mental health rehabilitation centres. We used a linear mixed modelling approach on data from the entire sample, as well as on the two study groups separately. We found that trauma history predicted PTSS and depression whereas a history of psychiatric diagnosis did not. Regarding trauma types, we found that individuals in the psychiatric diagnosis group relative to themselves had more symptoms during COVID-19 compared to war and routine time, while those without diagnosis had more PTSS and depression symptoms during wartime compared to routine time and COVID-19. In conclusion, a traumatic past may have an important influence on reactions to different types of traumatic events. Distinct traumatic events may affect individuals with or without a psychiatric diagnosis differentially