Pain sensitivity is modulated by affective temperament: Results from the population-based CHRIS Affective Disorder (CHRIS-AD) study.

BACKGROUND: Nociceptive pain modulation is related to psychological and psychiatric conditions. Evidence from clinical studies backs innate temperaments as potential precursors of mood symptoms and disorders, and pain sensitivity. Our study examines the modulation effect of affective temperaments on pain sensitivity in a general population adult sample, accounting for possible intervening mood symptoms, lifetime anxiety and depression, and pain treatments. METHODS: The sample is part of the CHRIS-AD study, Italy. Primary outcomes were the pain sensitivity questionnaire PSQ-total intensity score and the experimental pressure pain threshold (PPT). Affective temperaments were evaluated with the TEMPS-M. Lifetime depression, anxiety, current mood disorders, and treatments were self-reported via rating-scales. Directed acyclic graphs theory guided linear and mixed linear regression model analyses. RESULTS: Among 3804 participants (aged 18-65; response rate 78.4 %, females 53.3 %, mean age 38.4 years) for any given temperament, both the PSQ-total and the PPT were associated with temperament. The TEMPS-M four cyclothymic-related temperaments aligned on the pain-sensitive pole and the hyperthymic on the pain-resilient pole. The inclusion of current or lifetime mood symptoms, or pain drug use, as possible intervening pathways only partly diluted these associations, with stronger evidence for an effect of trait anxiety. LIMITATIONS: The main limitations were the lack of experimental measures of suprathreshold pain intensity perception, and detailed information on affective disorders in the study population. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the hypothesis of a biological dichotomous diathesis of affective temperaments towards pain sensitivity; hyperthymic suggesting protection, whereas cyclothymic suggesting predisposition.

Metacognitions and repetitive negative thinking in bipolar disorder and healthy controls: A comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Metacognitive deficits and repetitive negative thinking are poorly explored in bipolar disorder (BD). The majority of the published studies concerned patients with bipolar depression, without differentiating among BD subtypes. The most common dysfunctional metacognitions, measured with the Metacognition Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30), were Negative Beliefs about the Uncontrollability and Danger of Worry (NB), Cognitive Confidence (CC) and Beliefs about the Need to Control Thoughts (NC). Worry and rumination also seem to influence every phase of BD. This study aimed to investigate metacognitions and repetitive negative thinking in euthymic patients with BD. METHOD: Using the MCQ-30, the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ) and the Ruminative Responses Scale (RRS), we compared 57 BD-I and 48 BD-II patients with 78 healthy controls. RESULTS: Both BD groups showed significantly higher NB, CC, NC and total MCQ-30 scores. 'Positive Beliefs About Worry' (PBW) showed a significantly higher score only in the BD-II group. Rumination scores were significantly higher in both patient samples. Worry did not show any significant differences between groups. LIMITATIONS: The primary limitations are related to the size of the samples and the research design. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggested that metacognitive deficits and negative repetitive thinking were associated with euthymic BD. Rumination, NB, CC, and TC may represent trait-dependent features related to the inter-episodic phase of the disorder. A higher PBW score seemed to be a distinctive feature only for patients with euthymic BD-II. The results offer new perspectives in the psychotherapeutic treatment of these patients.

Use of Stimulants in Bipolar Disorder.

Several international guidelines indicate stimulants, including methylphenidate (MPH), amphetamines and derivatives, modafinil, and armodafinil among the second-third-line choices for bipolar depression. Efficacy of stimulants has been also reported for the management of residual depressive symptoms such as fatigue and sleepiness and for the management of affective, cognitive, and behavioral symptoms in children and adult bipolar patients with comorbid ADHD. Few case reports show positive results with MPH in the treatment of resistant mania. Finally, MPH might be an option in some bipolar forms observed in psychiatric presentations of frontotemporal dementia and traumatic brain injury. In spite of these preliminary observations, the use of stimulants in bipolar patients is still controversial. Potential of misuse and abuse and mood destabilization with induction of (hypo)manic switches, mixed states, and rapid cycling are the concerns most frequently reported. Our aims are to summarize available literature on this topic and discuss practical management implications.

Factor structure and reliability of the Italian adaptation of the Hypomania Check List-32, second revision (HCL-32-R2).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the psychometric properties of the Italian adaptation of the Hypomania-Check-List 32-item, second revision (HCL-32-R2) for the detection of bipolarity in major depressive disorder (MDD) treatment-seeking outpatients. METHODS: A back-to-back Italian adaption of the "Bipolar Disorders: Improving Diagnosis, Guidance, and Education" English module of the HCL-32-R2 was administered between March 2013 and October 2014 across twelve collaborating sites in Italy. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Fourth edition (DSM-IV) diagnoses were made adopting the mini-international neuropsychiatric interview, using bipolar disorder (BD) patients as controls. RESULTS: In our sample (n=441, of whom, BD-I=68; BD-II=117; MDD=256), using a cut-off of 14 allowed the HCL-32-R2 to discriminate DSM-IV-defined MDD patients between "true unipolar" (HCL-32-R2(-)) and "sub-threshold bipolar depression" (HCL-32-R2(+)) with sensitivity=89% and specificity=79%. Area under the curve was .888; positive and negative predictive values were 75.34% and 90.99% respectively. Owing to clinical interpretability considerations and consistency with previous adaptations of the HCL-32, a two-factor solution (F1="hyperactive/elated" vs. F2="irritable/distractible/impulsive") was preferred using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, whereas items n.33 ("I gamble more") and n.34 ("I eat more") introduced in the R2 version of the scale slightly loaded onto F2 and F1 respectively. Cronbach׳s α=.88 for F1 and .71 for F2. LIMITATIONS: No cross-validation with any additional validated screening tool; treatment-seeking outpatient sample; recall bias; no systematic evaluation of eventual medical/psychiatric comorbidities, current/lifetime pharmacological history, neither record of severity of current MDE. CONCLUSIONS: Our results seem to indicate fair accuracy of HCL-32 as a screening instrument for BD, though replication studies are warranted.