-
Psychopharmacology May 2016Psychosocial stressors are a well-documented risk factor for mental illness. Neuroinflammation, in particular elevated microglial activity, has been proposed to mediate... (Review)
Review
RATIONALE
Psychosocial stressors are a well-documented risk factor for mental illness. Neuroinflammation, in particular elevated microglial activity, has been proposed to mediate this association. A number of preclinical studies have investigated the effect of stress on microglial activity. However, these have not been systematically reviewed before.
OBJECTIVES
This study aims to systematically review the effects of stress on microglia, as indexed by the histological microglial marker ionised calcium binding adaptor molecule 1 (Iba-1), and consider the implications of these for the role of stress in the development of mental disorders.
METHODS
A systematic review was undertaken using pre-defined search criteria on PubMed and EMBASE. Inclusion and data extraction was agreed by two independent researchers after review of abstracts and full text.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria. These used seven different psychosocial stressors, including chronic restraint, social isolation and repeated social defeat in gerbils, mice and/or rats. The hippocampus (11/18 studies) and prefrontal cortex (13/18 studies) were the most frequently studied areas. Within the hippocampus, increased Iba-1 levels of between 20 and 200 % were reported by all 11 studies; however, one study found this to be a duration-dependent effect. Of those examining the prefrontal cortex, ∼75 % found psychosocial stress resulted in elevated Iba-1 activity. Elevations were also consistently seen in the nucleus accumbens, and under some stress conditions in the amygdala and paraventricular nucleus.
CONCLUSIONS
There is consistent evidence that a range of psychosocial stressors lead to elevated microglial activity in the hippocampus and good evidence that this is also the case in other brain regions. These effects were seen with early-life/prenatal stress, as well as stressors in adulthood. We consider these findings in terms of the two-hit hypothesis, which proposes that early-life stress primes microglia, leading to a potentiated response to subsequent stress. The implications for understanding the pathoaetiology of mental disorders and the development of new treatments are also considered.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Inflammation; Mental Disorders; Microglia; Psychoneuroimmunology; Psychotic Disorders; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 26847047
DOI: 10.1007/s00213-016-4218-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2015Early and accurate diagnosis and treatment of schizophrenia may have long-term advantages for the patient; the longer psychosis goes untreated the more severe the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Early and accurate diagnosis and treatment of schizophrenia may have long-term advantages for the patient; the longer psychosis goes untreated the more severe the repercussions for relapse and recovery. If the correct diagnosis is not schizophrenia, but another psychotic disorder with some symptoms similar to schizophrenia, appropriate treatment might be delayed, with possible severe repercussions for the person involved and their family. There is widespread uncertainty about the diagnostic accuracy of First Rank Symptoms (FRS); we examined whether they are a useful diagnostic tool to differentiate schizophrenia from other psychotic disorders.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the diagnostic accuracy of one or multiple FRS for diagnosing schizophrenia, verified by clinical history and examination by a qualified professional (e.g. psychiatrists, nurses, social workers), with or without the use of operational criteria and checklists, in people thought to have non-organic psychotic symptoms.
SEARCH METHODS
We conducted searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycInfo using OvidSP in April, June, July 2011 and December 2012. We also searched MEDION in December 2013.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected studies that consecutively enrolled or randomly selected adults and adolescents with symptoms of psychosis, and assessed the diagnostic accuracy of FRS for schizophrenia compared to history and clinical examination performed by a qualified professional, which may or may not involve the use of symptom checklists or based on operational criteria such as ICD and DSM.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened all references for inclusion. Risk of bias in included studies were assessed using the QUADAS-2 instrument. We recorded the number of true positives (TP), true negatives (TN), false positives (FP), and false negatives (FN) for constructing a 2 x 2 table for each study or derived 2 x 2 data from reported summary statistics such as sensitivity, specificity, and/or likelihood ratios.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 21 studies with a total of 6253 participants (5515 were included in the analysis). Studies were conducted from 1974 to 2011, with 80% of the studies conducted in the 1970's, 1980's or 1990's. Most studies did not report study methods sufficiently and many had high applicability concerns. In 20 studies, FRS differentiated schizophrenia from all other diagnoses with a sensitivity of 57% (50.4% to 63.3%), and a specificity of 81.4% (74% to 87.1%) In seven studies, FRS differentiated schizophrenia from non-psychotic mental health disorders with a sensitivity of 61.8% (51.7% to 71%) and a specificity of 94.1% (88% to 97.2%). In sixteen studies, FRS differentiated schizophrenia from other types of psychosis with a sensitivity of 58% (50.3% to 65.3%) and a specificity of 74.7% (65.2% to 82.3%).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The synthesis of old studies of limited quality in this review indicates that FRS correctly identifies people with schizophrenia 75% to 95% of the time. The use of FRS to diagnose schizophrenia in triage will incorrectly diagnose around five to 19 people in every 100 who have FRS as having schizophrenia and specialists will not agree with this diagnosis. These people will still merit specialist assessment and help due to the severity of disturbance in their behaviour and mental state. Again, with a sensitivity of FRS of 60%, reliance on FRS to diagnose schizophrenia in triage will not correctly diagnose around 40% of people that specialists will consider to have schizophrenia. Some of these people may experience a delay in getting appropriate treatment. Others, whom specialists will consider to have schizophrenia, could be prematurely discharged from care, if triage relies on the presence of FRS to diagnose schizophrenia. Empathetic, considerate use of FRS as a diagnostic aid - with known limitations - should avoid a good proportion of these errors.We hope that newer tests - to be included in future Cochrane reviews - will show better results. However, symptoms of first rank can still be helpful where newer tests are not available - a situation which applies to the initial screening of most people with suspected schizophrenia. FRS remain a simple, quick and useful clinical indicator for an illness of enormous clinical variability.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Diagnosis, Differential; Early Diagnosis; Humans; Mental Disorders; Prospective Studies; Psychotic Disorders; Retrospective Studies; Schizophrenia; Sensitivity and Specificity; Symptom Assessment
PubMed: 25879096
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010653.pub2 -
Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology Aug 2016Antipsychotics are the drugs prescribed to treat psychotic disorders; however, patients often fail to adhere to their treatment, and this has a severe negative effect on... (Review)
Review
Antipsychotics are the drugs prescribed to treat psychotic disorders; however, patients often fail to adhere to their treatment, and this has a severe negative effect on prognosis in these kinds of illnesses. Among the wide range of risk factors for treatment nonadherence, this systematic review covers those that are most important from the point of view of clinicians and patients and proposes guidelines for addressing them. Analyzing 38 studies conducted in a total of 51,796 patients, including patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and bipolar disorder, we found that younger age, substance abuse, poor insight, cognitive impairments, low level of education, minority ethnicity, poor therapeutic alliance, experience of barriers to care, high intensity of delusional symptoms and suspiciousness, and low socioeconomic status are the main risk factors for medication nonadherence in both types of disorder. In the future, prospective studies should be conducted on the use of personalized patient-tailored treatments, taking into account risk factors that may affect each individual, to assess the ability of such approaches to improve adherence and hence prognosis in these patients.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Bipolar Disorder; Humans; Medication Adherence; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 27307187
DOI: 10.1097/JCP.0000000000000523 -
Neuropsychobiology 2020Schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) represent a cluster of severe mental illnesses. Diet has been identified as a modifiable risk factor and opportunity for...
INTRODUCTION
Schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) represent a cluster of severe mental illnesses. Diet has been identified as a modifiable risk factor and opportunity for intervention in many physical illnesses and more recently in mental illnesses such as unipolar depression; however, no dietary guidelines exist for patients with SSD.
OBJECTIVE
This review sought to systematically scope the existing literature in order to identify nutritional interventions for the prevention or treatment of mental health symptoms in SSD as well as gaps and opportunities for further research.
METHODS
This review followed established methodological approaches for scoping reviews including an extensive a priori search strategy and duplicate screening. Because of the large volume of results, an online program (Abstrackr) was used for screening and tagging. Data were extracted based on the dietary constituents and analyzed.
RESULTS
Of 55,330 results identified by the search, 822 studies met the criteria for inclusion. Observational evidence shows a connection between the presence of psychotic disorders and poorer quality dietary patterns, higher intake of refined carbohydrates and total fat, and lower intake or levels of fibre, ω-3 and ω-6 fatty acids, vegetables, fruit, and certain vitamins and minerals (vitamin B12 and B6, folate, vitamin C, zinc, and selenium). Evidence illustrates a role of food allergy and sensitivity as well as microbiome composition and specific phytonutrients (such as L-theanine, sulforaphane, and resveratrol). Experimental studies have demonstrated benefit using healthy diet patterns and specific vitamins and minerals (vitamin B12 and B6, folate, and zinc) and amino acids (serine, lysine, glycine, and tryptophan).
DISCUSSION
Overall, these findings were consistent with many other bodies of knowledge about healthy dietary patterns. Many limitations exist related to the design of the individual studies and the ability to extrapolate the results of studies using dietary supplements to dietary interventions (food). Dietary recommendations are presented as well as recommendations for further research including more prospective observational studies and intervention studies that modify diet constituents or entire dietary patterns with statistical power to detect mental health outcomes.
Topics: Diet; Humans; Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; Psychotic Disorders; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 30359969
DOI: 10.1159/000493399 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2021Evidence is limited regarding the most effective pharmacological treatment for psychotic depression: monotherapy with an antidepressant, monotherapy with an... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Evidence is limited regarding the most effective pharmacological treatment for psychotic depression: monotherapy with an antidepressant, monotherapy with an antipsychotic, another treatment (e.g. mifepristone), or combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic. This is an update of a review first published in 2005 and last updated in 2015.
OBJECTIVES
1. To compare the clinical efficacy of pharmacological treatments for patients with an acute psychotic depression: antidepressant monotherapy, antipsychotic monotherapy, mifepristone monotherapy, and the combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic versus placebo and/or each other. 2. To assess whether differences in response to treatment in the current episode are related to non-response to prior treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
A search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (CCMDCTR); Ovid MEDLINE (1950-); Embase (1974-); and PsycINFO (1960-) was conducted on 21 February 2020. Reference lists of all included studies and related reviews were screened and key study authors contacted.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included participants with acute major depression with psychotic features, as well as RCTs consisting of participants with acute major depression with or without psychotic features, that reported separately on the subgroup of participants with psychotic features.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias in the included studies, according to criteria from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data were entered into RevMan 5.1. We used intention-to-treat data. Primary outcomes were clinical response for efficacy and overall dropout rate for harm/tolerance. Secondary outcome were remission of depression, change from baseline severity score, quality of life, and dropout rate due to adverse effects. For dichotomous efficacy outcomes (i.e. response and overall dropout), risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Regarding the primary outcome of harm, only overall dropout rates were available for all studies. If the study did not report any of the response criteria as defined above, remission as defined here could be used as an alternative. For continuously distributed outcomes, it was not possible to extract data from the RCTs. MAIN RESULTS: The search identified 3947 abstracts, but only 12 RCTs with a total of 929 participants could be included in the review. Because of clinical heterogeneity, few meta-analyses were possible. The main outcome was reduction in severity (response) of depression, not of psychosis. For depression response, we found no evidence of a difference between antidepressant and placebo (RR 8.40, 95% CI 0.50 to 142.27; participants = 27, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or between antipsychotic and placebo (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.73; participants = 201, studies = 2; very low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, we found no evidence of a difference in overall dropouts with antidepressant (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.34 to 4.51; participants = 27, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.08; participants = 201, studies = 2; very low-certainty evidence). No evidence suggests a difference in depression response (RR 2.09, 95% CI 0.64 to 6.82; participants = 36, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or overall dropouts (RR 1.79, 95% CI 0.18 to 18.02; participants = 36, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) between antidepressant and antipsychotic. For depression response, low- to very low-certainty evidence suggests that the combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic may be more effective than antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.38; participants = 447, studies = 4), more effective than antidepressant monotherapy (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.80; participants = 245, studies = 5), and more effective than placebo (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.82; participants = 148, studies = 2). Very low-certainty evidence suggests no difference in overall dropouts between the combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic versus antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.01; participants = 447, studies = 4), antidepressant monotherapy (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.50; participants = 245, studies = 5), or placebo alone (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.18; participants = 148, studies = 2). No study measured change in depression severity from baseline, quality of life, or dropouts due to adverse events. We found no RCTs with mifepristone that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Risk of bias is considerable: we noted differences between studies with regards to diagnosis, uncertainties around randomisation and allocation concealment, treatment interventions (pharmacological differences between various antidepressants and antipsychotics), and outcome criteria.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Psychotic depression is heavily under-studied, limiting confidence in the conclusions drawn. Some evidence indicates that combination therapy with an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic is more effective than either treatment alone or placebo. Evidence is limited for treatment with an antidepressant alone or with an antipsychotic alone. Evidence for efficacy of mifepristone is lacking.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Psychotic Disorders; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 34875106
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004044.pub5 -
PloS One 2021Antipsychotic agents are the basis for the pharmacological management of acute and chronic schizophrenia, bipolar disorders, mood disorders with psychotic feature, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Antipsychotic agents are the basis for the pharmacological management of acute and chronic schizophrenia, bipolar disorders, mood disorders with psychotic feature, and other psychotic disorders. Antipsychotic medication use is frequently associated with unfavorable adverse effects such as extrapyramidal side effects (EPSEs). Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis was aimed to determine the magnitude of antipsychotic-induced EPSEs.
METHOD
A literature search was conducted using legitimate databases, indexing services, and directories including PubMed/MEDLINE (Ovid®), EMBASE (Ovid®), google scholar and WorldCat to retrieve studies. Following screening and eligibility, the relevant data were extracted from the included studies using an Excel sheet and exported to STATA 15.0 software for analyses. The Random effects pooling model was used to analyze outcome measures at a 95% confidence interval. Besides, publication bias analysis was conducted. The protocol has been registered on PROSPERO with ID: CRD42020175168.
RESULT
In total, 15 original articles were included for the systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of antipsychotic-induced EPSEs among patient taking antipsychotic medications was 37% (95% CI: 18-55%, before sensitivity) and 31% (95% CI: 19-44%, after sensitivity). The prevalence of antipsychotic-induced parkinsonism, akathisia, and tardive dyskinesia was 20% (95% CI: 11-28%), 11% (95% CI: 6-17%), and 7% (95% CI: 4-9%), respectively. To confirm a small-study effect, Egger's regression test accompanied by funnel plot asymmetry demonstrated that there was a sort of publication bias in studies reporting akathisia and tardive dyskinesia.
CONCLUSION
The prevalence of antipsychotic-induced EPSEs was considerably high. One in five and more than one in ten patients experienced parkinsonism and akathisia, respectively. Appropriate prevention and early management of these effects can enhance the net benefits of antipsychotics.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Geography; Humans; Movement Disorders; Observational Studies as Topic; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Publication Bias; Tardive Dyskinesia
PubMed: 34506552
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257129 -
Frontiers in Psychology 2017Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) is a psychotherapeutic approach that has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of Post-traumatic Stress Disorder...
Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) is a psychotherapeutic approach that has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) through several randomized controlled trials (RCT). Solid evidence shows that traumatic events can contribute to the onset of severe mental disorders and can worsen their prognosis. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the most important findings from RCT conducted in the treatment of comorbid traumatic events in psychosis, bipolar disorder, unipolar depression, anxiety disorders, substance use disorders, and chronic back pain. Using PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Scopus, we conducted a systematic literature search of RCT studies published up to December 2016 that used EMDR therapy in the mentioned psychiatric conditions. RCT are still scarce in these comorbid conditions but the available evidence suggests that EMDR therapy improves trauma-associated symptoms and has a minor effect on the primary disorders by reaching partial symptomatic improvement. EMDR therapy could be a useful psychotherapy to treat trauma-associated symptoms in patients with comorbid psychiatric disorders. Preliminary evidence also suggests that EMDR therapy might be useful to improve psychotic or affective symptoms and could be an add-on treatment in chronic pain conditions.
PubMed: 29018388
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01668 -
Antipsychotics for agitation and psychosis in people with Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia.The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2021Typical and atypical antipsychotics are widely used to treat agitation and psychosis in dementia. However, whether or not they are beneficial is uncertain. Some trials... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Typical and atypical antipsychotics are widely used to treat agitation and psychosis in dementia. However, whether or not they are beneficial is uncertain. Some trials have yielded negative results and effectiveness may be outweighed by harms.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of antipsychotics for the treatment of agitation and psychosis in people with Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's register, MEDLINE (Ovid Sp), Embase (Ovid SP), PsycINFO (Ovid SP), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Web of Science Core Collection (ISI Web of Science), LILACS (BIREME), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization's meta-register, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Portal on 7 January 2021. Two review authors independently screened the title and abstract of the hits, and two review authors assessed the full text of studies that got through this screening.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-arm trials comparing the effects of antipsychotics and placebo for the treatment of agitation or psychosis in people with dementia due to Alzheimer's disease or vascular dementia, or both, irrespective of age, severity of cognitive impairment, and setting. (The majority of) participants had to have clinically significant agitation (including aggression) or psychosis or both at baseline. We excluded studies about antipsychotics that are no longer available in the USA or EU, or that are used for emergency short-term sedation. We also excluded head-to-head trials and antipsychotic withdrawal trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The primary outcomes were (1) reduction in agitation or psychosis in participants with agitation or psychosis, respectively at baseline, and (2) the number of participants with adverse events: somnolence, extrapyramidal symptoms, any adverse event, any serious adverse event (SAE), and death. Two review authors independently extracted the necessary data and assessed risk of bias with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We calculated the pooled effect on agitation and psychosis for typical and atypical antipsychotics separately, and the pooled risk of adverse effects independent of the target symptom (agitation or psychosis). We used RevMan Web for the analyses.
MAIN RESULTS
The search yielded 8233 separate hits. After assessing the full-text of 35 studies, we included 24 trials that met the eligibility criteria. Six trials tested a typical antipsychotic, four for agitation and two for psychosis. Twenty trials tested an atypical antipsychotic, eight for agitation and 12 for psychosis. Two trials tested both drug types. Seventeen of 26 comparisons were performed in patients with Alzheimer's disease specifically. The other nine comparisons also included patients with vascular dementia or mixed dementia. Together, the studies included 6090 participants (12 to 652 per study). The trials were performed in institutionalised, hospitalised and community-dwelling patients, or a combination of those. For typical antipsychotics (e.g. haloperidol, thiothixene), we are uncertain whether these drugs improve agitation compared with placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.57 to -0.15, 4 studies, n = 361); very low-certainty evidence, but typical antipsychotics may improve psychosis slightly (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.03, 2studies, n= 240; low-certainty evidence) compared with placebo. These drugs probably increase the risk of somnolence (risk ratio (RR) 2.62, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.56, 3 studies, n = 466; moderate-certainty evidence) and increase extrapyramidal symptoms (RR 2.26, 95% CI 1.58 to 3.23, 3 studies, n = 467; high-certainty) evidence. There was no evidence regarding the risk of any adverse event. The risks of SAEs (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.66, 1 study, n = 193) and death (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.54 to 4.00, 6 studies, n = 578) may be increased slightly, but these estimates were very imprecise, and the certainty was low. The effect estimates for haloperidol from five trials were in line with those of the drug class. Atypical antipsychotics (e.g. risperidone, olanzapine, aripiprazole, quetiapine) probably reduce agitation slightly (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.12, 7 studies, n = 1971; moderate-certainty evidence), but probably have a negligible effect on psychosis (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.03, 12 studies, n = 3364; moderate-certainty evidence). These drugs increase the risk of somnolence (RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.57 to 2.39, 13 studies, n - 3878; high-certainty evidence) and are probably also associated with slightly increased risk of extrapyramidal symptoms (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.68, 15 studies, n = 4180; moderate-certainty evidence), serious adverse events (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.61, 15 studies, n= 4316; moderate-certainty evidence) and death (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.05, 17 studies, n= 5032; moderate-certainty evidence), although the latter estimate was imprecise. The drugs probably have a negligible effect on the risk of any adverse event (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.09, 11 studies, n = 2785; moderate-certainty evidence). The findings from seven trials for risperidone were in line with those for the drug class.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is some evidence that typical antipsychotics might decrease agitation and psychosis slightly in patients with dementia. Atypical antipsychotics reduce agitation in dementia slightly, but their effect on psychosis in dementia is negligible. The apparent effectiveness of the drugs seen in daily practice may be explained by a favourable natural course of the symptoms, as observed in the placebo groups. Both drug classes increase the risk of somnolence and other adverse events. If antipsychotics are considered for sedation in patients with severe and dangerous symptoms, this should be discussed openly with the patient and legal representative.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Antipsychotic Agents; Dementia, Vascular; Humans; Psychotic Disorders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risperidone
PubMed: 34918337
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013304.pub2 -
Current Neuropharmacology Jan 2015The use of anabolic-androgenic steroids (AASs) by professional and recreational athletes is increasing worldwide. The underlying motivations are mainly performance... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The use of anabolic-androgenic steroids (AASs) by professional and recreational athletes is increasing worldwide. The underlying motivations are mainly performance enhancement and body image improvement. AAS abuse and dependence, which are specifically classified and coded by the DSM-5, are not uncommon. AAS-using athletes are frequently present with psychiatric symptoms and disorders, mainly somatoform and eating, but also mood, and schizophrenia-related disorders. Some psychiatric disorders are typical of athletes, like muscle dysmorphia. This raises the issue of whether AAS use causes these disorders in athletes, by determining neuroadaptive changes in the reward neural circuit or by exacerbating stress vulnerability, or rather these are athletes with premorbid abnormal personalities or a history of psychiatric disorders who are attracted to AAS use, prompted by the desire to improve their appearance and control their weights. This may predispose to eating disorders, but AASs also show mood destabilizing effects, with longterm use inducing depression and short-term hypomania; withdrawal/discontinuation may be accompanied by depression. The effects of AASs on anxiety behavior are unclear and studies are inconsistent. AASs are also linked to psychotic behavior. The psychological characteristics that could prompt athletes to use AASs have not been elucidated.
Topics: Anabolic Agents; Antisocial Personality Disorder; Athletes; Athletic Performance; Humans; Mental Disorders; Psychopathology; Steroids; Substance-Related Disorders; Testosterone Congeners
PubMed: 26074746
DOI: 10.2174/1570159X13666141210222725 -
Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Revue... Nov 2014Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI), the deliberate, self-inflicted damage of bodily tissue without the intent to die, is associated with various negative outcomes. Although... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI), the deliberate, self-inflicted damage of bodily tissue without the intent to die, is associated with various negative outcomes. Although basic and epidemiologic research on NSSI has increased during the last 2 decades, literature on effective interventions targeting NSSI is still emerging. Here, we present a comprehensive, systematic review of existing psychological and pharmacological treatments designed specifically for NSSI, or including outcome assessments examining change in NSSI.
METHOD
We conducted a systematic search of PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and ERIC databases to retrieve relevant articles that met inclusion criteria; specifically, uncontrolled and controlled trials that 1) presented quantitative outcome data on NSSI, and 2) clearly differentiated NSSI from suicidal self-injury (SSI). Consistent with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, definition of NSSI, we excluded studies examining populations with developmental or intellectual disabilities, or with psychotic disorders.
RESULTS
Several interventions appear to hold promise for reducing NSSI, including dialectical behaviour therapy, emotion regulation group therapy, manual-assisted cognitive therapy, dynamic deconstructive psychotherapy, atypical antipsychotics (aripiprazole), naltrexone, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (with or without cognitive-behavioural therapy). Nevertheless, there remains a paucity of well-controlled studies investigating treatment efficacy for NSSI.
CONCLUSIONS
Structured psychotherapeutic approaches focusing on collaborative therapeutic relationships, motivation for change, and directly addressing NSSI behaviours seem to be most effective in reducing NSSI. Medications targeting the serotonergic, dopaminergic and opioid systems also have demonstrated some benefits. Future studies employing controlled designs as well as a clear delineation of NSSI and SSI will improve knowledge regarding treatment effects.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Borderline Personality Disorder; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Combined Modality Therapy; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Psychotherapy; Psychotherapy, Group; Psychotropic Drugs; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Self-Injurious Behavior; Suicide, Attempted; Theory of Mind; Young Adult
PubMed: 25565473
DOI: 10.1177/070674371405901103