Debating Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Death in People with Psychiatric Disorders.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Over the last 30 years, medical assistance in dying (MAiD) including euthanasia (EU) and physician-assisted death (or suicide, PAS) has become the center of a large debate, particularly when these practices have involved people with psychiatric illness, including resistant depression, schizophrenia, personality, or other severe psychiatric disorders. We performed a review utilizing several databases, and by including the most relevant studies in full journal articles investigating the problem of MAiD in patients with psychiatric disorders but not in physical terminal conditions (non-terminal, MAiD-NT). RECENT FINDINGS: Literature has shown that a small percentage of people with psychiatric disorders died by MAiD-NT in comparison with patients with somatic diseases in terminal clinical conditions (e.g., cancer, AIDS). However, the problem in the field is complex and not solved yet as confirmed by the fact that only a few countries (e.g., the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg) have legalized MAiD-NT for patients with psychiatric disorders, while most have maintained the practices accessible only to people with somatic disease in a terminal phase. Also, how to make objective the criterion of irremediability of a mental disorder; how to balance suicide prevention with assisted suicide; how to avoid the risk of progressively including in requests for MAiD-NT vulnerable segments of the population, such as minors, elderly, or people with dementia, in a productive-oriented society, are some of the critical points to be discussed. The application of MAiD-NT in people with psychiatric disorders should be further explored to prevent end-of-life rights from contradicting the principles of recovery-oriented care.

A comparison of Dignity Therapy narratives among people with severe mental illness and people with cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To examine Dignity Therapy (DT) narratives in patients with severe mental illness (SMI) and a control group of cancer patients. METHODS: 12 patients with SMI (schizophrenia, bipolar disorders, sever personality disorders) and 12 patients with non-advanced cancer individually participated to DT interviews. DT was tape-recorded, transcribed verbatim and shaped into a narrative through a preliminary editing process. A session was dedicated to the final editing process along with the participant, with a final written legacy (generativity document) provided to the participant. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis was used to qualitatively analyze the generativity documents. RESULTS: Patients with SMI and patients with cancer presented similar main narrative categories relative to dignity, such as "Meaning making", "Resources", "Legacy", "Dignity"; in addition, inpatients with SMI "Stigma" and inpatients with cancer "Injustice" emerged as separate categories. Patients in both groups strongly appreciated DT as an opportunity to reflect on their life story and legacy. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed that DT is a valuable intervention for people with SMI, grounded in a practical, person-centered approach. All patients found DT as an opportunity to describe their past and present, highlighting changes in the way they relate to themselves and others. These results can guide implementation of DT in mental health settings for people with SMI, as it is for people with cancer.

Knowledge about risk factors for cancer and cancer risk behavior among patients with severe mental illness.

OBJECTIVE: To examine knowledge about, perception of and current risk factors for cancer, among patients with severe mental illness (SMI) and to compare these variables with patients without SMI. METHODS: A series of patients affected by SMI (i.e., schizophrenia spectrum disorders, bipolar disorders and severe personality disorders) and a matched (gender, age) control group of primary care attenders were assessed, by using an ad hoc semi-structured interview and a short true/false 17-item questionnaire, about family history of cancer, cancer risk-related lifestyles, personal perception and knowledge of risk for cancer. RESULTS: Patients with SMI (n = 185, mainly schizophrenia spectrum disorders, 48%, and mood disorders, 33%) significantly differed from primary care attenders (n = 173) for: lower participation to occult stool blood screening test, Pap smear test and mammography; higher prevalence of current and past smoking habits; lower awareness towards their own physical symptoms and their perception of risks for cancer; lower physical exercise practicing; lower knowledge about risk factors for cancer (e.g. familiarity for cancer, smoke-habits, breast and uterine cancer). CONCLUSIONS: Patients suffering from SMI had higher at-risk behavior for cancer and showed fewer concerns and less knowledge about risk for cancer than primary care attendees. These findings can guide to implement screening for cancer (e.g., Pap test, blood) and to design evidence-based interventions to reduce cancer risk (e.g., educational and behavioral change for smoking cessation, dietary habits) among patients with SMI.

Pre-loss symptoms related to risk of complicated grief in caregivers of terminally ill cancer patients.

PURPOSE: A number of studies have underlined a 10-20% prevalence of complicated grief (CG) among caregivers of cancer patients. The study aimed at examining the relationship between pre-loss criteria for CG and post-loss diagnosis of CG and at evaluating the validity and factor structure of a predictive tool, the Inventory of Complicated Grief (ICG), in order to identify the risk of developing CG in a sample of Italian caregivers. METHODS: Sixty family members of terminally ill patients admitted to hospice and receiving a Palliative Prognostic Score (PaP) predictive 30 day survival time <30% completed the Pre-Death ICG (ICG-PL) (T0). Family members were met again 6 months after the death of their loved one (T1) and submitted to the interview for Complicated Grief (Post-loss interview-PLI). RESULTS: Caseness for CG was shown in 18.3% of caregivers at T1. ICG-PL score (T0) were higher among those who developed CG at T1 than non-cases. A cut off score ≥49 on the ICG-PL (AUC=0.98) maximized sensitivity (92%) and specificity (98%) on caseness at T1. Pre-loss criteria related to traumatic distress, separation distress and emotional symptoms in general were significantly related to a post-loss diagnosis of CG, while no effect was shown on duration of pre-loss distress. CONCLUSIONS: The use of short screening tools, like the ICG-PL, may help health care professionals to identify subjects at risk for CG.

Hopelessness and related variables among cancer patients in the Southern European Psycho-Oncology Study (SEPOS).

BACKGROUND: Although hopelessness has been studied in cancer, no data are available in non-English-speaking countries. OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to amass data from Southern European countries (Italy, Portugal, Spain, and Switzerland) in order to fill this void. METHOD: A group of 312 cancer patients completed the Mini-MAC Hopelessness subscale, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Cancer Worry Inventory (CWI), and a six-item Visual Analog scale (VAS) to measure intensity of physical symptoms, general well-being, difficulty in coping with cancer, intensity of social support from close relationships, leisure activity, and support from religious beliefs. RESULTS: Regression analysis indicated that HADS-Depression, VAS Maladaptive Coping and Well-Being, and the CWI explained 42% of the variance. CONCLUSION: Hopelessness in cancer patients seems not exclusively to correspond to depression, but is related to various other psychosocial factors, such as maladaptive coping, as well.

Depression and serotonin transporter (5-HTTLPR) polymorphism in breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Mixed evidence in the general population and medically ill patients has suggested that homozygous carriers of the short allele (s/s) of the serotonin transporter gene-linked polymorphic region (5-HTTLPR) may increase the risk of depression in comparison with carriers of the long allele (l/l) or s/l. Given the lack of data in oncology, we examined the relationship of depression with the 5-HTTLPR and psychosocial variables among breast cancer patients. METHODS: A sample of 145 breast cancer patients were studied as regards to depression, psychosocial-related variables (coping, Type D-personality, life events, and social support), and the 5-HTTLPR, which was genotyped by using a standard protocol with DNA extracted from the blood. RESULTS: No difference was found between s/s, s/l and l/l patients on depression and any other psychosocial variable. No gene-by environment (GxE) interactions were observed between the 5-HTTLPR and recent life events. CONCLUSIONS: The study did not provide support of a possible association between 5-HTTLPR polymorphism, alone or in conjunction with life events, and depression in newly diagnosed breast cancer. Further follow-up studies are however necessary to confirm these data.

Effects of supportive-expressive group therapy in breast cancer patients with affective disorders: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: So far, no study has tested supportive-expressive group therapy (SEGT) in cancer patients with an established psychiatric diagnosis. The aim of this 6-month follow-up study was to evaluate breast cancer patients with an ICD-10 diagnosis of affective syndromes participating in SEGT and a group of breast cancer patients with no ICD-10 diagnosis. METHODS: A total of 214 patients were examined in the screening phase (T0) using the ICD-10, the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), the Mini-Mental Adjustment-to-Cancer Scale (Mini-MAC), the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, the Openness Scale and the Cancer Worries Inventory (CWI). Those with an ICD-10 diagnosis of affective syndromes received 16-24 sessions of SEGT (90-min sessions, once a week), while those with no ICD-10 diagnosis were followed up. A second assessment for both sam- ples took place 6 months later (T1). RESULTS: Seventy-eight (36.4%) patients were positive for an ICD-10 diagnosis of affective syndromes at T0, while 127 (59.4%) did not meet any ICD-10 diagnosis. Among the former, 54 patients participated in the SEGT. At T1, significant differences were observed in all the dimensions of the BSI, hopelessness and anxious preoccupation subscales of the Mini-MAC, the Openness Scale and the CWI. No variable at T0 was a predictor of BSI distress as measured at T1. Among those with no ICD-10 diagnosis at T0, 8.2% were positive for affective disorders at the 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested that SEGT is effective for breast cancer patients with affective disorders, and indicates the need for prospective evaluations in order to identify those who may develop psychopathology over time.

Rationale and design of an independent randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of aripiprazole or haloperidol in combination with clozapine for treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: One third to two thirds of people with schizophrenia have persistent psychotic symptoms despite clozapine treatment. Under real-world circumstances, the need to provide effective therapeutic interventions to patients who do not have an optimal response to clozapine has been cited as the most common reason for simultaneously prescribing a second antipsychotic drug in combination treatment strategies. In a clinical area where the pressing need of providing therapeutic answers has progressively increased the occurrence of antipsychotic polypharmacy, despite the lack of robust evidence of its efficacy, we sought to implement a pre-planned protocol where two alternative therapeutic answers are systematically provided and evaluated within the context of a pragmatic, multicentre, independent randomised study. METHODS/DESIGN: The principal clinical question to be answered by the present project is the relative efficacy and tolerability of combination treatment with clozapine plus aripiprazole compared with combination treatment with clozapine plus haloperidol in patients with an incomplete response to treatment with clozapine over an appropriate period of time. This project is a prospective, multicentre, randomized, parallel-group, superiority trial that follow patients over a period of 12 months. Withdrawal from allocated treatment within 3 months is the primary outcome. DISCUSSION: The implementation of the protocol presented here shows that it is possible to create a network of community psychiatric services that accept the idea of using their everyday clinical practice to produce randomised knowledge. The employed pragmatic attitude allowed to randomly allocate more than 100 individuals, which means that this study is the largest antipsychotic combination trial conducted so far in Western countries. We expect that the current project, by generating evidence on whether it is clinically useful to combine clozapine with aripiprazole rather than with haloperidol, provides physicians with a solid evidence base to be directly applied in the routine care of patients with schizophrenia.

Affective syndromes and their screening in cancer patients with early and stable disease: Italian ICD-10 data and performance of the Distress Thermometer from the Southern European Psycho-Oncology Study (SEPOS).

BACKGROUND: The assessment of mood and anxiety disorders secondary to cancer by using easy-to-administer instruments has been the object of recent research. METHODS: The aim of this study was to examine the accuracy of the short screening tool developed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines for Distress Management, (0-10 point-scale Distress Thermometer) (DT) in detecting affective syndrome disorders in Italian cancer patients. The sample consisted of 109 cancer outpatients who were administered the ICD-10 psychiatric interview (CIDI), the DT and the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS). RESULTS: Forty-four patients (40.4%) met the criteria for an ICD-10 diagnosis of affective syndromes. The DT was significantly associated with HADS-Total score (r=0.66, p=0.001). A cut-off > or = 4 on the DT showed a sensitivity of 79.5% and a specificity of 75.4% (positive predictive value--PPV = 68.6%; negative predictive value--NPV = 84.5%). The cut-off score > or = 10 on the HADS was associated with a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 81.5% (PPV = 76%; NPV = 89.9%). A cut-off score > or = 5 on DT and > or = 15 on HADS maximized sensitivity (78.6% and 85%, respectively) and specificity (83.1% and 96%, respectively) for patients with more severe affective syndromes (major depression, persistent depressive disorders). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that simple instruments can be used as feasible tools in the screening of mood and anxiety disorders among cancer patients.

Psychological factors affecting oncology conditions.

The area of psychological factors affecting cancer has been the object of research starting from the early 1950s and consolidating from the 1970s with the development of psychooncology. A series of problems in the DSM and ICD nosological systems, such as the difficult application of the criteria for psychiatric diagnoses (i.e. major depression, adjustment disorders) and the scarce space dedicated to the rubric of psychosocial implications of medical illness (i.e. Psychological Factors Affecting a Medical Condition under 'Other Conditions That May Be a Focus of Clinical Attention' in the DSM-IV) represent a major challenge in psycho-oncology. The application of the Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research (DCPR) has been shown to be useful in a more precise identification of several psychological domains in patients with cancer. The DCPR dimensions of health anxiety, demoralization and alexithymia have been shown to be quite frequent in cancer patient (37.7, 28.8 and 26%, respectively). The overlap between a formal DSM-IV diagnosis and the DCPR is low, with 58% of patients being categorized as non-cases on the DSM-IV having at least one DCPR syndrome. The specific quality of the DCPR in characterizing psychosocial aspects secondary to cancer is also confirmed by the fact that some dimensions of coping (e.g. Mini-Mental Adjustment to Cancer subscale hopelessness) correlate with the DCPR dimension of demoralization, while a quantitative approach on symptom assessment (e.g. stress symptoms on the Brief Symptom Inventory) is not useful in discriminating the patients with and without DCPR syndromes. More research is needed in order to understand the relationship between DCPR constructs (e.g. alexithymia) and psychosocial factors which have been shown to be significant in oncology (e.g. emotional repression and avoidance). The role of specific DCPR constructs in influencing the course of illness is also an area that should be investigated.

Factors associated with antipsychotic dosing in psychiatric inpatients: a prospective study.

The persistent use of doses in excess of recommended levels is associated with increased risks of adverse reactions without evidence of additional benefits. Such treatment modality was evaluated in hospitalized psychiatric patients. During a 6-year recruitment period, a consecutive series of psychiatric inpatients receiving antipsychotic therapy were included. At admission, sociodemographic and clinical data, including antipsychotic drug use, were collected, and the 18-item version of the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale was administered. At discharge, data on antipsychotic drug therapy were collected. Prescribed daily doses were converted into multiples of the defined daily doses. Using a cut-off score of a prescribed daily dose/defined daily dose as a ratio of more than 1.5 both at admission and at discharge assessments, a total of 62 (15.4%) patients persistently received high antipsychotic dose. With less stringent criteria (prescribed daily dose/defined daily dose as a ratio of more than 2), however, only 4.4% of the entire sample was persistently exposed to high antipsychotic doses. Bootstrapped linear regression analysis revealed that positive symptoms were positively associated with high antipsychotic dose, whereas negative symptoms were negatively associated with high antipsychotic dose. Antipsychotic polypharmacy at admission was the strongest predictor of persistently receiving antipsychotic doses in excess of recommended levels. This study showed that the use of high antipsychotic dosing is not an occasional event. Clinicians should consider that concurrent prescribing of two or more antipsychotic agents increases the probability of administering excessive dosing in the long-term.

Determinants of antipsychotic polypharmacy in psychiatric inpatients: a prospective study.

A recent survey of clinicians' opinions suggested that antipsychotic polypharmacy is reserved for particularly severe cases, and that it is intended to avoid high doses of a single drug. In the present study, we tested these clinicians' reasons for antipsychotic polypharmacy in a sample of Italian psychiatric inpatients. During a 6-year recruitment period, all psychiatric patients receiving antipsychotic therapy at discharge from an inpatient facility were included. Sociodemographic and clinical data were collected, and the 18-item version of the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale was administered on admission and before discharge. At discharge, data on length of inpatient stay, psychotropic drug therapy and treatment adherence were collected. Prescribed daily doses were converted into multiples of the defined daily doses. A total of 354 inpatients receiving antipsychotic treatment at discharge were included. Of these, 100 (28%) were discharged with two or more antipsychotic drugs. After background group differences were controlled for, positive symptoms, manic/hostility symptoms and polypharmacy on admission were predictors of polypharmacy at discharge. The risk of high-dose antipsychotics in patients receiving polypharmacy at discharge was 10-fold higher than that in patients receiving one antipsychotic (odds ratio 10.70, 95% confidence interval 4.78-23.97, P<0.001). The perception of clinicians is to reserve antipsychotic polypharmacy for severe, persistent and difficult-to-treat cases, and this was confirmed by the finding that patients discharged on two or more antipsychotic agents were more severely ill on admission. Conversely, the theoretical advantage of avoiding a high dose of a single drug is counterbalanced by the documented disadvantage of administering high total doses.

Use of the diagnostic criteria for psychosomatic research in oncology.

BACKGROUND: Psycho-oncology literature has shown that 30-50% of cancer patients meet the criteria for a psychiatric diagnosis, according to the usual nosographic classification (e.g. DSM). The Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research (DCPR) have been shown to be useful in identifying psychological constellations in patients with medical illness. The aims of the study were to compare the DSM-IV and the DCPR in their application to cancer patients. METHOD: One hundred and forty-six patients with cancer underwent semistructured interviews to assess psychiatric morbidity and psychosocial syndromes according to the DSM-IV and the DCPR, respectively. The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) was also used to assess psychological stress symptoms. RESULTS: Sixty-five subjects (44.5%) met the criteria for a DSM-IV diagnosis (DSM cases), while 104 patients (71.2%) presented symptoms meeting the criteria for at least one DCPR syndrome. Three DCPR dimensions were more frequent than others, specifically Health Anxiety (37.7%), Demoralization (28.8%) and Alexithymia (26%). Among the subjects with no formal DSM-IV diagnosis (n = 81), 58% had at least one DCPR syndrome. DSM-IV cases had higher scores on several BSI subscales in comparison with patients with only one DCPR syndrome, while no difference was found in patients with more than one DCPR diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The DCPR system was found to be useful in oncology in investigating psychological conditions which are not identified by the DSM-IV alone. Assessment of more specific constructs, other than intensity of general stress symptoms, may give more specific information and help in tailoring psychological intervention for patients with cancer.

Effect of reboxetine on major depressive disorder in breast cancer patients: an open-label study.

BACKGROUND: Depression is a common disorder in cancer patients, and it is associated with reduced quality of life, abnormal illness behavior, pain, and suicide risk. A few studies have investigated the effects of tricyclic antidepressants and serotonin reuptake inhibitors in cancer patients. No data are available regarding the use of reboxetine, a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor that has been shown to be safe (e.g., absence of clinically significant drug-drug interactions and cytochrome P450 metabolism) and effective in the treatment of depressed patients, including those with medical illness (e.g., Parkinson's disease, human immunodeficiency virus infection). METHOD: The effects of reboxetine were investigated in 20 breast cancer patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of major depressive disorder in an open, prospective 8-week trial. Severity of depression was assessed with the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D). Psychiatric symptoms (Brief Symptom Inventory [BSI]), styles of coping with cancer (Mini-Mental Adjustment to Cancer [Mini-MAC]), quality of life (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire C30 [EORTC-QLQ-C30]), and Clinical Global Impressions scale scores were also monitored. RESULTS: At 8 weeks, a significant (p <.01) reduction was observed in HAM-D scores, several BSI dimension scores, and Mini-MAC hopelessness and anxious preoccupation scores. A significant (p <.05) improvement from baseline to endpoint was found on the EORTC-QLQ-C30 subfactors emotional, cognitive, dyspnea, sleep, and global. Discontinuation was necessary in 1 subject because of hypomanic switch and in another because of side effects (tachycardia, tension). Seven patients experienced transient side effects (e.g., mild anxiety, insomnia, sweating). CONCLUSION: In this open trial, reboxetine appeared to be well tolerated and promising in reducing depressive symptoms and maladjusted coping styles and in improving scores on quality-of-life parameters.

Emotional stress, psychosocial variables and coping associated with hepatitis C virus and human immunodeficiency virus infections in intravenous drug users.

BACKGROUND: The increasing health problem of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has only recently attracted the attention of psychosocial research, especially among subjects at higher risk (e.g. intravenous drug users; IDUs). The aim of the present study was to compare emotional stress symptoms, psychosocial variables (i.e. social support, external locus of control and emotional repression) and coping strategies in HCV-seropositive, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-seropositive and HCV/HIV-noninfected IDUs. METHODS: IDUs followed by the Infectious Diseases Outpatient clinic were enrolled in the study over a period of 1 year. HCV-positive (n = 62) and HIV-positive (n = 76) IDUs and HCV/HIV-seronegative IDUs (n = 152) completed the Brief Symptom Inventory, the Social Provision Scale, the Locus of Control scale and the affective inhibition scale of the Illness Behavior Questionnaire. Coping with illness among HCV-positive and HIV-positive subjects was assessed through a modified version of the Mental Adjustment to Cancer Scale. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the samples with respect to individual and interpersonal variables. HCV-positive subjects showed higher scores on several psychological stress dimensions (i.e. obsessive-compulsive, phobic anxiety, paranoid ideation, psychoticism) and lower scores on fighting spirit, hopelessness and anxious preoccupation towards illness than HIV-positive patients. HCV-positive and HCV/HIV-seronegative IDUs reported comparable scores on most of the psychological measures. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that routine assessment of psychosocial variables and coping mechanisms should be integrated into all HCV and HIV services, especially those dedicated to treatment of patients with substance abuse, as a vulnerable segment of the population at risk for life-threatening physical illness such as HCV and HIV infections.