[Spouses and bipolar disorder]. / Conjoints et trouble bipolaire.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of life of a population of spouses of bipolar patients compared with a control population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study which included two groups: a group of 30 spouses of patients followed for bipolar I disorder according to DSM IV criteria and a second group of 30 subjects from the general population. Both groups were matched by age, sex, marital status and socioeconomic level. This device was designed to limit the differences between the two groups solely those of the bipolar illness. Evaluating the quality of life was achieved using the quality of life scale: SF-36. This is a scale that has already been translated and validated in dialect Arabic. RESULTS: Regarding sociodemographic variables, the two study groups differed only for: recreation, friendly relations and the couple relationship that included more and better skills among the control group. In the categorical approach, the quality of life was impaired in 60% of spouses and 40% of controls with a statistically significant difference. The following standardized dimensions: mental health (D4), limitation due to mental health (D5), life and relationship with others (D6) and perceived health (D8) and mental component (CM) were significantly altered in patients' spouses compared to controls. We found significant differences between the two groups for: overall average score (51.1 vs. 68.2), mental health (D4), limitation due to mental health (D5), life and relationship with others (D6), perceived health (D8) and perceived health (D8) standards. DISCUSSION: The impairment of quality of life of bipolar patients' spouses is related to the extra responsibility, stress, financial problems and health problems, stigma, and loss of security of the person loved. CONCLUSION: Considering the consequences that the appearance of bipolar disorder on the patient's spouse may have, certain measures must be proposed to improve their quality of life.

[Schizophrenia and violence, incidence and risk factors: a Tunisian sample]. / Schizophrénie et violence: incidence et facteurs de risque à propos d'une population tunisienne.

INTRODUCTION: Schizophrenia appears to be the mental pathology the most associated with violence. The aim of this study is to show the incidence and the different risk factors of violence among schizophrenics. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We have compared a group of 30 violent schizophrenic inpatients with another group of 30 nonviolent schizophrenic inpatients hospitalised during the same period. These two groups have been matched according to age and gender. The comparison concerned: sociodemographic parameters, family and personal psychiatric history, legal antecedents, social insertion, clinic, Clinical Global Impressions (CGI), Global Impairment Scale (GIS) and Positive And Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores for admissions, familial support and insight, compliance to treatment, administered treatments, and awareness degree. RESULTS: Violent schizophrenics represent 18.07% of all hospitalisations and 26.08% of schizophrenic patients. When compared to violent schizophrenic patients, nonviolent schizophrenic patients have a better socioeconomic level (77% versus 43%), better professional adaptation (67% versus 10%) and familial support (60% versus 10%), better insight (87% versus 23%) and therapeutic control (70% versus 17%). Differences are significant. We found significantly more personal antecedents of inflicted violence within violent schizophrenics (50% versus 13%), more addictive behavior (53% versus 13%), and more paranoid and indifferentiated forms (87% versus 47%) than in nonviolent schizophrenics. The average of CGI scores was significantly higher within violent schizophrenics (5.27+/-0.8 versus 3.77+/-0.5). Conversely, the average of EGF scores was lowest (37.6+/-6.5 versus 47.8+/-5.6). The comparison of PANSS scores revealed that violent schizophrenic subjects are characterised by the existence of more positive signs and more general symptoms (34.4+/-4.7 versus 20.2+/-4.5; 55.1+/-11.4 versus 46.1+/-6.9). Violent schizophrenics are characterised by higher neuroleptic doses (2375+/-738 mg/d versus 1610+/-434 mg/d). Differences here are also significant. DISCUSSION: Addictive behaviour seems to considerably increase the risk of turning to violence. Thus in our study, 53% of violent patients showed an addictive behaviour. These results have also been reported by other authors. It is obvious that alcohol and drug abuse double the risk of violence among schizophrenic subjects. Psychotic decompensation and rich symptomatology increase the violent potential among the schizophrenics. In our study, the PANSS scores were higher among violent subjects. Nonviolent schizophrenic subjects have a lesser symptomatology of psychiatric disorders and a better outcome as shown by the CGI and EGF scores. In our study, the group of violent subjects needed higher neuroleptic doses and were noncompliant. Compliance permits the acquisition, and then maintains, the stability of the mental status and plays an essential role in decreasing dangerousness. In fact, violent schizophrenics exhibit low insight, implying diminished awareness of the legal implications of their acts, and are little aware of their illness and its dangerousness. In our study, we noted better familial support among nonviolent subjects. According to the literature, violent schizophrenics are characterised by a particularly hostile and rejecting familial environment. CONCLUSION: Awareness of these factors will allow us to provide improved prevention of violence within schizophrenic subjects.

[Unipolar versus bipolar depression: clues toward predicting bipolarity disorder]. / Dépression unipolaire versus dépression bipolaire: facteurs prédictifs d'une évolution bipolaire.

Bipolar and unipolar disorders share a common depressive clinical manifestation. It is important to distinguish between these two forms of depression for several reasons. First, prescribing antidepressors in monotherapy indubitably worsens the prognosis of bipolarity disorders. Second, postponing the prescription of a mood stabilizer reduces the efficacy of the treatment and multiplies the suicidal risks by two. The object of this study is to reveal the factors that distinguish between unipolar and bipolar depression. This is a retrospective study on patients' files. It includes 186 patients divided according to DSM IV criteria into two groups: patients with bipolar disorder type I or II with a recent depressive episode (123 patients) and patients with recurrent depressive disorder (63 patients). A medical record card was filled-in for every patient. It included socio-demographic data, information about the disorder, family antecedents, CGI score (global clinical impressions), physical comorbidity, substance abuse and personality disorder. In order to sort out the categorization variables, the two groups were compared using chi2 test or Fischer's test. With regard to the quantitative variables, the two groups were compared using Krostal Wallis's test or Ancova. Our study has revealed that bipolar disorder differs significantly from unipolar disorder in the following respects: bipolar disorder is prevalent among men (sex-ratio 2) while unipolar disorder is prevailing among women (sex-ratio 0.8); patients with bipolar disorder are younger than patients with unipolar disorder (38.1 +/- 5 years vs. 49.7 +/- years); the age at the onset of bipolar disorder is earlier than that of unipolar disorder (20.8 +/- 2 years vs. 38.7 +/- 5 years); family antecedents are more important in bipolar patients than in unipolar patients (51.1% vs. 33%). More importantly, bipolar disorder differs from unipolar disorder in the following aspects: The number of suicidal attempts (25.3% vs. 23.6%); the degree of substance abuse (15.4% vs. 14.5%); the level of somatic comorbidity (20.3% vs. 17.4%); the amount of anxiety manifestations (5.6% vs. 4.8%); the extent of personality disorder (30.8% vs. 23.8%); the degree of socio-professional impairment (bachelorhood and unemployment). On the other hand, we noted that unipolar patients differ from bipolar patients in terms of the frequency of hospitalizations (3.5 vs. 3.1) and the length of stays in hospitals (25.8 vs. 20.7 days) with significant differences of 0.003 and 0.0000001 respectively. Moreover, the CGI scores of unipolar patients are higher than those of bipolar patients. However, the difference is not significant. Consequently, an early distinction between bipolar and unipolar disorder is of utmost importance for the treatment of these two illnesses.