57 research outputs found

    Delier

    Get PDF

    Pervasive refusal syndrome as part of the refusal–withdrawal–regression spectrum: critical review of the literature illustrated by a case report

    Get PDF
    Pervasive refusal syndrome (PRS) is a rare child psychiatric disorder characterized by pervasive refusal, active/angry resistance to help and social withdrawal leading to an endangered state. Little has been written about PRS. A literature search yielded only 15 relevant articles, all published between 1991 and 2006. This article presents a critical review of the published literature, illustrated by a case report of an 11-year-old girl. PRS most often affects girls (75%). The mean age of the known population is 10.5 years. A premorbid high-achieving, perfectionist, conscientious personality seems to play an important role in the aetiology of PRS, as can a psychiatric history of parents or child and environmental stressors. PRS shows a symptom overlap with many other psychiatric disorders. However, none of the current DSM diagnoses can account for the full range of symptoms seen in PRS, and the active/angry resistance can be considered as the main distinguishing feature. Treatment should be multidisciplinary and characterized by patience, gentle encouragement and tender loving care. Hospitalization, ideally in a child and adolescent psychiatric unit, is almost always required. Although the recovery process is painfully slow (average duration of therapy 12.8 months), most children recover fully (complete recovery in 67% of known cases). In our opinion, it is important to increase knowledge of PRS, not only because of its disabling, potential life-threatening character, but also because there is hope for recovery through suitable treatment. We therefore propose an incorporation of PRS into the DSM and ICD classifications. However, an adaptation of the current diagnostic criteria is needed. We also consider PRS closely related to regression, which is why we introduce a new concept: “the refusal–withdrawal–regression spectrum”

    The DSM-5 criteria, level of arousal and delirium diagnosis: Inclusiveness is safer

    Full text link
    © 2014 European Delirium Association et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. Background: Delirium is a common and serious problem among acutely unwell persons. Alhough linked to higher rates of mortality, institutionalisation and dementia, it remains underdiagnosed. Careful consideration of its phenomenology is warranted to improve detection and therefore mitigate some of its clinical impact. The publication of the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-5) provides an opportunity to examine the constructs underlying delirium as a clinical entity.Discussion: Altered consciousness has been regarded as a core feature of delirium; the fact that consciousness itself should be physiologically disrupted due to acute illness attests to its clinical urgency. DSM-5 now operationalises 'consciousness' as 'changes in attention'. It should be recognised that attention relates to content of consciousness, but arousal corresponds to level of consciousness. Reduced arousal is also associated with adverse outcomes. Attention and arousal are hierarchically related; level of arousal must be sufficient before attention can be reasonably tested.Summary: Our conceptualisation of delirium must extend beyond what can be assessed through cognitive testing (attention) and accept that altered arousal is fundamental. Understanding the DSM-5 criteria explicitly in this way offers the most inclusive and clinically safe interpretation

    Combination antiretroviral therapy and the risk of myocardial infarction

    Get PDF

    Withdrawal symptoms in children after long-term administration of sedatives and/or analgesics: A literature review. "Assessment remains troublesome"

    Get PDF
    Background: Prolonged administration of benzodiazepines and/or opioids to children in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) may induce physiological dependence and withdrawal symptoms. Objective: We reviewed the literature for relevant contributions on the nature of these withdrawal symptoms and on availability of valid scoring systems to assess the extent of symptoms. Methods: The databases PubMed, CINAHL, and Psychinfo (1980-June 2006) were searched using relevant key terms. Results: Symptoms of benzodiazepine and opioid withdrawal can be classified in two groups: central nervous system effects and autonomic dysfunction. However, symptoms of the two types show a large overlap for benzodiazepine and opioid withdrawal. Symptoms of gastrointestinal dysfunction in the PICU population have been described for opioid withdrawal only. Six assessment tools for withdrawal symptoms are used in children. Four of these have been validated for neonates only. Two instruments are available to specifically determine withdrawal symptoms in the PICU: the Sedation Withdrawal Score (SWS) and the Opioid Benzodiazepine Withdrawal Scale (OBWS). The OBWS is the only available assessment tool with prospective validation; however, the sensitivity is low. Conclusions: Withdrawal symptoms for benzodiazepines and opioids largely overlap. A sufficiently sensitive instrument for assessing withdrawal symptoms in PICU patients needs to be developed
    corecore