Different measures for auditory hallucinations in populations with psychosis. The Validation of the Spanish versions of the Auditory Vocal Hallucination Rating Scale (AVHRS) and the Positive and Useful Voices Inquiry (PUVI).

INTRODUCTION: An updated summary of the most used instruments assessing auditory hallucinations in population with psychosis, allows us to underline the scarceness and need of Spanish versions of important instruments. The aim of the study is to examine the psychometric characteristics of two different and complementary instruments for assessing auditory hallucinations, the Spanish version of the Auditory Vocal Hallucination Scale (AVHRS) and the Spanish version of the Positive and Useful Voices Inquiry (PUVI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of 68 patients from four different centres, with a DSM-IV diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder presenting with auditory hallucinations were included. Apart from the AVHRS and the PUVI, the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales-Auditory Hallucinations subscale (PSYRATS-AH) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) were also administered to all patients, plus an acceptability questionnaire. RESULTS: The Spanish version of the AVHRS showed a good internal consistency, a moderate to high inter-rater reliability, a medium to moderate test-retest reliability, and a good convergent and discriminant validity. The Spanish version of the PUVI showed a good internal consistency and a heterogeneous, but in general moderate, test-retest reliability. CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish versions of the AVHRS and the PUVI have good psychometric properties and are well accepted among patients.

Different measures for auditory hallucinations in populations with psychosis. The Validation of the Spanish versions of the Auditory Vocal Hallucination Rating Scale (AVHRS) and the Positive and Useful Voices Inquiry (PUVI) / Diferentes medidas para las alucinaciones auditivas en poblaciones con psicosis. Validación de las versiones españolas de la Escala de Valoración de Alucinaciones Auditivas Vocales (AVHRS) y de la Encuesta sobre Voces Positivas y Útiles (PUVI)

Introduction: An updated summary of the most used instruments assessing auditory hallucinations in population with psychosis, allows us to underline the scarceness and need of Spanish versions of important instruments. The aim of the study is to examine the psychometric characteristics of two different and complementary instruments for assessing auditory hallucinations, the Spanish version of the Auditory Vocal Hallucination Scale (AVHRS) and the Spanish version of the Positive and Useful Voices Inquiry (PUVI). Materials and methods: A sample of 68 patients from four different centres, with a DSM-IV diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder presenting with auditory hallucinations were included. Apart from the AVHRS and the PUVI, the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales-Auditory Hallucinations subscale (PSYRATS-AH) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) were also administered to all patients, plus an acceptability questionnaire. Results: The Spanish version of the AVHRS showed a good internal consistency, a moderate to high inter-rater reliability, a medium to moderate test–retest reliability, and a good convergent and discriminant validity. The Spanish version of the PUVI showed a good internal consistency and a heterogeneous, but in general moderate, test–retest reliability. Conclusions: The Spanish versions of the AVHRS and the PUVI have good psychometric properties and are well accepted among patients. (AU)

Introducción: Un resumen actualizado de los instrumentos más utilizados en la evaluación de las alucinaciones auditivas en poblaciones con psicosis, nos permite subrayar la escasez y necesidad de versiones españolas de importantes instrumentos. El objetivo del estudio es examinar las características psicométricas de dos instrumentos para la evaluación de las alucinaciones auditivas diferentes y complementarios, la versión española de la Escala de Valoración de Alucinaciones Auditivas Vocales (AVHRS) y la versión española de la Encuesta sobre Voces Positivas y Útiles (PUVI). Material y métodos: Se incluyó una muestra de 68 pacientes de cuatro centros diferentes, con diagnóstico de esquizofrenia o trastorno esquizoafectivo según el DSM-IV, que presentaban alucinaciones auditivas. Además de la AVHRS y de la PUVI, se administraron también a todos los pacientes la subescala de Alucinaciones Auditivas de la Escalas de Evaluación de Síntomas Psicóticos (PSYRATS-AH) y la Escala de Evaluación de Síndrome Positivo y Negativo (PANSS), además de un cuestionario de aceptabilidad. Resultados: La versión española de la AVHRS mostró una buena consistencia interna, una fiabilidad inter-jueces de moderada a alta, una fiabilidad re-test de media a moderada, y una buena validez convergente y discriminante. La versión española de la PUVI mostró una buena consistencia interna y una fiabilidad test-retest heterogénea pero, en general, moderada. Conclusiones: Las versiones españolas de la AVHRS y la PUVI tienes buenas propiedades psicométricas y son bien aceptadas entre los pacientes. (AU)

Different measures for auditory hallucinations in populations with psychosis. The Validation of the Spanish versions of the Auditory Vocal Hallucination Rating Scale (AVHRS) and the Positive and Useful Voices Inquiry (PUVI).

INTRODUCTION: An updated summary of the most used instruments assessing auditory hallucinations in population with psychosis, allows us to underline the scarceness and need of Spanish versions of important instruments. The aim of the study is to examine the psychometric characteristics of two different and complementary instruments for assessing auditory hallucinations, the Spanish version of the Auditory Vocal Hallucination Scale (AVHRS) and the Spanish version of the Positive and Useful Voices Inquiry (PUVI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of 68 patients from four different centres, with a DSM-IV diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder presenting with auditory hallucinations were included. Apart from the AVHRS and the PUVI, the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales-Auditory Hallucinations subscale (PSYRATS-AH) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) were also administered to all patients, plus an acceptability questionnaire. RESULTS: The Spanish version of the AVHRS showed a good internal consistency, a moderate to high inter-rater reliability, a medium to moderate test-retest reliability, and a good convergent and discriminant validity. The Spanish version of the PUVI showed a good internal consistency and a heterogeneous, but in general moderate, test-retest reliability. CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish versions of the AVHRS and the PUVI have good psychometric properties and are well accepted among patients.

Positive and Useful Voices in Patients With Schizophrenia: Prevalence, Course, Characteristics, and Correlates.

Auditory verbal hallucinations (AVHs) in schizophrenia have been characterized by their negative emotional valence. However, positive hallucinations have also been described. The objective of the current study is to explore the prevalence, course, characteristics, and associations of positive and useful voices. The Positive and Useful Voices Inquiry and some clinical and functioning instruments were administered to a sample of 68 patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder presenting with AVHs. Both the lifetime and current prevalences of positive and useful voices were high. Although AVHs tended to remain stable, there was a trend to decrease over time. The strongest positive attributions of such voices were that they help patients to feel important, amuse them, and help them to conduct their studies and carry out their profession. They seem to be mainly related to more grandiosity and to worse general functioning. Interference with biological and psychological treatments and the need for personalized formulations in patients with auditory hallucinations are discussed.

Efficacy of prospective pharmacogenetic testing in the treatment of major depressive disorder: results of a randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: A 12-week, double-blind, parallel, multi-center randomized controlled trial in 316 adult patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing for drug therapy guidance. METHODS: Patients with a CGI-S ≥ 4 and requiring antidepressant medication de novo or changes in their medication regime were recruited at 18 Spanish public hospitals, genotyped with a commercial PGx panel (Neuropharmagen®), and randomized to PGx-guided treatment (n = 155) or treatment as usual (TAU, control group, n = 161), using a computer-generated random list that locked or unlocked psychiatrist access to the results of the PGx panel depending on group allocation. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving a sustained response (Patient Global Impression of Improvement, PGI-I ≤ 2) within the 12-week follow-up. Patients and interviewers collecting the PGI-I ratings were blinded to group allocation. Between-group differences were evaluated using χ2-test or t-test, as per data type. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty patients were available for analysis at the end of the 12-week follow-up (PGx n = 136, TAU n = 144). A difference in sustained response within the study period (primary outcome) was not observed (38.5% vs 34.4%, p = 0.4735; OR = 1.19 [95%CI 0.74-1.92]), but the PGx-guided treatment group had a higher responder rate compared to TAU at 12 weeks (47.8% vs 36.1%, p = 0.0476; OR = 1.62 [95%CI 1.00-2.61]), and this difference increased after removing subjects in the PGx-guided group when clinicians explicitly reported not to follow the test recommendations (51.3% vs 36.1%, p = 0.0135; OR = 1.86 [95%CI 1.13-3.05]). Effects were more consistent in patients with 1-3 failed drug trials. In subjects reporting side effects burden at baseline, odds of achieving a better tolerability (Frequency, Intensity and Burden of Side Effects Rating Burden subscore ≤2) were higher in the PGx-guided group than in controls at 6 weeks and maintained at 12 weeks (68.5% vs 51.4%, p = 0.0260; OR = 2.06 [95%CI 1.09-3.89]). CONCLUSIONS: PGx-guided treatment resulted in significant improvement of MDD patient's response at 12 weeks, dependent on the number of previously failed medication trials, but not on sustained response during the study period. Burden of side effects was also significantly reduced. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Clinical Trials Database 2013-002228-18 , registration date September 16, 2013; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02529462 , retrospectively registered: August 19, 2015.

Estudio cualitativo sobre los estados de agitación y su caracterización, y los procedimientos de atención utilizados en su contención / Qualitative study of the agitation states and their characterization, and the interventions used to attend them

Introducción. La agitación es un problema común en la atención psiquiátrica con graves consecuencias clínicas y económicas. Metodología. El objetivo del estudio fue definir y caracterizar los estados de agitación en la práctica habitual en una unidad de Psiquiatría de Agudos y urgencias psiquiátricas, y describir los paquetes de atención típicos. Se establecieron dos grupos nominales, uno con 7 profesionales de enfermería y otro con 10 de psiquiatría (urgencias y psiquiatría de agudos del Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu). Resultados. El equipo de enfermería describió dos estados principales que formaban los extremos de un espectro que iba de leve (pre-agitación) a grave (agitación). Se describió un tercer estado que se caracterizaba por un comportamiento desorganizado. Diversos paquetes de atención fueron descritos para cada estado de agitación que se dividían en paquetes de primera, segunda y tercera línea. La primera línea (contención verbal) se aplicaba en todos los estados de agitación. Si no fuese eficaz, se implementaban los de segunda y tercera línea, llegando hasta la contención mecánica. El equipo de psiquiatras describió tres estados de agitación: un estado inicial leve (ansiedad e irritabilidad), un estado moderado (pre-agitación sin agresividad) y un estado severo de agitación con agresividad y/o violencia. Conclusiones. Para evitar la progresión a un estado de agitación severa, ambos grupos coincidieron en la importancia de la contención verbal, apropiada para todos los estados. Esto iría seguido de las medidas ambientales y farmacológicas hasta llegar a la contención mecánica dependiendo de la gravedad de la situación

Introduction. Agitation is a common problem in psychiatric care with serious clinical and economic consequences. Methodology. The aim of the study was to define and characterize the agitation states present in usual medical practice in the acute and emergency units of a psychiatric hospital. Two nominal groups, one with 7 nurses and the other with 10 psychiatrists from the Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, were established. Results. The nurses described two main states forming the endpoints of a spectrum: from mild (pre-agitation) to severe (agitation). A third state was outlined in which agitation was characterized by disorganized behavior problems. Various care packages were described for each agitation state. The care packages were divided into first, second and third line approaches. The first line approaches (i.e., verbal containment) were used on every (pre)agitated patient. If the first line approach was not effective, the second and third line approaches were implemented, culminating with physical restraint. The psychiatrists described 3 states: a mild initial state (anxiety and irritability), moderate (pre-agitation without aggressiveness) and a severe state of agitation with aggressiveness and/or violence. Conclusions. In order to avoid progression to a severely agitated state, both groups agreed on the importance of appropriate verbal containment for all states. This would be followed by environmental measures, medication and mechanical restrain depending on the severity of the state

Qualitative study of the agitation states and their characterization, and the interventions used to attend them.

INTRODUCTION: Agitation is a common problem in psychiatric care with serious clinical and economic consequences. METHODOLOGY: The aim of the study was to define and characterize the agitation states present in usual medical practice in the acute and emergency units of a psychiatric hospital. Two nominal groups, one with 7 nurses and the other with 10 psychiatrists from the Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, were established. RESULTS: The nurses described two main states forming the endpoints of a spectrum: from mild (pre-agitation) to severe (agitation). A third state was outlined in which agitation was characterized by disorganized behavior problems. Various care packages were described for each agitation state. The care packages were divided into first, second and third line approaches. The first line approaches (i.e., verbal containment) were used on every (pre)agitated patient. If the first line approach was not effective, the second and third line approaches were implemented, culminating with physical restraint. The psychiatrists described 3 states: a mild initial state (anxiety and irritability), moderate (pre-agitation without aggressiveness) and a severe state of agitation with aggressiveness and/or violence. CONCLUSIONS: In order to avoid progression to a severely agitated state, both groups agreed on the importance of appropriate verbal containment for all states. This would be followed by environmental measures, medication and mechanical restrain depending on the severity of the state.

Aspectos conceptuales sobre el proceso de decisión compartida en salud mental / Conceptual analysis of shared decision-making process in mental health

Uno de los cambios más importantes en la atención sanitaria de las últimas décadas, en lo que a las decisiones terapéuticas se refiere, ha sido la transición desde un modelo centrado en la enfermedad a uno centrado en el paciente. Esto conlleva la progresiva sustitución de una aproximación paternalista por una más deliberativa y, en relación a los tratamientos farmacológicos, del concepto de cumplimiento o adherencia al de concordancia o acuerdo terapéutico. El concepto de concordancia, por su parte, ha sido contemplado como el objetivo final de un proceso de negociación y corresponsabilidad en la decisión de elegir un tratamiento al que se ha denominado proceso de decisión compartida (PDC) (shared decision making). Hasta el momento, el PDC ha sido escasamente implantado en trastornos mentales graves, cuando no contestado como inadecuado dada la presunta alteración de la capacidad del paciente psiquiátrico gravemente enfermo para tomar decisiones. Sin embargo, esta incapacidad no siempre está presente por lo que la decisión compartida debe contemplarse como premisa y no como excepción. El PDC implica la implantación de un procedimiento en etapas (asociación médico paciente, información sobre opciones, pros y contras, deliberación sobre las mismas y su relación con valores y preferencias del paciente, decisión consensuada). Un de las barreras más importantes para la aplicación del proceso de decisión compartida en salud mental es la cuestión de la capacidad del enfermo mental. Por ello, la evaluación de la capacidad debe hacerse central en la práctica clínica psiquiátrica (AU)

One of the most important changes in health care in recent decades, regarding the therapeutic decisions, has been the transition from a model focused on the disease to other one focused on the patient. This entails the progressive replacement of a paternalistic approach by a more deliberative one and, in relation to pharmacological treatments, the concept of compliance or adherence to the therapeutic agreement. The concept of therapeutic agreement, on the other hand, has been referred to as the ultimate goal of a process of negotiation and co-responsibility in the decision to choose a treatment which has been called 'shared decision making process' (SDM). So far, the SDM has been poorly implemented in severe mental disorders, when not answered as inadequate given the alleged alteration of the seriously ill psychiatric patient’s ability to make decisions. However, this inability is not always present so shared decision should be viewed as a premise and not as an exception. SDM involves the introduction of a procedure in stages (doctor-patient partnership, information about options, pros and cons, deliberation about them and their relationship with the values and preferences of the patient, consensual decision). One of the most important barriers for the implementation of the shared mental health decision-making process is the question of the capacity of the mentally ill. Therefore, the evaluation of the capacity must be central in psychiatric clinical practice (AU)

El proceso de decisión compartida en el tratamiento del paciente psiquiátrico: estudios empíricos y evaluación de la capacidad / The shared decision-making process in the treatment of psychiatric patient: empirical studies and capacity assessment

Existe investigación empírica sobre experiencias de decisión compartida en salud mental, preferentemente en depresión y esquizofrenia, y algo menos en adicciones. La evidencia disponible a partir de los estudios llevados a cabo en los últimos años muestra que esta práctica mejora la calidad de las decisiones y parece efectiva en el proceso decisorio (aumenta el conocimiento y la participación, favorece una mayor congruencia con los valores y preferencias del paciente), aumentando, generalmente, la satisfacción del usuario. Sin embargo, existe escasa o mínima evidencia acerca de su eficacia sobre indicadores de resultados de salud. Uno de los elementos claves de los procesos de decisión compartida es la determinación de la capacidad del paciente para tomar la decisión clínica en cuestión. Se trata de un juicio clínico que posee un papel relevante en el difícil equilibrio entre autonomía y beneficencia/no maleficencia en la atención sanitaria. Así, una adecuada evaluación de la capacidad de tomar decisiones del paciente debe servir para proteger ambos principios y evitar dos tipos de errores: por un lado, el soslayar injustificadamente la autonomía del paciente para salvaguardar su bienestar; por otro, el injustificable respeto a su autonomía al precio de su bienestar (AU)

There is empirical research on shared decision making in mental health, above all in depression and schizophrenia, and somewhat less in addictions. Studies carried out in recent years produce evidence showing that it improves the quality of decisions and it seems to be effective in decision making (increased knowledge and participation, promotes greater consistency with the patient values and preferences), increasing user satisfaction mostly. However, there is tiny evidence of its effectiveness on health outcomes. One of the key elements of shared decision-making processes is the determination of the patient’s capacity to make the clinical decisions in question. This is an assessment that has a core role in the delicate balance between autonomy and beneficence / non-maleficence in health care. Thus, a proper assessment of the capacity of the patient to make decisions might be useful to protect both principles and to avoid two types of errors: first, to ignore unjustifiably the patient autonomy to safeguard their welfare, and secondly, the unwarranted respect for their autonomy for the price of their welfare (AU)

Practical issues with amisulpride in the management of patients with schizophrenia.

Amisulpride is an atypical antipsychotic with a significantly greater effect size than first-generation, typical antipsychotics, and efficacy at least similar to that of olanzapine and risperidone in large-scale clinical trials in schizophrenia. Amisulpride provides greater improvement in positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia, a better long-term outcome than typical antipsychotics, and distinct tolerability advantages over typical antipsychotics, which are reported to cause extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) in 20-50% of patients. In addition, amisulpride is associated with significantly less weight gain than olanzapine and risperidone, does not increase body mass index, and favourably influences lipid profiles. In many patients with schizophrenia, adverse events impair adherence to treatment, and switching from typical or atypical antipsychotic therapy to amisulpride may be clinically appropriate. Observational drug-utilization studies suggest that many physicians switch to amisulpride because of fewer EPS and/or less weight gain and improved patient adherence. Cross-tapering (over 4 weeks), rather than abrupt cessation of pre-switch treatment, is preferred. Amisulpride has a low risk of drug-drug interactions, and, during cross-tapering, patients can remain on concurrent treatments (e.g. anticholinergics and antiparkinsonian agents) until the effective dosage has been reached. An appropriate amisulpride starting dose is 800 mg/day for patients with acute psychotic exacerbations, 400-800 mg/day for patients with predominantly positive symptoms, and 100-300 mg/day for predominantly negative symptoms. Amisulpride may be particularly suitable for clozapine-augmentation therapy in patients with refractory schizophrenia. Indeed, amisulpride is more effective than quetiapine as augmentation therapy in patients partially responsive to clozapine, and several prospective open-label studies and case series have reported promising results for amisulpride/clozapine combination therapy. In three prospective studies, addition of amisulpride 200-800 mg/day to clozapine significantly reduced mean scores on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) total (-33% to -35%), Clinical Global Impression (CGI)-Severity scale (-31%), Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total (-22%), and Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (-34%). The proportion of responders (CGI score > or =3 or BPRS improvement >20%) was 71-86%. Retrospective case-series analyses have also reported improved psychopathological state, reduced adverse events, and lower clozapine dosage requirement with use of this combination. The pharmacological and clinical profiles of amisulpride suggest that this agent is a viable clinical option when a change of antipsychotic therapy is required in patients with schizophrenia because of lack of efficacy, adverse events and poor adherence to treatment, or for augmentation of clozapine in treatment-resistant illness.

Las bases epistemológicas de la psiquiatría y psicopatología: una aproximación metapsiquiátrica / No disponible

La metapsiquiatría o filosofía de la psiquiatría es la disciplina que estudia las distintas narrativas que tratan de conceptualizar, comprender y manejar los trastornos mentales en un contexto sociocultural determinado. Según Berrios, existirían dos enfoques contrapuestos: por un lado la aproximación centrípeta que intenta aplicar métodos o sistemas filosóficos externos al campo de la psiquiatría; por otro, la visión centrífuga que intenta generar herramientas y un metalenguaje propios. Ambos enfoques pueden ser abordados, con mayor o menor fortuna, por psiquiatras o filósofos, y preceder y supervisar o simplemente justificar los hallazgos empíricos de la psiquiatría como empresa tecnocientífica. La metapsiquiatría se enfrenta con dos grandes tipos de problemas: por una lado, aquellos extrínsecos a la propia disciplina psiquiátrica y que se enmarcan en las cuestiones filosóficas fundamentales del contexto sociocultural correspondiente; por otro lado, intrínsecas a la psiquiatría, derivadas de su posición intersticial entre las ciencias. El presente artículo expondrá las líneas generales que deben guiar la exploración de unas y otras y analizará, brevemente, las más relevantes (AU)

No disponible

¿Fenomenología revisitada? / No disponible

No disponible