Half a Century of Research on Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Scientometric Analysis.

We conducted a scientometric analysis to outline clinical research on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Our primary objective was to perform a broad-ranging scientometric analysis to evaluate key themes and trends over the past decades. Our secondary objective was to measure research network performance. We conducted a systematic search in the Web of Science Core Collection up to 15 August 2022 for publications on PTSD. We identified 42,170 publications published between 1945 and 2022. We used CiteSpace to retrieve the co-cited reference network (1978-2022) that presented significant modularity and mean silhouette scores, indicating highly credible clusters (Q = 0.915, S = 0.795). Four major trends of research were identified: 'war veterans and refugees', 'treatment of PTSD/neuroimaging', 'evidence syntheses', and 'somatic symptoms of PTSD'. The largest cluster of research concerned evidence synthesis for genetic predisposition and environmental exposures leading to PTSD occurrence. Research on war-related trauma has shifted from battlefield-related in-person exposure trauma to drone operator trauma and is being out published by civilian-related trauma research, such as the 'COVID-19' pandemic impact, 'postpartum', and 'grief disorder'. The focus on the most recent trends in the research revealed a burst in the 'treatment of PTSD' with the development of Mhealth, virtual reality, and psychedelic drugs. The collaboration networks reveal a central place for the USA research network, and although relatively isolated, a recent surge of publications from China was found. Compared to other psychiatric disorders, we found a lack of high-quality randomized controlled trials for pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments. These results can inform funding agencies and future research.

Pharmacological interventions for antipsychotic-related sialorrhea: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Antipsychotic-induced sialorrhea carries a significant burden, but evidence-based treatment guidance is incomplete, warranting network meta-analysis (NMA) of pharmacological interventions for antipsychotic-related sialorrhea. PubMed Central/PsycInfo/Cochrane Central database/Clinicaltrials.gov/WHO-ICTRP and the Chinese Electronic Journal Database (Qikan.cqvip.com) were searched for published/unpublished RCTs of antipsychotic-induced sialorrhea (any definition) in adults, up to 06/12/2023. We assessed global/local inconsistencies, publication bias, risk of bias (RoB2), and confidence in the evidence, conducting subgroup/sensitivity analyses. Co-primary efficacy outcomes were changes in saliva production (standardized mean difference/SMD) and study-defined response (risk ratios/RRs). The acceptability outcome was all-cause discontinuation (RR). Primary nodes were molecules; the mechanism of action (MoA) was secondary. Thirty-four RCTs entered a systematic review, 33 NMA (n = 1958). All interventions were for clozapine-induced sialorrhea in subjects with mental disorders. Regarding individual agents and response, metoclopramide (RR = 3.11, 95% C.I. = 1.39-6.98), cyproheptadine, (RR = 2.76, 95% C.I. = 2.00-3.82), sulpiride (RR = 2.49, 95% C.I. = 1.65-3.77), propantheline (RR = 2.39, 95% C.I. = 1.97-2.90), diphenhydramine (RR = 2.32, 95% C.I. = 1.88-2.86), benzhexol (RR = 2.32, 95% C.I. = 1.59-3.38), doxepin (RR = 2.30, 95% C.I. = 1.85-2.88), amisulpride (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.30-3.81), chlorpheniramine (RR = 2.20, 95% C.I. = 1.67-2.89), amitriptyline (RR = 2.09, 95% C.I. = 1.34-3.26), atropine, (RR = 2.03, 95% C.I. = 1.22-3.38), and astemizole, (RR = 1.70, 95% C.I. = 1.28-2.26) outperformed placebo, but not glycopyrrolate or ipratropium. Across secondary nodes (k = 28, n = 1821), antimuscarinics (RR = 2.26, 95% C.I. = 1.91-2.68), benzamides (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.75-3.10), TCAs (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.83-2.72), and antihistamines (RR = 2.18, 95% C.I. = 1.83-2.59) outperformed placebo. In head-to-head comparisons, astemizole and ipratropium were outperformed by several interventions. All secondary nodes, except benzamides, outperformed the placebo on the continuous efficacy outcome. For nocturnal sialorrhea, neither benzamides nor atropine outperformed the placebo. Active interventions did not differ significantly from placebo regarding constipation or sleepiness/drowsiness. Low-confidence findings prompt caution in the interpretation of the results. Considering primary nodes' co-primary efficacy outcomes and head-to-head comparisons, efficacy for sialorrhea is most consistent for the following agents, decreasing from metoclopramide through cyproheptadine, sulpiride, propantheline, diphenhydramine, benzhexol, doxepin, amisulpride, chlorpheniramine, to amitriptyline, and atropine (the latter not for nocturnal sialorrhea). Shared decision-making with the patient should guide treatment decisions regarding clozapine-related sialorrhea.

Anxiety and Depression during the Second Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Role of Coping Strategies.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests increased anxious-depressive symptoms in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic, also in its second wave. High symptom variability across individuals suggests that risk and protective factors, including coping strategies, can play a mediating role. METHODS: General Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Brief-COPE questionnaires were administered to people attending a COVID-19 point-of-care. Univariate and multivariate methods were used to test the association of symptoms with risk and protective factors. RESULTS: A total of 3509 participants (27.5% with moderate-severe anxiety; 12% with depressive symptoms) were recruited. Sociodemographic and lifestyle factors, including age, sex, sleep, physical activity, psychiatric treatments, parenthood, employment, and religiosity were associated with affective symptoms. Avoidant (self-distraction, venting, behavioral disengagement) and approach (emotional support, self-blame but not positive reframing and acceptance) coping strategies predicted greater anxiety. Avoidant strategies, including venting, denial, behavioral disengagement, substance use, and self-blame, and the humor strategy were associated with more severe depressive symptoms, while the planning predicted the opposite. CONCLUSIONS: Coping strategies, in addition to socio-demographic and life-habit factors, could have contributed to modulating anxious and depressive symptoms during the second-wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, thus advocating for interventions aimed at promoting positive coping strategies to reduce the psychosocial toll of the pandemic.

Difficulties in emotion regulation in bipolar disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder (BD) is a severe mental disorder characterized by mood swings and functional impairment. Although alterations in emotional regulation (ER) are a key feature, a comprehensive meta-analysis on abnormalities in emotion regulation in BD is still lacking. METHODS: We performed a random-effects meta-analysis on studies comparing the ER measured with the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) in BD and healthy controls (HC) or borderline personality disorder (BPD) and calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) of the total DERS score between those with BD and HC (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes were the SMD of the DERS subscales between BD and HC, as well as the SMD of the total score of DERS and the subscales between BD and BPD. RESULTS: Twelve studies (858 BD, 540 BPD, 285 HC) were included. Compared to HC, BD showed significantly higher total DERS score (k=8, SMD 0.962, p<0.001) and subscale scores, including non-acceptance (k=6, SMD=0.85, p<0.001), goal-directed behavior (k=6, SMD=0.894, p<0.001), impulse control (k=6, SMD=1.08, p<0.001), strategies (k=6, SMD=1.25, p<0.001) and emotional clarity (k=6, SMD=0.694, p=0.001). Relative to BPD, BD presented significantly lower scores in all the DERS subscales. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the main analyses. The age of the participants and sample size moderated the primary outcome. LIMITATIONS: The small number of studies and the cross-sectional design limit the generalizability of the results. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that alterations of specific ER abilities are present in BD and their magnitude is smaller relative to BPD. Future therapeutic interventions should target ER strategies.

Evaluation of peritraumatic distress at the point of care: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 related peritraumatic distress has been investigated in the general population with contrasting results probably due to the perceived risk of developing COVID-19. Our study aims to investigate this condition in individuals with ascertained or probable SARS-CoV-2 exposure. METHODS: The Coronavirus Peritraumatic Distress Index (CPDI) was administered to people attending a COVID-19 point of care. The sample was stratified for perceived risk in SARS-CoV-2 positive cases, close contacts, case relatives, undergoing screening subjects, and symptomatic subjects. RESULTS: 1463 subjects participated, and with a mean CPDI Score of 28.2 (SD 16.9). CPDI Scores in SARS-CoV-2 positive cases were significantly higher than case relatives (p = 0.02). Multiple logistic regression revealed that having had work changes (p = 0.001), night sleep changes (p < 0.001), physical activity reduction (p = 0.002), alcohol consumption changes (p = 0.003), and at least one relative lost to COVID-19 (p < 0.001) independently predicted higher CPDI Scores. Male sex (p < 0.001), age ≥ 35 years (p < 0.001), higher educational level (p = 0.002), night sleep >7 hours (p = 0.002), and being physically active (p = 0.018) were identified as protective factors. LIMITATIONS: Cross-sectional design and the regional recruitment area limit the generalizability of results. CONCLUSIONS: Mean CPDI values were above the threshold for medium grade peritraumatic distress, with greater CPDI Scores in subjects who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to family members or caregivers without a clear indication to undergo the swab. Specific demographics, physical and mental health events could help in identifying individuals at greater risk of COVID-19 related peritraumatic distress that may benefit from early treatment.