736 research outputs found

    Psychometric properties of the J apanese version of the S ocial P hobia I nventory

    Full text link
    Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/97457/1/pcn12037.pd

    Relief of Chronic Shoulder and Neck Pain by Electro-Acupuncture and Transcutaneous Electrical Nervous Stimulation: A Randomized Crossover Trial

    Full text link
    Abstract Background: Chronic neck and shoulder pain is common and disabling. Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of electro-acupuncture and transcutaneous electrical stimulation (TENS) for relief of shoulder and neck pain. Materials and Methods: Design: This was a randomized crossover trial. Subjects: Ninety patients were enrolled, with a mean age of 34 years, and with females slightly outnumbering males. All subjects completed the study. Intervention: For electro-acupuncture, acupuncture needles were placed in four different acupoints in the trapezius muscle and each subject underwent a 15-minute session of low-frequency electrical stimulation. TENS treatment was similar and used as an active comparator, with a 2-week washout period between treatments. Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was reduction in pain as measured by a 100?cm visual analogue scale. Secondary outcomes included quality-of-life (QoL) measures. Results: Electro-acupuncture produced significantly greater reduction in pain than TENS did the first 2 days after treatment (p=0.001 and p=0.003, respectively), with pain decreasing from 56 to 33 and 34 versus from 55 to 42 and 42. Electro-acupuncture also produced a significant improvement in the vitality subscale of the Short Form-36. No adverse effects or carryover effect were detected. Conclusions: The results of this study offer preliminary evidence for the comparative effectiveness of electro-acupuncture over TENS for the acute relief of chronic shoulder and neck pain in adults.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98448/1/acu%2E2011%2E0824.pd

    Using the mood disorder questionnaire and bipolar spectrum diagnostic scale to detect bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder among eating disorder patients

    Full text link
    Abstract Background Screening scales for bipolar disorder including the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) and Bipolar Spectrum Diagnostic Scale (BSDS) have been plagued by high false positive rates confounded by presence of borderline personality disorder. This study examined the accuracy of these scales for detecting bipolar disorder among patients referred for eating disorders and explored the possibility of simultaneous assessment of co-morbid borderline personality disorder. Methods Participants were 78 consecutive female patients who were referred for evaluation of an eating disorder. All participants completed the mood and eating disorder sections of the SCID-I/P and the borderline personality disorder section of the SCID-II, in addition to the MDQ and BSDS. Predictive validity of the MDQ and BSDS was evaluated by Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis of the Area Under the Curve (AUC). Results Fifteen (19%) and twelve (15%) patients fulfilled criteria for bipolar II disorder and borderline personality disorder, respectively. The AUCs for bipolar II disorder were 0.78 (MDQ) and 0.78 (BDSD), and the AUCs for borderline personality disorder were 0.75 (MDQ) and 0.79 (BSDS). Conclusions Among patients being evaluated for eating disorders, the MDQ and BSDS show promise as screening questionnaires for both bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/112636/1/12888_2012_Article_1235.pd

    Using the mood disorder questionnaire and bipolar spectrum diagnostic scale to detect bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder among eating disorder patients

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Screening scales for bipolar disorder including the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) and Bipolar Spectrum Diagnostic Scale (BSDS) have been plagued by high false positive rates confounded by presence of borderline personality disorder. This study examined the accuracy of these scales for detecting bipolar disorder among patients referred for eating disorders and explored the possibility of simultaneous assessment of co-morbid borderline personality disorder. METHODS: Participants were 78 consecutive female patients who were referred for evaluation of an eating disorder. All participants completed the mood and eating disorder sections of the SCID-I/P and the borderline personality disorder section of the SCID-II, in addition to the MDQ and BSDS. Predictive validity of the MDQ and BSDS was evaluated by Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis of the Area Under the Curve (AUC). RESULTS: Fifteen (19%) and twelve (15%) patients fulfilled criteria for bipolar II disorder and borderline personality disorder, respectively. The AUCs for bipolar II disorder were 0.78 (MDQ) and 0.78 (BDSD), and the AUCs for borderline personality disorder were 0.75 (MDQ) and 0.79 (BSDS). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients being evaluated for eating disorders, the MDQ and BSDS show promise as screening questionnaires for both bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder

    Family Features of Social Withdrawal Syndrome (Hikikomori)

    Get PDF
    Background: Family may play an important role in the origin, maintenance, and treatment of people with social withdrawal. The aim of this study is to analyze family factors related to social withdrawal syndrome. Methods: Socio-demographic, clinical, and family data, including family psychiatric history, dysfunctional family dynamics, and history of family abuse were analyzed in 190 cases of social withdrawal with a minimum duration of 6 months that started an at-home treatment program. Data were analyzed at baseline and at 12 months. Results: In 36 cases (18%) neither the patient nor the family allowed at home evaluation and treatment by the Crisis Resolution Home Treatment (CRHT) team. Patients had high rates of dysfunctional family dynamics (n = 115, 61.5%), and family psychiatric history (n = 113, 59.3%), especially maternal affective (n = 22, 42.9%), and anxiety disorders (n = 11 20.4%). There was a non-negligible percentage of family maltreatment in childhood (n = 35, 20.7%) and single-parent families (n = 66, 37.8%). Most of the cases lived with their families (n = 135, 86%), had higher family collaboration in the therapeutic plan (n = 97, 51.9%) and families were the ones to detect patient isolation and call for help (n = 140, 73.7%). Higher social withdrawal severity (as defined by at least one of: early age of onset, no family collaboration, lack of insight, higher CGSI score, and higher Zarit score), was associated with family psychiatric history, dysfunctional family dynamics, and family abuse history. All of these predictive variables were highly correlated one to each other. Conclusions: There is a high frequency of family psychiatric history, dysfunctional family dynamics, and traumatic events in childhood (family maltreatment), and these factors are closely interrelated, highlighting the potential role of family in the development and maintenance of social withdrawal

    “Having all of your internal resources exhausted beyond measure and being left with no clean-up crew”: defining autistic burnout

    Get PDF
    Background: Although autistic adults often discuss experiencing ‘‘autistic burnout’’ and attribute serious negative outcomes to it, the concept is almost completely absent from the academic and clinical literature. Methods: We used a community-based participatory research approach to conduct a thematic analysis of 19 interviews and 19 public Internet sources to understand and characterize autistic burnout. Interview participants were autistic adults who identified as having been professionally diagnosed with an autism spectrum condition. We conducted a thematic analysis, using a hybrid inductive–deductive approach, at semantic and latent levels, through a critical paradigm. We addressed trustworthiness through multiple coders, peer debriefing, and examination of contradictions. Results: Autistic adults described the primary characteristics of autistic burnout as chronic exhaustion, loss of skills, and reduced tolerance to stimulus. They described burnout as happening because of life stressors that added to the cumulative load they experienced, and barriers to support that created an inability to obtain relief from the load. These pressures caused expectations to outweigh abilities resulting in autistic burnout. Autistic adults described negative impacts on their health, capacity for independent living, and quality of life, including suicidal behavior. They also discussed a lack of empathy from neurotypical people and described acceptance and social support, time off/reduced expectations, and doing things in an autistic way/unmasking as associated in their experiences with recovery from autistic burnout. Conclusions: Autistic burnout appears to be a phenomenon distinct from occupational burnout or clinical depression. Better understanding autistic burnout could lead to ways to recognize, relieve, or prevent it, including highlighting the potential dangers of teaching autistic people to mask or camouflage their autistic traits, and including burnout education in suicide prevention programs. These findings highlight the need to reduce discrimination and stigma related to autism and disability

    Development and validation of the 25â item Hikikomori Questionnaire (HQâ 25)

    Full text link
    Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146508/1/pcn12691_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146508/2/pcn12691.pd

    DNA repair, DNA replication and human disorders: A personal journey

    Get PDF
    I was born in 1946 and grew up in the industrial north-west of England close to the city of Manchester. My parents were German- Jewish refugees, who left Germany fairly early, in 1933. My father helped to establish and was one of the directors of a tannery, which made leather for shoes and handbags. This was part of a group of tanneries established first in Strasbourg by my great-grandfather Ferdinand Oppenheimer. I would describe my childhood and adolescent years as comfortable by general post-war standards. I went to a state primary school and obtained a scholarship to Manchester Grammar School (MGS), a fairly prestigious secondary school. As a child I was always interested in chemistry but had little interest in or knowledge of biology. The educational system in the UK at that time was such that one had to specialise very early and as a consequence I have had no formal biology education since the age of 12, something I have managed to hide reasonably successfully for the rest of my life! In my final two years at MGS I studied just physics, chemistry and mathematics and obtained a scholarship to Pembroke College, Cambridge (England) to study Natural Sciences, with the intention of becoming a chemist. In the second year at Cambridge, one of the options was a course on biochemistry. Having no real idea what this was, I read a book about it in the summer of 1965, and was truly astonished and excited to discover that the basis of life was just a bunch of rather complicated organic chemistry reactions. So I took the biochemistry course in my second year. By the end of that year, I was fed up with chemistry and for my final year I chose to do biochemistry rather than chemistry, a decision I have not regretted. The biochemistry lectures must have been pretty up-to-date, as we were told briefly about the discovery of DNA repair by Dick Setlow [1], a topic that seemed rather esoteric at the time

    Cognitive behavioural therapy for adults with dissociative seizures (CODES): a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Dissociative seizures are paroxysmal events resembling epilepsy or syncope with characteristic features that allow them to be distinguished from other medical conditions. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) plus standardised medical care with standardised medical care alone for the reduction of dissociative seizure frequency. METHODS: In this pragmatic, parallel-arm, multicentre randomised controlled trial, we initially recruited participants at 27 neurology or epilepsy services in England, Scotland, and Wales. Adults (≥18 years) who had dissociative seizures in the previous 8 weeks and no epileptic seizures in the previous 12 months were subsequently randomly assigned (1:1) from 17 liaison or neuropsychiatry services following psychiatric assessment, to receive standardised medical care or CBT plus standardised medical care, using a web-based system. Randomisation was stratified by neuropsychiatry or liaison psychiatry recruitment site. The trial manager, chief investigator, all treating clinicians, and patients were aware of treatment allocation, but outcome data collectors and trial statisticians were unaware of treatment allocation. Patients were followed up 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcome was monthly dissociative seizure frequency (ie, frequency in the previous 4 weeks) assessed at 12 months. Secondary outcomes assessed at 12 months were: seizure severity (intensity) and bothersomeness; longest period of seizure freedom in the previous 6 months; complete seizure freedom in the previous 3 months; a greater than 50% reduction in seizure frequency relative to baseline; changes in dissociative seizures (rated by others); health-related quality of life; psychosocial functioning; psychiatric symptoms, psychological distress, and somatic symptom burden; and clinical impression of improvement and satisfaction. p values and statistical significance for outcomes were reported without correction for multiple comparisons as per our protocol. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in the intention-to-treat population with multiple imputation for missing observations. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry, ISRCTN05681227, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02325544. FINDINGS: Between Jan 16, 2015, and May 31, 2017, we randomly assigned 368 patients to receive CBT plus standardised medical care (n=186) or standardised medical care alone (n=182); of whom 313 had primary outcome data at 12 months (156 [84%] of 186 patients in the CBT plus standardised medical care group and 157 [86%] of 182 patients in the standardised medical care group). At 12 months, no significant difference in monthly dissociative seizure frequency was identified between the groups (median 4 seizures [IQR 0-20] in the CBT plus standardised medical care group vs 7 seizures [1-35] in the standardised medical care group; estimated incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0·78 [95% CI 0·56-1·09]; p=0·144). Dissociative seizures were rated as less bothersome in the CBT plus standardised medical care group than the standardised medical care group (estimated mean difference -0·53 [95% CI -0·97 to -0·08]; p=0·020). The CBT plus standardised medical care group had a longer period of dissociative seizure freedom in the previous 6 months (estimated IRR 1·64 [95% CI 1·22 to 2·20]; p=0·001), reported better health-related quality of life on the EuroQoL-5 Dimensions-5 Level Health Today visual analogue scale (estimated mean difference 6·16 [95% CI 1·48 to 10·84]; p=0·010), less impairment in psychosocial functioning on the Work and Social Adjustment Scale (estimated mean difference -4·12 [95% CI -6·35 to -1·89]; p<0·001), less overall psychological distress than the standardised medical care group on the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-10 scale (estimated mean difference -1·65 [95% CI -2·96 to -0·35]; p=0·013), and fewer somatic symptoms on the modified Patient Health Questionnaire-15 scale (estimated mean difference -1·67 [95% CI -2·90 to -0·44]; p=0·008). Clinical improvement at 12 months was greater in the CBT plus standardised medical care group than the standardised medical care alone group as reported by patients (estimated mean difference 0·66 [95% CI 0·26 to 1·04]; p=0·001) and by clinicians (estimated mean difference 0·47 [95% CI 0·21 to 0·73]; p<0·001), and the CBT plus standardised medical care group had greater satisfaction with treatment than did the standardised medical care group (estimated mean difference 0·90 [95% CI 0·48 to 1·31]; p<0·001). No significant differences in patient-reported seizure severity (estimated mean difference -0·11 [95% CI -0·50 to 0·29]; p=0·593) or seizure freedom in the last 3 months of the study (estimated odds ratio [OR] 1·77 [95% CI 0·93 to 3·37]; p=0·083) were identified between the groups. Furthermore, no significant differences were identified in the proportion of patients who had a more than 50% reduction in dissociative seizure frequency compared with baseline (OR 1·27 [95% CI 0·80 to 2·02]; p=0·313). Additionally, the 12-item Short Form survey-version 2 scores (estimated mean difference for the Physical Component Summary score 1·78 [95% CI -0·37 to 3·92]; p=0·105; estimated mean difference for the Mental Component Summary score 2·22 [95% CI -0·30 to 4·75]; p=0·084), the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 scale score (estimated mean difference -1·09 [95% CI -2·27 to 0·09]; p=0·069), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scale depression score (estimated mean difference -1·10 [95% CI -2·41 to 0·21]; p=0·099) did not differ significantly between groups. Changes in dissociative seizures (rated by others) could not be assessed due to insufficient data. During the 12-month period, the number of adverse events was similar between the groups: 57 (31%) of 186 participants in the CBT plus standardised medical care group reported 97 adverse events and 53 (29%) of 182 participants in the standardised medical care group reported 79 adverse events. INTERPRETATION: CBT plus standardised medical care had no statistically significant advantage compared with standardised medical care alone for the reduction of monthly seizures. However, improvements were observed in a number of clinically relevant secondary outcomes following CBT plus standardised medical care when compared with standardised medical care alone. Thus, adults with dissociative seizures might benefit from the addition of dissociative seizure-specific CBT to specialist care from neurologists and psychiatrists. Future work is needed to identify patients who would benefit most from a dissociative seizure-specific CBT approach. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment programme
    corecore