Minor depression in family practice: functional morbidity, co-morbidity, service utilization and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Minor depression is a disabling condition commonly seen in primary care settings. Although considerable impairment is associated with minor depression, little is known about the course of the illness. Using a variety of clinical and functional measurements, this paper profiles the course of minor depression over a 1 year interval among a cohort of primary care patients. METHOD: Patients at a university-based primary care facility were screened for potential cases of depression and selected into three diagnostic categories: an asymptomatic control group; patients with a diagnosis of major depression; and, a third category, defined as minor depression, consisting of patients who reported between two and four symptoms of depression, but who failed to qualify for a diagnosis of major depression. Functional status, service use, and physical, social and mental health were assessed at baseline and at 3-month intervals for the ensuing year. RESULTS: Respondents with a baseline diagnosis of minor depression exhibited marked impairment on most measures both at baseline and over the following four waves. Their responses in most respects were similar to, although not as severe as, those of respondents with a baseline diagnosis of major depression. Both groups were considerably more impaired than asymptomatic controls. CONCLUSIONS: Minor depression is a persistently disabling condition often seen in primary care settings. Although quantitatively less severe than major depression, it is qualitatively similar and requires careful assessment and close monitoring over the course of the illness.

Does a coexisting anxiety disorder predict persistence of depressive illness in primary care patients with major depression?

We assessed whether a coexisting anxiety disorder predicts risk for persistent depression in primary care patients with major depression at baseline. Patients with major depression were identified in a 12-month prospective cohort study at a University-based family practice clinic. Presence of an anxiety disorder and other potential prognostic factors were measured at baseline. Persistent depressive illness (major depression, minor depression, or dysthymia) was determined at 12 months. Of 85 patients with major depression at baseline, 43 had coexisting anxiety disorder (38 with social phobia). The risk for persistent depression at 12 months was 44% greater [Risk Ratio (RR) = 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-2.04] in those with coexisting anxiety. This risk persisted in stratified analysis controlling for other prognostic factors. Patients with coexisting anxiety had greater mean depressive severity [repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), p < 0.04] and total disability days (54.9 vs 19.8, p < 0.02) over the 12-month study. Patients with social phobia had similar increased risk for persistent depression (RR = 1.40, 95% CI 0.98-2.00). A coexisting anxiety disorder indicates risk for persistent depression in primary care patients with major depression. Social phobia may be important to recognize in these patients. Identifying anxiety disorders can help primary care clinicians target patients needing more aggressive treatment for depression.

A diagnostic aid for detecting (DSM-IV) mental disorders in primary care.

This study was designed to develop and validate a new computerized version of the Symptom Driven Diagnostic System for Primary Care (SDDS-PC) and examine its feasibility in primary care practice. One thousand and one patients (ages 18-70) coming for routine care to Kaiser-Permanente were screened on a self-administered symptom scale for major depression, alcohol and drug dependence, generalized anxiety, panic and obsessive compulsive disorders, and suicidal behavior. The screen was followed up by a brief diagnostic interview, administered by a nurse, which yielded a one-page summary of positive symptoms and a provisional computer-generated diagnosis for the physician. The physician reviewed the summary results and made a diagnosis. The nurse and physician were blind to the screen results. Patients were reinterviewed within 96 hours by a mental health professional (MHP) blind to previous results. The nurses' interviews ranged between 1.5 and 3.5 minutes for a screened positive diagnosis. Agreement between the nurse and physician diagnoses was excellent to moderate. Disagreement was usually in the direction of the physician ruling out major mental disorders in favor of subsyndromal or medical explanations. Only rarely did physicians diagnose disorders not detected by the nurse interview. Agreement between physician and MHP was moderate. Physicians using the SDDS-PC seldom made diagnoses that were not confirmed by the independent assessment of the MHP. The SDDS-PC may facilitate recognition of psychiatric disorders and minimize the physician's time in information gathering.

Screening for anxiety and depression in primary care with the Duke Anxiety-Depression Scale.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Anxiety and depression are highly prevalent and underdiagnosed in primary care. This study tested the seven-item Duke Anxiety-Depression Scale (DUKE-AD) in primary care adult patients as a screener for anxiety and depression as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III-R). METHODS: Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) and odds ratios were used to test screener accuracy, and sensitivities and specificities were used to test screener efficiency in patients with anxiety and/ or depression. RESULTS: In 481 patients, the ROC area for patients with major anxiety disorders (panic disorder, agoraphobia, or generalized anxiety) was 72.3%. The ROC area for major depressive disorders (major depressive disorder and/or dysthymia) was 78.3%, and the ROC area for both major anxiety and/or depressive disorders was 76.2%. Odds ratios for these same groups after controlling for sociodemographic factors were 1.043, 1.057, and 1.053, respectively. Sensitivities and specificities for these groups at the DUKE-AD score cutoff point of > 30 on a 0-100 scale were 71.4% and 59.2%, 81.8% and 63.6%, and 73.9% and 66.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The DUKE-AD is a brief, easily scored questionnaire that serves as a valid screener for DSM-III-R anxiety and depression in the primary care setting.

Subthreshold psychiatric symptoms in a primary care group practice.

BACKGROUND: The authors define 6 groups of subthreshold psychiatric symptoms that do not meet the full criteria for a DSM-IV Axis I disorder and examine the clinical significance of these symptoms in an outpatient primary care sample. METHODS: The subjects were 1001 adult primary care patients in a large health maintenance organization. Data on sociodemographic characteristics and functional impairment, including scores on the Sheehan Disability Scale, were collected at the time of the medical visit, and a structured diagnostic interview for DSM-IV disorders was completed by telephone within 4 days of the visit. Subthreshold symptoms were defined for depressive, anxiety, panic, obsessive-compulsive, drug, and alcohol symptoms. RESULTS: Subthreshold symptoms were as or more common than their respective Axis I disorders: panic (10.5% vs 4.8%), depression (9.1% vs 7.3%), anxiety (6.6% vs 3.7%), obsessive-compulsive (5.8% vs 1.4%), and alcohol (5.3% vs 5.2%) and other drug (3.7% vs 2.4%) cases. Patients with each of the subthreshold symptoms had significantly higher Sheehan Disability Scale scores (greater impairment) than did patients with no psychiatric symptoms. Many patients (22.6%-53.4%) with subthreshold symptoms also met the full criteria for other Axis I disorders. After adjusting for the confounding effects of other Axis I disorders, other subthreshold symptoms, age, sex, race, marital status, and perceived physical health status, only depressive symptoms, major depressive disorder, and, to a lesser extent, panic symptoms were significantly correlated with the impairment measures. CONCLUSIONS: In these primary care patients, the morbidity of subthreshold symptoms was often explained by confounding mental, physical, or demographic factors. However, depressive symptoms and, to a lesser extent, panic symptoms were disabling even after controlling for these factors. Primary care clinicians who detect subthreshold psychiatric symptoms should consider a broad psychiatric assessment.

Brief screens for mental disorders in primary care.

We evaluated a set of diagnostic screens for mental disorders in primary care. A self-administered screening questionnaire containing 26 items testing for multiple mental disorders was completed by 1,001 patients. Brief diagnostic modules, structured for psychiatric diagnoses, were subsequently administered to each patient by a research nurse. Operating characteristics of the screens were as follows: alcohol dependence (sensitivity [SE] 0.75; positive predictive value [PPV] 0.58; [kappa] 0.63), drug dependence (SE 0.50; PPV 0.50; kappa 0.50), generalized anxiety disorder (SE 0.74; PPV 0.44; kappa 0.44), major depressive disorder (SE 0.71; PPV 0.52; kappa 0.50), obsessive compulsive disorder (SE 0.71; PPV 0.15; kappa 0.21), and panic disorder (SE 0.71; PPV 0.43; kappa 0.48). Other chance-corrected measures of agreement are also reported, and criterion validity of the screens is examined. The results provide evidence that the screens discriminate between patients with symptomatology meeting established diagnostic criteria and those without. They detected previously unrecognized cases in this study and may prove to be valuable tools for psychiatric diagnosis in primary care.

Risk factors for nosocomial pneumonia: comparing adult critical-care populations.

The purpose of the study was to examine risk factors for nosocomial pneumonia in the surgical and medical/respiratory intensive care unit (ICU) populations. In a public teaching hospital, all cases of nosocomial pneumonia in the surgical and medical/respiratory ICUs (n = 20, respectively) were identified by prospective surveillance during a 5-yr period from 1987-1991. Each group of ICU cases was compared with 40 ICU control patients who did not acquire pneumonia, and analyzed for 25 potential risk factors. Surgical ICU patients were found to have consistently higher rates of nosocomial pneumonia than medical ICU patients (RR = 2.2). The strongest predictor for nosocomial pneumonia in both the surgical and medical/respiratory ICU groups was found to be prolonged mechanical ventilation (> 1 d) resulting in a 12-fold increase in risk over nonventilated patients. APACHE III score was found to be predictive of nosocomial pneumonia in the surgical ICU population, but not in the medical/respiratory ICU population. We conclude that certain groups deserve special attention for infection control intervention. Surgical ICU patients with high APACHE scores and receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation may be at the greatest risk of acquiring nosocomial pneumonia of all hospitalized patients.

Anxiety and depressive symptom identification using the Duke Health Profile.

Duke Health Profile (DUKE) subscales were compared for their ability to identify anxiety and depressive symptoms as measured by the State Anxiety Inventory (SAI) and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) in 413 primary care patients. The seven-item Duke Anxiety-Depression Scale (DUKE-AD) was the best symptom identifier, with sensitivities and specificities greater than 70% for high scores on both the SAI and CES-D. Also, baseline DUKE-AD scores predicted five clinical outcomes during an 18-month follow-up period, with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve areas ranging from 57.1 to 58.7%. Patients shown by DUKE-AD scores to be at high risk (>30, scale 0-100) for symptoms of anxiety and/or depression were more often women, less well-educated, not working, and with lower socioeconomic status. The severity of illness was higher than that of low-risk patients. Although the providers did not know which patients were at high risk, they made a clinical diagnosis of anxiety or depression more often in high-risk patients.

Prevalence of mental disorders in primary care. Implications for screening.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of five mental disorders in primary care and to identify patient groups that have a relatively high prevalence of these disorders. DESIGN: Two-stage case identification design that involves administration of a 16-item screening instrument followed by an independent diagnostic assessment. SETTING: Three family practice offices in Rhode Island. SUBJECTS: A total of 937 primary care patients completed the brief screen, 388 of whom completed the independent diagnostic assessment. PREVALENCE ESTIMATION: A Bayesian procedure was used to estimate prevalence of mental disorder from screening and assessment results. Independent assessments were based on the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R administered by a mental health professional. RESULTS: The prevalence estimates were alcohol abuse or dependence, 3.2%; generalized anxiety disorder, 2.8%; major depressive disorder, 14.1%; obsessive-compulsive disorder, 2.2%; panic disorder, 6.2%; and any of the five disorders, 22.0%. The prevalence of any of the five disorders was higher in patients returning for follow-up visits (27.9%) than in those either presenting with a new illness (21.7%) or seeking a routine physical examination (11.8%). The combined prevalence was also higher in patients with a chronic medical problem (25.8%) than in those without (16.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients returning for follow-up care and, to a lesser extent, those with chronic medical problems appear to be at increased risk of having a mental disorder. The practice of selectively screening new patients for mental health problems is questioned. Screening efforts in primary care should include established patients and those with chronic medical illnesses as well as new patients.

The impact of an ambulatory rotation on medical student interest in internal medicine. The Society of General Internal Medicine Task Force on Career Choice in Internal Medicine.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether students who take ambulatory rotations in internal medicine are more likely to choose internal medicine careers. DESIGN: National survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The intended sample was 1,650 senior U.S. medical students from 16 medical schools, of whom 1,244 (76%) responded. Representative schools nationwide were selected using a stratified, random-sampling method. MEASUREMENTS: The questionnaire asked about characteristics of the ambulatory rotation, perceptions of internal medicine, and factors influencing students toward or away from an internal medicine career. RESULTS: Ambulatory rotations were taken by 543 students (43%). Of these rotations, 73% were required, 74% were during the fourth year, 77% were in general internal medicine, 73% provided continuity of care, and 19% were during the medicine clerkship. Overall, 24% of the students chose careers in general (9%) or subspecialty internal medicine (15%). Thirty percent of the students who did ambulatory rotations planned internal medicine careers, compared with 19% of the students who had no rotation [odds ratio (OR) = 1.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3 to 2.4, p = 0.0001]. This association was of similar magnitudes for students completing required rotations (OR = 1.6, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.2, p = 0.002) and for students completing rotations before or in proximity to when they chose careers (OR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.4, p = 0.01). Ninety percent of the 543 students who had ambulatory rotations were satisfied with the experience. Thirty-eight percent of the highly satisfied students chose internal medicine careers, compared with 21% of the students who had low or moderate satisfaction (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: An ambulatory rotation is strongly associated with positive perceptions of, attraction to, and choice of a career in internal medicine. Research is needed to determine specific components of an effective rotation. Further development of ambulatory rotations could help attract more students to internal medicine.

Recognition of emotional distress in physically healthy primary care patients who perceive poor physical health.

This study examines the recognition and treatment of emotional distress in physically healthy primary care patients who perceive themselves to be in fair or poor physical health. Patients (N = 892) from three private primary care practices completed a mental health screening form prior to their medical visit which included an overall assessment of their physical health (1 = excellent, 2 = good, 3 = fair, 4 = poor). Following the visit, their physicians completed a questionnaire that included the same physical health assessment item. The study group, physically healthy patients who perceive poor physical health (HPPPH), included those patients who rated their physical health as 2 or 3 points more impaired than it was rated by their physician. HPPPH (N = 39) were significantly more likely than other patients (N = 853) to report a prior psychiatric hospitalization (p < 0.05), marital difficulties (p < 0.01), recent missed work due to a mental health problem (p < 0.001), and a range of anxiety, depressive, and psychosomatic symptoms. However, HPPPH were also significantly more likely than other patients to receive excellent emotional health ratings (p < 0.001) from their physicians and were less likely to receive mental health treatment (p < 0.05). Detection of emotional distress may be particularly difficult in physically healthy patients who have low physical health perceptions. Identification of pessimistic physical health perceptions may serve as an indicator for underlying emotional distress.

Development and validation of the SDDS-PC screen for multiple mental disorders in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To develop, validate, and cross-validate a patient-completed screen for multiple mental disorders in primary care. DESIGN: Comparison of a patient self-report screen with an independent diagnostic assessment by mental health professionals using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R diagnoses as criterion standard. SETTING: Three Rhode Island family practices and a South Carolina family medicine residency. SUBJECTS: In the initial validation study, 937 patients in Rhode Island were screened; 388 were interviewed. In the cross-validation study, 775 patients were screened in Rhode Island and South Carolina, and 257 were interviewed. SCREEN ITEMS: Sixty-two questions pertaining to nine mental disorders and suicidal ideation. RESULTS: A 16-item screen remained after analysis of item and scale performance. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value, respectively, were calculated for the following scales: alcohol abuse or dependence (62%, 98%, and 54%), generalized anxiety disorder (90%, 54%, and 5%), major depression (90%, 77%, and 40%), obsessive-compulsive disorder (65%, 73%, and 5%), panic disorder (78%, 80%, and 21%), and suicidal ideation (43%, 91%, and 51%). Replication in a new sample showed attenuated but acceptable operating characteristics for cross-validation. CONCLUSIONS: The Symptom-Driven Diagnostic System for Primary Care screen assesses multiple mental disorders that are common to primary care. It serves as a sensitive, valid, and patient-friendly first step in a new approach to recognizing and managing mental disorders in primary care. Finally, it aids the primary care clinician in selecting an appropriate diagnostic interview module for the disease for which the patient screened positive.

Brief diagnostic interviews (SDDS-PC) for multiple mental disorders in primary care. A pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To pilot test the feasibility and validity of new, brief, structured, physician-administered diagnostic interviews for six mental disorders in primary care patients identified from a patient-completed screen. DESIGN: Comparison of the new diagnostic interviews with the Structured Clinical Interview for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Revised Third Edition, version P (SCID-P), administered independently by a mental health professional. SETTING: Three Rhode Island family practices and a South Carolina family medicine residency. SUBJECTS: Consecutive patients of either sex, aged 18 to 70 years, who were able to read and write English were eligible for screening; 775 patients completed the screen. Of these, 246 screened positive for at least one disorder and received at least one module. Of these, 158 received a SCID-P interview. RESULTS: The diagnostic interviews were found useful by all 16 participating physicians. Eighty-seven percent reported that they diagnosed a new mental problem, and 93% said that the modules clarified suspected symptoms. However, 26% thought the procedure was too time consuming, and 80% believed that reimbursement would be necessary for routine use. Detection of cases using the diagnostic modules was associated with physician intervention and with independent assessment of patient impairment. Over three quarters of the patients (76.4%) who were classified as positive by the physician interview for any of the diagnoses also tested positive on the SCID-P. Two thirds of the patients (62.7%) with at least one of the disorders (according to SCID-P) were classified by the physician interview as having a mental disorder. However, the operating characteristics varied across specific disorders and indicated a need for revisions and testing in larger samples. CONCLUSIONS: These brief physician-administered diagnostic interview modules are part of a screening and diagnostic system (Symptom-Driven Diagnostic System for Primary Care [SDDS-PC], The UpJohn Co, Kalamazoo, Mich) to detect mental disorders in primary care patients. The pilot results help establish their feasibility and validity.

Perceived family stress as a predictor of health-related outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the predictive effect of patient-perceived family stress for health-related outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective study of patients whose social stress and support were measured by self-report at baseline with the Duke Social Support and Stress Scale and used as predictors of outcomes during an 18-month follow-up period. SETTING: Rural primary care community health clinic. PATIENTS: Convenience sample of ambulatory adults. INTERVENTION: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Follow-up (one or more follow-up visits), frequent follow-up (more than six visits), referral and/or hospitalization (one or more), high follow-up severity of illness (upper-tertile mean Duke Severity of Illness Checklist scores), and high follow-up total charges (> or = $268). RESULTS: There were 413 patients with a mean age of 40.4 years. Of these, 58.6% were women; 47.2%, African American; 52.8%, white; 56.7%, married; 77.2%, wage earners or housekeepers; and 52.3% had more than one health problem. At baseline, patients with high self-reported family stress (upper-tertile Duke Social Support and Stress Scale scores) had lower quality of life, functional health, and social support scores and higher dysfunctional health and social stress scores than other patients. High baseline family stress scores (scale of 0 to 100) predicted follow-up (odds ratio [OR] = 1.014), frequent follow-up (OR = 1.021), referral and/or hospitalization (OR = 1.018), high severity of illness at follow-up (OR = 1.016), and high follow-up charges (OR = 1.018) after controlling for the effects of social support, age, gender, and race. Family stress scores were stronger predictors of these outcomes than the other social stress and support variables. CONCLUSION: The finding of patient-perceived family stress as a risk factor for unfavorable health-related outcomes suggests the need for early detection and treatment of family stress by family physicians.

Computer-prompted diagnostic codes.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate a computer system that would translate patient diagnoses noted by a physician into appropriate International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes and maintain a patient-specific up-to-date problem list. METHODS: The intervention consisted of a computerized list (dictionary) of diagnoses, including practice-specific synonyms and abbreviations, linked to their corresponding ICD-9-CM codes. To record the diagnoses for the office visit before the intervention, physicians used International Classification of Health Problems in Primary Care (ICHPPC-2) codes. After the intervention, physicians used their own words or checked previously identified diagnoses on the computer-generated problem list. The computer then identified the correct ICD-9-CM code. Accuracy of coding was compared before and after the new computerized system was implemented. RESULTS: Visits in which all diagnoses matched increased from 58% to 76% (P < .001) with use of the computer system. Visits in which no computer diagnoses matched the chart decreased from 22% to 8% (P < .001). Errors of omission declined from 38% to 18% (P < .001). Errors of commission decreased from 19% to 11% (P = .006). Overall accuracy increased from 62% to 82% (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient medical diagnosis coding can be simplified and accuracy improved by using a computerized dictionary of practice-specific diagnoses and synonyms linked to appropriate ICD-9-CM codes. Such a system provides a computer-generated problem list that accurately reflects the chart and assists with prompted coding on subsequent visits.

The SDDS-PC: a diagnostic aid for multiple mental disorders in primary care.

The Symptom Driven Diagnostic System for Primary Care (SDDS-PC) is a new computerized clinical procedure to assist primary care physicians in diagnosing mental disorders during the course of routine practice. It has three components: (1) a 5-minute patient-administered 16-item screening questionnaire, (2) six 5-minute physician-administered diagnostic interview modules based on DSM-III-R criteria, and (3) a longitudinal tracking form. The SDDS-PC covers five disorders (major depression, panic disorder, alcohol abuse or dependence, generalized anxiety disorder, and obsessive compulsive disorder) as well as suicidal ideation. Patients who screen positive for a disorder receive the corresponding diagnostic interview module. Patients who meet mental disorder criteria on the diagnostic interview module are then followed with the longitudinal tracking form. Minor or subsyndromal conditions are also addressed at the physician's discretion. This article describes the development of SDDS-PC and summarizes results from two studies which involved comparisons between the SDDS-PC and independently administered full-length structured diagnostic interviews.

Health status and severity of illness as predictors of outcomes in primary care.

Two measures of health status and severity of illness were tested as indicators of patient case-mix to predict health-related outcomes in a rural primary care community health clinic, using a convenience sample of 413 ambulatory adults (mean age = 40.4 years: 58.6% women, and 47.2% black). At baseline; patients completed the Duke Health Profile, and providers completed the Duke Severity of Illness Checklist. During the 18-month follow-up study, patients experienced the following outcomes: at least one follow-up visit (74.3%), more than six visits (20.6%), at least one referral or hospital admission (17.3%), upper tertile severity scores (24.9%), and upper tertile office charges (24.9%). Baseline physical health, perceived health, and severity scores were statistically significantly predictive of all five outcomes. Predictive accuracy (i.e., area under the receiver operating characteristic curves) for outcome probabilities estimated from a case-mix model of physical health, severity, age, gender, and race was 72.3% for follow-up, 69.7% for frequent follow-up, 70.5% for referral and/or hospital stay, 65.7% for high follow-up severity of illness, and 67.6% for high follow-up charges. These data support health status and severity of illness as case-mix indicators and outcome predictors of follow-up utilization, severity of illness, and cost in the primary care setting.

Subsyndromal ("mixed") anxiety--depression in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To determine in primary care settings the prevalence, clinical characteristics, and functional status of patients who have anxious and depressive symptoms who did not meet diagnostic criteria for major mood and anxiety diagnoses. DESIGN: Patients were screened with the General Health Questionnaire and interviewed if they exceeded the cutoff score of 5. Also, one patient whose score was below the cutoff was interviewed for every two patients whose scores were above the cutoff. SETTING: Five primary care sites in the United States, France, and Australia. PATIENT: Two hundred sixty-seven patients presenting to their primary care physicians for general medical care and follow-up. METHODS: Structured diagnostic interviews were conducted and ratings of anxiety, depression, and functional impairment were obtained by trained interviewers. RESULTS: After adjustments for sampling, 5% of the patients had symptoms of anxiety, depression, and functional impairment, without meeting formal criteria for a major DSM-III-R mood or anxiety disorder. This was comparable to the prevalence of diagnosable DSM-III-R mood disorders but only one-fourth the prevalence of diagnosable anxiety disorders. These patients who had subsyndromal symptoms had rates of lifetime psychiatric disorders and prior psychiatric treatment comparable to those of patients meeting criteria for major mood and anxiety disorders. CONCLUSION: The comparable rates of symptomatic distress, functional impairment, and prior psychiatric illness and treatment suggest that patients with subsyndromal anxiety and depressive symptoms warrant clinical recognition and possibly specific treatment.

Risk factors for violent behavior in elementary school boys: have you hugged your child today?

Seventeen Hispanic elementary schoolboys with violent behavior problems were compared with 27 matched control students who were not overtly violent at school. Violent boys were significantly more likely to not live with their fathers, to have unmarried parents, to have more siblings, and to have fathers who never show them affection. Parents of violent boys were more likely than those of matched control students to use spanking for discipline and to admit that they rarely express affection for their sons.