A comparative study of different modalities of treatment in nicotine dependence syndrome.

UNLABELLED: There are different modalities for management of Nicotine dependence, but it is still inconclusive which is the best modality for the treatment of Nicotine dependence syndrome (NDS). In this background the present study was carried out to assess the efficacy and to compare different modalities for the treatment of NDS. METHODS: Patients diagnosed as NDS as per ICD-10 were taken up for study. These patients were administered proforma to elicit sociodemographic details, Fagerstrom test for Nicotine Dependence, Questionnaire of Smoking Urges-Brief and breath analysis was done using carbon monoxide meter. Assessment was done at base line and at weekly follow-ups for 12 weeks. Patients were divided into six groups randomly. Group A received BUP at a dose of 150mg/day for 3 days; subsequently increased to 300mg/day, Group B: for initial 6 weeks Nicotine gum of 4mg every 1-2 hourly was used and next 6 weeks every 2-4 hourly was used, Group C: BI, Group D: BI+BUP, Group E: BI+NRT, Group F received BUP+NRT+BI. RESULTS: The quit rates at end of the study were BUP-30%, NRT-26.66%, BI-23.33%, BI+BUP-43.33%, BI+NRT-33.33%, and BI+BUP+NRT-50%. BI+BUP+NRT had 2-3 times more quit rates than the individual modality treatment group. CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference between the study groups, but there was clinical difference in quit rates. Among the groups BI+BUP+NRT had higher quit rates compared to other groups. Combination modalities yield better quit rates than individual modalities.

Failed suicide and deliberate self-harm: A need for specific nomenclature.

BACKGROUND: Out of those who attempted self-harm and survived, many actually wanted to die and many did not. Presently, no distinctive nomenclature exists for these two groups, which causes difficulty in understanding as well as in management and research. AIM: To study whether there exist two such groups which are distinct and can be differentiated clinically. METHODS: Seventy-eight persons who attempted self-harm were evaluated in detail by a psychiatrist. The data were recorded in an especially designed proforma which documented sociodemographic variables, psychiatric and physical illnesses, psychosocial stress factors, substance abuse, past and family history and details of suicide attempt. RESULTS: Two groups emerged with distinct characteristics. The two groups were different in factors such as age, diagnosis, intentionality, lethality, mode, motive to kill oneself, past/family history, relation to stress, personality traits and precaution to prevent detection before and/or after the act. The group which had persons who really wanted to die but survived is suggested to be named as the 'failed suicide' group and the other group which had persons who did not actually want to die is suggested to be named as the 'deliberate self-harm' group. CONCLUSION: THOSE WHO CAUSE HARM TO THEMSELVES BUT SURVIVE CAN BE DISTINCTLY PUT INTO TWO GROUPS: (i) the 'failed suicide' group constituting those who actually wanted to kill themselves and (ii) the 'deliberate self-harm' group constituting those who did not actually want to die. The criteria for distinctions are suggested.

Dissociative disorder presenting as catatonia.

Three cases of dissociative disorder presenting with catatonia are described. Catatonia is generally believed to be associated with schizophrenia. However, many other conditions are also known to cause catatonia. A brief review of literature is provided. All the cases improved rapidly with a few ECTs. This report aims to highlight the presentation of dissociative disorders with catatonia. It also seeks to bring to notice the need to avoid lumping all non-organic catatonics under the rubric of schizophrenia so as to ensure proper treatment.

BIOFEEDBACK IN MEDICAL PRACTICE.

Biofeedback is emerging as a non-pharmacological method of treatment, mainly as an adjunct in the management of a large number of common medical conditions seen in general hospital set-up. Origin of biofeedback, biofeedback methods and their clinical applications are discussed.

Simplified method of determining fetal brain weight in utero.

Analysis of autopsy data shows that, from the 26th through the 38th gestational weeks, fetal brain weight (BrW) is a function of the 3.124 power of the largest head circumference (HC). Because there is excellent correlation between prenatal ultrasound measurement and postnatal tape measurement of the HC, it is possible to determine fetal BrW in utero. An alteration of the BrW:somatic weight (SW) relationship is an important physical stigma of asymmetric intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR). The value of longitudinal studies of fetal BrW and SW as a means of discriminating between normal and asymmetric growth is tested in a population at risk for IUGR.