Increased suicide risk among younger women in winter during full moon in northern Europe. An artifact or a novel finding?

Available evidence suggests that there is no effect of moon phases on suicidal behavior. However, a Finnish study recently reported elevated suicide rates during full-moon, but only among premenopausal women and only in winter. This could not be replicated in an Austrian study and stirred a discussion about whether the Finnish finding was false-positive or if there are unaccounted moderator variables differing between Finland and Austria. The goal of the present study was to provide another replication with data from Sweden, which is geographically more comparable to Finland than Austria. We also investigated the discussed moderator variables latitude and nightly artificial brightness. There were 48,537 suicides available for analysis. The fraction of suicides during the full-moon quarter in winter did not differ significantly from the expected 25% among premenopausal women (23.3%) and in the full sample (24.7%). The incidence risk ratios for full moon quarter in Poisson regression models were 0.96 (95% CI: 0.90-1.02) for premenopausal women and 1.01 (95% CI: 0.99-1.04) for the full sample. According to Bayes-factor analysis, the evidence supports the null-hypothesis (no association) over the alternative hypothesis (some association). We found similar results when we split the data by latitude and artificial nightly brightness, respectively. In line with the Austrian study, there was no increase of suicides in Sweden among premenopausal women in winter during full-moon. The results from the Finnish study are likely false positive, perhaps resulting from problematic but common research and publication practices, which we discuss.

Evaluation of a new person-centered integrated care model in psychiatry.

The present study evaluated a new integrated treatment concept offering inpatient care, acute psychiatric day hospital and outpatient treatment by the same therapeutic team. 178 patients participated in this randomized controlled trial. Data on psychopathology, global and social functioning, patient satisfaction, continuity of care and administrative data was gathered on admission, throughout the course of treatment, upon discharge and at 1-year follow-up. In addition, the physicians in charge rated the therapeutic relationship. The data analysis consists of group-wise comparisons and regression analyses (cross-tabulations and χ(2) test statistics for categorical data and Mann-Whitney U tests for continuous data). Differences between groups over time were analyzed with a series of generalized linear mixed model. The integrated care group showed a significant reduction in psychopathological impairment (20.7%) and an improvement of psychosocial functioning (36.8%). The mean number of days before re-admission was higher in the control group when compared to the integrated care group (156.8 vs. 91.5). There was no difference in the number of re-admissions and days spent in psychiatric institutions. This new approach offers a treatment model, which facilitates continuity of care. Beside it improves psychopathological outcome measures and psychosocial functioning in patients with mental illness.

Antidepressants use in Italy: an ecological study of national and regional trends and associated factors.

The present study aimed to (1) provide an update on trends in AD consumption both at the national and regional unit of analysis for the period 2000-2020 in Italy and (2) analyze sociodemographic and healthcare system-related factors associated with AD prescribing at the regional-population level between 2000 and 2019. Data were extracted from reports of the Italian Medicines Agency and databases of the Italian National Institute of Statistics. Linear regression and mixed models were applied to analyze trends in AD use (DDD/1000/day) and ecological factors associated with AD prescribing. Between 2000 and 2010 AD prescription rates constantly increased. Thereafter they stabilized until 2017 when a positive trend began again. There was a positive ecological association between AD prescribing and rates of hospital discharge due to affective disorders, antibiotics prescribing, public non-drug healthcare spending per capita, and Northern regions compared to Southern regions. AD consumption increased massively during the 2000s, flattened during the 2010s but thereafter increased again until 2020. The ecological correlation between healthcare provision/spending and AD consumption suggests that health-economic factors may play an important role.

Stigma toward schizophrenia: do all psychiatrists behave the same? Latent profile analysis of a national sample of psychiatrists in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: An important issue concerning the worldwide fight against stigma is the evaluation of psychiatrists' beliefs and attitudes toward schizophrenia and mental illness in general. However, there is as yet no consensus on this matter in the literature, and results vary according to the stigma dimension assessed and to the cultural background of the sample. The aim of this investigation was to search for profiles of stigmatizing beliefs related to schizophrenia in a national sample of psychiatrists in Brazil. METHODS: A sample of 1414 psychiatrists were recruited from among those attending the 2009 Brazilian Congress of Psychiatry. A questionnaire was applied in face-to-face interviews. The questionnaire addressed four stigma dimensions, all in reference to individuals with schizophrenia: stereotypes, restrictions, perceived prejudice and social distance. Stigma item scores were included in latent profile analyses; the resulting profiles were entered into multinomial logistic regression models with sociodemographics, in order to identify significant correlates. RESULTS: Three profiles were identified. The "no stigma" subjects (n = 337) characterized individuals with schizophrenia in a positive light, disagreed with restrictions, and displayed a low level of social distance. The "unobtrusive stigma" subjects (n = 471) were significantly younger and displayed the lowest level of social distance, although most of them agreed with involuntary admission and demonstrated a high level of perceived prejudice. The "great stigma" subjects (n = 606) negatively stereotyped individuals with schizophrenia, agreed with restrictions and scored the highest on the perceived prejudice and social distance dimensions. In comparison with the first two profiles, this last profile comprised a significantly larger number of individuals who were in frequent contact with a family member suffering from a psychiatric disorder, as well as comprising more individuals who had no such family member. CONCLUSIONS: Our study not only provides additional data related to an under-researched area but also reveals that psychiatrists are a heterogeneous group regarding stigma toward schizophrenia. The presence of different stigma profiles should be evaluated in further studies; this could enable anti-stigma initiatives to be specifically designed to effectively target the stigmatizing group.

Effect of the FDA Black Box Suicidality Warnings for Antidepressants on Suicide Rates in the USA.

Background: Some authors claimed that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) black box warning on treatment-emergent suicidality with antidepressants in adolescents (issued 2004) and young adults (issued 2006) led to an increase of suicides, based on the analyses of ecological data with debatable assumptions about putative changes in suicide rates. Aims: To explore if putative changes in suicide rates in adolescents and young adults at the time of the FDA warnings is a detectable signal in the data or compatible with random fluctuations. Method: We applied different changepoint analyses for adolescent and young adult suicide rates from 1981 to 2019 in the USA. Results: Changepoint analysis did not support a detrimental effect of the FDA black box warnings. The downward trend of suicides reversed several years after the warning in adolescents (2007-2009) and many years before in young adults (1999-2001). Limitations: Our analyses cannot rule out detrimental effects of the FDA warnings. However, even if there was such an effect, it was likely small and indistinguishable from random fluctuations in the available suicide data. Conclusion: There is no detectable change of trend in adolescent or young adult suicide rates in line with a detrimental effect of the FDA black box warnings on treatment-emergent suicidality.

Observational studies of antidepressant use and suicide risk are selectively published in psychiatric journals.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate if observational studies showing favorable results for antidepressants on suicidal behavior (reduced risk) are preferably and more easily published in psychiatric journals and cited more often compared to studies with unfavorable results (increased risk). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Prespecified secondary analysis, including 27 original studies selected through a systematic review of observational studies reporting associations between the use of newer antidepressant drugs and suicide risk. RESULTS: Independent of study quality, studies reporting favorable results were more frequently published in psychiatric than nonpsychiatric journals and were more often conducted by lead authors with financial conflicts of interest (fCOI). Within psychiatric journals, lead authors with fCOI published in journals with a higher impact factor (IF) and ranking. Within psychiatric journals, favorability of results also correlated with citation frequency, IF, and journal ranking, but these associations became weaker and inconclusive after adjusting for study quality. Results for ease of publishing were inconclusive. CONCLUSION: Studies reporting unfavorable results (increased suicide risk with antidepressant exposure) are less likely to be published in psychiatric journals. Lead authors with fCOI report more favorable results, and their studies are published in the most prestigious psychiatric journals. This may create a biased evidence base and an unbalanced dissemination and appraisal of findings within psychiatry.

The risks of adverse events with venlafaxine and mirtazapine versus 'active placebo', placebo, or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder: a protocol for two separate systematic reviews with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder causes a great burden on patients and societies. Venlafaxine and mirtazapine are commonly prescribed as second-line treatment for patients with major depressive disorder worldwide. Previous systematic reviews have concluded that venlafaxine and mirtazapine reduce depressive symptoms, but the effects seem small and may not be important to the average patient. Moreover, previous reviews have not systematically assessed the occurrence of adverse events. Therefore, we aim to investigate the risks of adverse events with venlafaxine or mirtazapine versus 'active placebo', placebo, or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder in two separate systematic reviews. METHODS: This is a protocol for two systematic reviews with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis. The assessments of the effects of venlafaxine or mirtazapine will be reported in two separate reviews. The protocol is reported as recommended by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols, risk of bias will be assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool version 2, clinical significance will be assessed using our eight-step procedure, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. We will search for published and unpublished trials in major medical databases and trial registers. Two review authors will independently screen the results from the literature searches, extract data, and assess risk of bias. We will include published or unpublished randomised clinical trial comparing venlafaxine or mirtazapine with 'active placebo', placebo, or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder. The primary outcomes will be suicides or suicide attempts, serious adverse events, and non-serious adverse events. Exploratory outcomes will include depressive symptoms, quality of life, and individual adverse events. If feasible, we will assess the intervention effects using random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses. DISCUSSION: Venlafaxine and mirtazapine are frequently used as second-line treatment of major depressive disorder worldwide. There is a need for a thorough systematic review to provide the necessary background for weighing the benefits against the harms. This review will ultimately inform best practice in the treatment of major depressive disorder. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022315395.

Longitudinal reciprocal associations between depression, anxiety, and substance use disorders over three decades of life.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Studies exploring longitudinal reciprocal associations between depressive, anxiety, and substance use disorders (DD, AD and SUD, respectively) over long periods of time are mainly lacking. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to test longitudinal associations (i.e. temporal dynamics) between DD, AD and SUD from young adulthood to middle adulthood. METHODS: A stratified community sample of 591 participants from the canton of Zurich, Switzerland, was interviewed with the Structured Psychopathological Interview and Rating of the Social Consequences of Psychological Disturbances for Epidemiology over seven interview waves from ages 20/21 to 49/50. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria were used to evaluate the presence of DD, AD and SUD. We fitted an auto-regressive cross-lagged path analysis within a Bayesian structural equation model to test longitudinal associations. RESULTS: Regarding autoregressive effects, AD (except during young adulthood) and SUD predicted themselves over the entire time period, while DD recurrently predicted itself not consistently over time. Regarding cross-lagged effects, DD predicted SUD at different time points, and vice versa. DD predicted subsequent AD in adulthood, whereas the reverse did not happen. Female gender was associated with DD and AD at all ages while male gender was associated with SUD only in young adulthood. CONCLUSIONS: Reciprocal longitudinal associations were found between DD and SUD and DD usually preceded AD. Our results further confirm an increased risk of DD and AD in women and a higher risk of SUD in young men. Early treatment and broad psychosocial interventions should be provided in order to prevent chronicity and further maladjustment as well as interrupting the cycle of mutual reinforcement between DD and SUD.

Tricyclic antidepressants versus 'active placebo', placebo or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder is a common psychiatric disorder causing great burden on patients and societies. Tricyclic antidepressants are frequently used worldwide to treat patients with major depressive disorder. It has repeatedly been shown that tricyclic antidepressants reduce depressive symptoms with a statistically significant effect, but the effect is small and of questionable clinical importance. Moreover, the beneficial and harmful effects of all types of tricyclic antidepressants have not previously been systematically assessed. Therefore, we aim to investigate the beneficial and harmful effects of tricyclic antidepressants versus 'active placebo', placebo or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder. METHODS: This is a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis that will be reported as recommended by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols, bias will be assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool-version 2, our eight-step procedure will be used to assess if the thresholds for clinical significance are crossed, Trial Sequential Analysis will be conducted to control random errors and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. To identify relevant trials, we will search both for published and unpublished trials in major medical databases and trial registers, such as CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and ClinicalTrials.gov from their inception to 12 May 2021. Clinical study reports will be applied for from regulatory authorities and pharmaceutical companies. Two review authors will independently screen the results from the literature searches, extract data and perform risk of bias assessment. We will include any published or unpublished randomised clinical trial comparing tricyclic antidepressants with 'active placebo', placebo or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder. The following interventions will be assessed: amineptine, amitriptyline, amoxapine, butriptyline, cianopramine, clomipramine, desipramine, demexiptiline, dibenzepin, dosulepin, dothiepin, doxepin, imipramine, iprindole, lofepramine, maprotiline, melitracen, metapramine, nortriptyline, noxiptiline, opipramol, protriptyline, tianeptine, trimipramine and quinupramine. Primary outcomes will be depressive symptoms, serious adverse events and quality of life. Secondary outcomes will be suicide or suicide-attempts and non-serious adverse events. If feasible, we will assess the intervention effects using random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses. DISCUSSION: Tricyclic antidepressants are recommended by clinical guidelines and frequently used worldwide in the treatment of major depressive disorder. There is a need for a thorough systematic review to provide the necessary background for weighing the benefits against the harms. This review will ultimately inform best practice in the treatment of major depressive disorder. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021226161 .

Beneficial and harmful effects of antidepressants versus placebo, 'active placebo', or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder: a protocol for a systematic review of published and unpublished data with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder is one of the most common, burdensome, and costly psychiatric disorders worldwide. Antidepressants are frequently used to treat major depressive disorder. It has been shown repeatedly that antidepressants seem to reduce depressive symptoms with a statistically significant effect, but the clinical importance of the effect sizes seems questionable. Both beneficial and harmful effects of antidepressants have not previously been sufficiently assessed. The main objective of this review will be to evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of antidepressants versus placebo, 'active placebo', or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder. METHODS/DESIGN: A systematic review with meta-analysis will be reported as recommended by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA), bias will be assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool-version 2 (ROB2), our eight-step procedure will be used to assess if the thresholds for clinical significance are crossed, Trial Sequential Analysis will be conducted to control for random errors, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. To identify relevant trials, we will search both for published and unpublished trials in major medical databases from their inception to the present. Clinical study reports will be obtained from regulatory authorities and pharmaceutical companies. Two review authors will independently screen the results of the literature searches, extract data, and perform risk of bias assessment. We will include any published or unpublished randomised clinical trial comparing one or more antidepressants with placebo, 'active placebo', or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder. The following active agents will be included: agomelatine, amineptine, amitriptyline, bupropion, butriptyline, cianopramine, citalopram, clomipramine, dapoxetine, demexiptiline, desipramine, desvenlafaxine, dibenzepin, dosulepin, dothiepin, doxepin, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, imipramine, iprindole, levomilnacipran, lofepramine, maprotiline, melitracen, metapramine, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, nortriptyline, noxiptiline, opipramol, paroxetine, protriptyline, quinupramine, reboxetine, sertraline, trazodone, tianeptine, trimipramine, venlafaxine, vilazodone, and vortioxetine. Primary outcomes will be depressive symptoms, serious adverse events, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes will be suicide or suicide attempt, suicidal ideation, and non-serious adverse events. DISCUSSION: As antidepressants are commonly used to treat major depressive disorder in adults, a systematic review evaluating their beneficial and harmful effects is urgently needed. This review will inform best practice in treatment and clinical research of this highly prevalent and burdensome disorder. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020220279.

What are the chances for personalised treatment with antidepressants? Detection of patient-by-treatment interaction with a variance ratio meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate if the treatment effect of antidepressants in patients with depression substantially varies in each patient (patient-by-treatment interaction or treatment heterogeneity), a necessary but largely unexplored prerequisite of personalised antidepressant treatment. DESIGN: Meta-analytic variance comparison of treatment outcome between drug arms and placebo arms of clinical trials, based on the assumption that patient-by-treatment interaction should lead to larger variances in drug arms than placebo arms. To put the results into context, we run simple simulations, assuming different definitions and rates of those who respond especially well to antidepressants. DATA SOURCES: 163 randomised, placebo-controlled trials (51 396 patients) with complete results for pre-post differences, selected from a recently published systematic review. ANALYSIS: Variance ratios (VRs) and coefficients of variance ratios (CVRs) of individual trials were meta-analytically combined. The analysis was repeated for classes of antidepressants and specific antidepressants. RESULTS: VRs (VR=1.01, CI 0.99 to 1.02) and CVRs (CVR=0.82, CI 0.80 to 0.84) of the antidepressant-treatment arms were comparable or smaller than in placebo arms. Similar results were observed for classes of antidepressants and for specific antidepressants. Our simulation analysis confirmed that equal VRs can only be obtained if they are not more than a few patients who respond slightly above average. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of increased treatment-outcome variance in the antidepressants versus placebo groups in randomised controlled trials indicates that no or only very small subgroups of patients respond particularly well to antidepressants. Thus, the scope for personalised treatment with antidepressants seems to be limited.

Birth experiences in adult women with a history of childhood sexual abuse.

OBJECTIVE: Although childhood sexual abuse (CSA) may seriously impair childbirth experiences, few systematic evaluations on associations, mediating influences, risk and protective factors are available. As such information is mandatory to improve obstetric care, the present study aimed to provide such data. METHODS: The study compared childbirth experiences from 85 women after CSA and at least one pregnancy resulting in a life birth with those from 170 control women matched for nationality, personal age and children's age. Trained specialists from support centers investigated CSA. Obstetrical data were collected from the official personal clinical record of each pregnancy (Mutterpass) and data on CSA as well as childbirth experiences were examined by questionnaires. RESULTS: Childbirth was more often highly frightening (24.7 vs. 5.3%; p<0.01) and a negative experience (40.7 vs. 19.6%, p<0.01) in women with a history of CSA than in controls. Multivariate regression models support the hypothesis that at least part of this association was mediated by covariates (specifically, birth preparation classes, presence of a trusted person, participation in medical decision-making, pain relief, emergency during labor and extreme duration of labor), which represent important resources in improving obstetric care. In 41% of women with CSA, memories of traumatic experiences intruded during childbirth, whereas about 58% experienced dissociation. While dissociation may result in loss of contact with obstetric staff, it was also used to reduce labor pain. CONCLUSION: Childbirth following a history of CSA is associated with particular challenges. Creating a trusting environment by evaluating and integrating individual needs could ameliorate birth experiences.

The Detrimental Impact of Maladaptive Personality on Public Mental Health: A Challenge for Psychiatric Practice.

Experts in personality psychology and personality disorders have long emphasized the pervasive and persistent detrimental impact of maladaptive personality traits on mental health and functioning. However, in routine psychiatric practice, maladaptive personality is readily ignored and personality traits are seldom incorporated into clinical guidelines. The aim of this narrative review is to outline how pervasively personality influences public mental health and how personality thereby challenges common psychiatric practice. A comprehensive search and synthesis of the scientific literature demonstrates that maladaptive personality traits and personality disorders, in particular high neuroticism and negative affectivity, first, are risk factors for divorce, unemployment, and disability pensioning; second, relate to the prevalence, incidence, and co-occurrence of common mental disorders; third, impair functioning, symptom remission, and recovery in co-occurring common mental disorders; and fourth, predispose to treatment resistance, non-response and poor treatment outcome. In conclusion, maladaptive personality is not only involved in the development and course of mental disorders but also predisposes to chronicity and re-occurrence of psychopathology and reduces the efficacy of psychiatric treatments. The pernicious impact of maladaptive personality on mental health and functioning demands that careful assessment and thorough consideration of personality should be compulsory in psychiatric practice.

An integrative examination of general personality dysfunction in a large community sample.

Recently, the severity of general personality dysfunction has gained broad interest in personality disorder (PD) research. We analysed data of 511 participants aged 20-41 years from a comprehensive psychiatric survey in the general population of Zurich, Switzerland. We added the trait-scores from all DSM-IV PDs, as assessed by a self-report questionnaire, to provide a measure of general personality dysfunction. Adjusting for the Big Five personality domains as a proxy for stylistic PD elements, this composite PD score exhibited strong associations with neuroticism and schizotypy. General personality dysfunction additionally revealed a moderate detrimental association with psychosocial functioning and a strong effect on coping resources, on heavy drinking and drug use and on most psychopathological syndromes. Of particular interest is the strong association with total psychopathological distress and co-occurrence of multiple disorders, suggesting that increasing PD severity relates to the degree of global impairment independent of specific PD traits. Discussed herein are implications for public mental health policies, classification, conceptualization and treatment of PDs.

The more information, the more negative stigma towards schizophrenia: Brazilian general population and psychiatrists compared.

Findings on stigmatizing attitudes toward individuals with schizophrenia have been inconsistent in comparisons between mental health professionals and members of the general public. In this regard, it is important to obtain data from understudied sociocultural settings, and to examine how attitudes toward mental illness vary in such settings. Nationwide samples of 1015 general population individuals and 1414 psychiatrists from Brazil were recruited between 2009 and 2010. Respondents from the general population were asked to identify an unlabeled schizophrenia case vignette. Psychiatrists were instructed to consider "someone with stabilized schizophrenia". Stereotypes, perceived prejudice and social distance were assessed. For the general population, stigma determinants replicated findings from the literature. The level of the vignette's identification constituted an important correlate. For psychiatrists, determinants correlated in the opposite direction. When both samples were compared, psychiatrists showed the highest scores in stereotypes and perceived prejudice; for the general population, the better they recognized the vignette, the higher they scored in those dimensions. Psychiatrists reported the lowest social distance scores compared with members of the general population. Knowledge about schizophrenia thus constituted an important determinant of stigma; consequently, factors influencing stigma should be further investigated in the general population and in psychiatrists as well.

Atitudes de profissionais de saúde mental em relação a indivíduos com esquizofrenia: uma comparação transcultural entre Suíça e Brasil / Attitudes of mental health professionals towards persons with schizophrenia: a transcultural comparison between Switzerland and Brazil

CONTEXTO: A estigmatização é uma questão importante no tratamento e no curso da esquizofrenia. A manutenção de atitudes estigmatizantes pode estar relacionada a fatores socioculturais. OBJETIVOS: Comparar atitudes estigmatizantes de profissionais de saúde mental em países culturalmente diversos: Brasil e Suíça. MÉTODOS: Foram analisados dados de duas grandes pesquisas sobre o estigma na Suíça e no Brasil, focando-se no desejo de distância social em relação a indivíduos com esquizofrenia e atitudes de profissionais de saúde mental em relação à aceitação de efeitos colaterais do tratamento psicofarmacológico. RESULTADOS: Profissionais de saúde mental suíços apresentaram níveis significativamente mais elevados de distância social do que suas contrapartes brasileiras. Houve também um efeito fraco de idade, bem como um efeito da interação entre a origem e a idade. Com relação à aceitação de efeitos colaterais, a influência da origem foi bastante fraca. Com exceção do risco de dependência dos psicotrópicos, a aceitação dos profissionais suíços a efeitos colaterais de longa duração foi significativamente maior do que a de seus colegas no Brasil. CONCLUSÕES: A forte associação entre origem e distância social pode estar relacionada à formação sociocultural dos profissionais de saúde mental; em comparação com a Suíça, o Brasil é muito heterogêneo em termos de estrutura étnica e socioeconômica. A aceitação de efeitos colaterais pode também estar relacionada com os medicamentos mais sofisticados (ou seja, drogas antipsicóticas de nova geração) comumente usados na Suíça.

BACKGROUND: Stigmatization is an important issue in the treatment and course of schizophrenia. The maintenance of stigmatizing attitudes may be related to socio-cultural factors. OBJECTIVES: To compare stigmatizing attitudes of mental health professionals in the culturally diverse countries Brazil and Switzerland. METHODS: We analyzed data of two broad stigmatization surveys from Switzerland and Brazil by focusing on the social distance and attitudes of mental health professionals towards the acceptance of side effects of psychopharmacological treatment. RESULTS: Swiss mental health professionals showed significantly higher levels of social distance than their Brazilian counterparts. There was also a weak effect of age as well as an interaction effect between origin and age. With respect to the acceptance of side effects, the effect of origin was rather weak. With the exception of drug dependence, Swiss professionals' acceptance of long-lasting side effects was significantly higher than for their counterparts in Brazil. DISCUSSION: The strong association between origin and social distance may be related to the socio-cultural background of the mental health professionals. In comparison with Switzerland, Brazil is very heterogeneous in terms of ethnicity and socio-economic structure. The distinct acceptance of side effects may additionally be related to the more sophisticated medicaments (i.e. new generation of antipsychotic drugs) commonly used in Switzerland.

O estigma atribuído pelos psiquiatras aos indivíduos com esquizofrenia / Psychiatrists' stigma towards individuals with schizophrenia

CONTEXTO: A literatura acerca da maneira como a população geral estigmatiza indivíduos com distúrbios mentais aumentou consideravelmente nas últimas décadas. Mas a dúvida sobre se os psiquiatras também estigmatizam seus pacientes ainda permanece. OBJETIVO: O presente estudo visou avaliar as atitudes de psiquiatras brasileiros em relação aos indivíduos com esquizofrenia. MÉTODOS: Dos cerca de 6.000 participantes do Congresso Brasileiro de Psiquiatria em 2009, 1.414 psiquiatras concordaram em participar do estudo. Entrevistas face a face foram realizadas utilizando um questionário que avaliava o estigma em três dimensões: estereótipos, distância social e preconceito, todas relacionadas a alguém com esquizofrenia. Opinião sobre medicações psicotrópicas e tolerância aos efeitos colaterais também foram avaliadas. Dados sociodemográficos e profissionais foram coletados. RESULTADOS: Psiquiatras brasileiros tenderam a estereotipar negativamente pessoas com esquizofrenia. Estereótipos negativos correlacionaram-se com uma melhor opinião sobre medicações psicotrópicas e com maior tolerância a efeitos colaterais. Idade maior correlacionou-se com estereótipos positivos e com menor preconceito. CONCLUSÃO: Os psiquiatras estigmatizam indivíduos com esquizofrenia e possivelmente têm certa dificuldade em admitir esse fato. Campanhas antiestigma para profissionais de saúde mental devem ser promovidas.

BACKGROUND: Literature on how the general population stigmatizes individuals with mental disorders has increased considerably over the last decades. But the question remains if psychiatrists also stigmatize their patients. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to assess Brazilian psychiatrists' attitude towards individuals with schizophrenia. METHODS: Out of the approximately 6,000 participants of the 2009 National Psychiatry Congress in Brazil, 1,414 psychiatrists agreed to undergo the survey. Face-to-face interviews were conducted using a questionnaire that assessed stigma in three dimensions: stereotypes, social distance and prejudice towards a person with schizophrenia. Their opinion on psychotropic drugs and tolerance of side-effects were also assessed. Socio-demographic and professional data were collected. RESULTS: Brazilian psychiatrists tend to negatively stereotype individuals with schizophrenia. More negative stereotypes correlated with a positive opinion on psychotropic drugs and with a higher tolerance of side-effects. Higher age was correlated with positive stereotyping and with less prejudice. DISCUSSION: Psychiatrists stigmatize individuals with schizophrenia and possibly find it difficulty admit this fact. Anti-stigma campaigns among mental health professionals should be promoted.