Substance-Induced Psychoses

Efficacy studies indicate anti-depressive effects of at least some second generation antipsychotics (SGAs). The Bergen Psychosis Project (BPP) is a 24-month, pragmatic, industry-independent, randomized, head-to-head comparison of olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone and ziprasidone in patients acutely admitted with psychosis. The aim of the study is to investigate whether differential anti-depressive effectiveness exists among SGAs in a clinically relevant sample of patients acutely admitted with psychosis

There were few studies on the outcome of schizophrenia in developing countries. Whether the outcome is similar to or different from developed world is still a point for research. The main aim of the current study was to know if patients with early onset non affective psychosis can behave and function properly after few years from start of the illness or not. Other aims included investigation of possible predictors and associated factors with remission and outcome.|There were few studies on the outcome of s

(Medical Journal of Australia) Clinician-assisted computerised versus therapist-delivered treatment for depressive and addictive disorders: a randomised controlled trial

Archives of General Psychiatry, a monthly professional medical journal published by the American Medical Association, publishes original, peer-reviewed articles about psychiatry and related fields

Few longitudinal cohort studies have focused on the impact of substances abused and psychiatric disorders on premature mortality. The aim of the present study was to identify predictors of increased risk of drug related death and non drug related death in substance abusers of opiates, stimulants, cannabis, sedatives/hypnotics, hallucinogens and alcohol over several decades.|Few longitudinal cohort studies have focused on the impact of substances abused and psychiatric disorders on premature mortality. The

In this second part of our study, we examined the extent of agreement between treating practitioners and expert witnesses on psychiatric diagnoses in evidence presented in criminal proceedings. We found good agreement on diagnoses of acquired brain injury, schizophrenia-spectrum psychoses, depressive disorders, intellectual disability, substance abuse, and personality disorders; fair agreement on substance-induced psychotic disorder; and poor agreement on the presence of anxiety disorders. A proportion of defendants with diagnosis by experts of substance-induced psychotic disorder also had a diagnosis of schizophrenia-spectrum psychosis by treating practitioners. Treating practitioners and experts engaged by the prosecution rarely made the diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder. Overall, there was moderate agreement between experts and treating practitioners on the principal Axis I disorder, and the evidence for psychiatric diagnoses presented by treating practitioners in

The term acute psychosis represents a group of rapid-onset and recovery psychosis. The current diagnostic criteria are not uniform and represent a heterogeneous set of psychoses. Although their form of clinical presentation may be similar, their evolution and prognosis are very different. It is very important to detect the possible factors of chronicity in order to make an early intervention and thus to diminish the negative consequences of the disease.|We conducted a 2 year prospective study in 48 patients diagnosed with acute psychosis in their first admission. Data was collected on the evolution and follow-up of the patient in the Mental Health Unit and the sociodemographic and clinical factors of the psychotic index episode that could predict a change in the diagnosis during the two years follow-up were analyzed.|None of the sociodemographic or clinical variables studied could predict a change in the diagnosis, except for the presence of a control delusion during the index episode.

It is unclear whether the incidence of first episode psychoses is in decline. We had the opportunity to determine whether incidence had changed over a 20-year period in a single setting, and test whether this could be explained by demographic or clinical changes.|The entire population at-risk aged 16-54 in Nottingham over three time periods (1978-80, 1993-95 and 1997-99) were followed up. All participants presenting with an ICD-9/10 first episode psychosis were included. The remainder of the population at-risk formed the denominator. Standardized incidence rates were calculated at each time period with possible change over time assessed via Poisson regression. We studied six outcomes: substance-induced psychoses, schizophrenia, other non-affective psychoses, manic psychoses, depressive psychoses and all psychotic disorders combined.|Three hundred and forty-seven participants with a first episode psychosis during 1.2 million person-years of follow-up over three time periods were

The distinction between a substance-induced psychosis and a primary psychotic disorder that co-occurs with the use of alcohol or other drugs is critical for understanding illness course and planning appropriate treatment, yet there has been little study and evaluation of the differences between these 2 diagnostic groups.|To identify key demographic, family, and clinical differences in substance-induced psychosis and primary psychotic disorders diagnosed according to DSM-IV criteria using a research diagnostic instrument for psychiatric and substance use comorbidity.|Data on demographic, family, and clinical factors were gathered at baseline as part of a 3-year longitudinal study of early-phase psychosis and substance use comorbidity in New York, NY.|Psychiatric emergency department admissions.|The study is based on a referred sample of 400 subjects interviewed at baseline. Participants had at least 1 psychotic symptom assessed during administration of the research protocol, had used

The purpose was to present the prevalence of all psychotic and bipolar (BP) disorders in a total general population (n=3563), which has been followed from 1947 to 1997.|Best-estimate consensus DSM-IV diagnoses, supported by data from interviews, case notes, registers and key-informants, were assessed. The period prevalence from 1947 to 1997 and the lifetime prevalence (LTP) in 1997, respectively, was calculated.|The period prevalence per 100 was: 4.24 for any psychotic or BP disorder, 2.25 for non-affective psychotic (NAP) disorder, 0.76 for psychotic disorder related to a general medical condition (GMC), 0.62 for affective psychotic (AP) disorder and 0.59 for substance-induced psychotic (SIP) disorder. The LTP per 100 was: 2.82 for any psychotic or BP disorder, 1.38 for NAP disorder, 0.54 for psychotic disorder related to a GMC, 0.48 for SIP disorder and 0.42 for AP disorder. The specific diagnosis with the highest period prevalence 1.43 per 100 and LTP 0.84 per 100, respectively,