[Factitious disorder imposed on self and Munchausen syndrome: An update]. / Trouble factice imposé à soi-même et syndrome de Munchausen : mise au point.

Factitious disorder imposed on self (FDIS) is a mental disorder characterized by conscious manipulative behavior from patients with no clearly identifiable external objective. It affects subjects with a wide range of characteristics, only some of whom fit the stereotypical profile of the young female working in the health sector. It can take the form of a variety of symptoms or clinical signs, and is likely to involve all specialties. Munchausen syndrome is a particular form of FDIS, more prevalent in men and marked by its severity. Psychiatric comorbidities are common in patients with FDIS. Death is rare but possible, either as a result of the disease itself, complications of examinations or treatments, or suicide. The diagnostic approach must seek to identify positive arguments in favor of the disorder. Diagnosis by elimination remains possible when no other hypothesis can explain a clinical picture suggestive of FDIS. The prognosis is often poor, at least in the short and medium term. Avoiding unnecessary prescriptions is essential to prevent iatrogenesis. The management of FDIS is poorly codified. In all cases, the practitioner must adopt a non-aggressive, empathetic attitude.

Forensic assessment of somatoform and functional neurological disorders.

Functional neurological disorders (FND) and somatization are common in clinical practice and medicolegal settings. These conditions are frequently disabling and, if arising following an accident, may lead to claims for legal compensation or occupational disability (such as social security disability insurance). However, distinguishing FND and somatization from symptoms that are intentionally produced (i.e., malingered or factitious) may pose a major forensic psychiatric challenge. In this article, we describe how somatoform disorders and FND lie along a spectrum of abnormal illness-related behaviors, including factitious disorder, compensation neurosis, and malingering. We provide a systematic approach to the forensic assessment of FND and conclude by describing common litigation scenarios in which FND may be at issue. Forensic testimony may play an important role in the resolution of such cases.

Using the MMPI-2-RF, IOP-29, IOP-M, and FIT in the In-Person and Remote Administration Formats: A Simulation Study on Feigned mTBI.

Our study compared the impact of administering Symptom Validity Tests (SVTs) and Performance Validity Tests (PVTs) in in-person versus remote formats and assessed different approaches to combining validity test results. Using the MMPI-2-RF, IOP-29, IOP-M, and FIT, we assessed 164 adults, with half instructed to feign mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and half to respond honestly. Within each subgroup, half completed the tests in person, and the other half completed them online via videoconferencing. Results from 2 ×2 analyses of variance showed no significant effects of administration format on SVT and PVT scores. When comparing feigners to controls, the MMPI-2-RF RBS exhibited the largest effect size (d = 3.05) among all examined measures. Accordingly, we conducted a series of two-step hierarchical logistic regression models by entering the MMPI-2-RF RBS first, followed by each other SVT and PVT individually. We found that the IOP-29 and IOP-M were the only measures that yielded incremental validity beyond the effects of the MMPI-2-RF RBS in predicting group membership. Taken together, these findings suggest that administering these SVTs and PVTs in-person or remotely yields similar results, and the combination of MMPI and IOP indexes might be particularly effective in identifying feigned mTBI.

Detecting feigned cognitive impairment using pupillometry on the Warrington Recognition Memory Test for Words.

OBJECTIVE: Pupillometry provides information about physiological and psychological processes related to cognitive load, familiarity, and deception, and it is outside of conscious control. This study examined pupillary dilation patterns during a performance validity test (PVT) among adults with true and feigned impairment of traumatic brain injury (TBI). PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Participants were 214 adults in three groups: adults with bona fide moderate to severe TBI (TBI; n = 51), healthy comparisons instructed to perform their best (HC; n = 72), and healthy adults instructed and incentivized to simulate cognitive impairment due to TBI (SIM; n = 91). The Recognition Memory Test (RMT) was administered in the context of a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Three pupillary indices were evaluated. Two pure pupil dilation (PD) indices assessed a simple measure of baseline arousal (PD-Baseline) and a nuanced measure of dynamic engagement (PD-Range). A pupillary-behavioral index was also evaluated. Dilation-response inconsistency (DRI) captured the frequency with which examinees displayed a pupillary familiarity response to the correct answer but selected the unfamiliar stimulus (incorrect answer). RESULTS: All three indices differed significantly among the groups, with medium-to-large effect sizes. PD-Baseline appeared sensitive to oculomotor dysfunction due to TBI; adults with TBI displayed significantly lower chronic arousal as compared to the two groups of healthy adults (SIM, HC). Dynamic engagement (PD-Range) yielded a hierarchical structure such that SIM were more dynamically engaged than TBI followed by HC. As predicted, simulators engaged in DRI significantly more frequently than other groups. Moreover, subgroup analyses indicated that DRI differed significantly for simulators who scored in the invalid range on the RMT (n = 45) versus adults with genuine TBI who scored invalidly (n = 15). CONCLUSIONS: The findings support continued research on the application of pupillometry to performance validity assessment: Overall, the findings highlight the promise of biometric indices in multimethod assessments of performance validity.

Exploration of PCL-5 symptom validity indices for detection of exaggerated and feigned PTSD.

INTRODUCTION: There are very few symptom validity indices directly examining overreported posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptomatology, and, until recently, there were no symptom validity indices embedded within the PTSD Checklist for the DSM-5 (PCL-5), which is one of the most commonly used PTSD measures. Given this, the current study sought to develop and cross-validate symptom validity indices for the PCL-5. METHOD: Multiple criterion groups comprised of Veteran patients were utilized (N = 210). Patients were determined to be valid or invalid responders based on Personality Asessment Inventory symptom validity indices. Three PCL-5 symptom validity indices were then examined: the PCL-5 Symptom Severity scale (PSS), the PCL-5 Extreme Symptom scale (PES), and the PCL-5 Rare Items scale (PRI). RESULTS: Area under the curve statistics ranged from .78 to .85. The PSS and PES both met classification accuracy statistic goals, with the PES achieving the highest sensitivity rate (.39) when maintaining specificity at .90 or above across all criterion groups. When an ad hoc analysis was performed, which included only patients with exceptionally strong evidence of invalidity, sensitivity rates increased to .60 for the PES while maintaining specificity at .90. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide preliminary support for new PTSD symptom validity indices embedded within one of the most frequently used PTSD measures.

Development of a measure for assessing malingered incompetency in criminal proceedings: Denney competency related test (D-CRT).

INTRODUCTION: Experts frequently assess competency in criminal settings where the rate of feigning cognitive deficit is demonstrably elevated. We describe the construction and validation of the Denney Competency Related Test (D-CRT) to assess feigned incompetency of defendants in the criminal adjudicative setting. It was expected the D-CRT would prove effective at identifying feigned incompetence based on its two alternative, forced-choice and performance curve characteristics. METHOD: Development and validation of the D-CRT occurred in described phases. Items were developed to measure competency based upon expert review. Item analysis and adjustments were completed with 304 young teenage volunteers to obtain a proper spread of item difficulty in preparation for eventual performance curve analysis (PCA). Test-retest reliability was assessed with 44 adult community volunteers. Validation included an analog simulation design with 101 jail detainees using MacArthur Competency Assessment Test-Criminal Adjudication and Word Memory Test as criterion measures. Effects of racial/ethnic demographic differences were examined in a separate study of 208 undergraduate volunteers. D-CRT specificity was identified with 46 elderly clinic referrals diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment and dementia. RESULTS: Item development, adjustment, and repeat analysis resulted in item probabilities evenly spread from .28 to 1.0. Test-retest correlation was good (.83). Internal consistency of items was excellent (KR-20 > .91). D-CRT demonstrated convergent validity in regard to measuring competency related information and as well as malingering. The test successfully differentiated between jail inmates asked to perforfm their best and inmates asked to simulate incompetency (AUC = .945). There were no statistically significant differences found in performance across racial/ethnic backgrounds. D-CRT specificity remained excellent among elderly clinic referrals with significant cognitive compromise at the recommended total score cutoff. CONCLUSIONS: D-CRT is an effective measure of feigned criminal incompetency in the context of potential cognitive deficiency, and PCA is assistive in the determination. Additional validation using knowns groups designs with various mental health-related conditions are needed.

Malingering assessment after severe traumatic brain injury in forensic psychology with a potential embedded symptom validity indicator of Symptom Checklist 90.

Objective: Malingering of neuropsychological damage is common among traumatic brain injury patients pursuing disability compensation in forensic contexts. There is an urgent need to explore differences in neuropsychological assessment outcomes with different levels of cooperation. Methods: A total of 420 participants with severe traumatic brain injury were classified into malingering group, partial cooperation group, and complete cooperation group according to the Binomial forced-choice digit memory test. The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, event-related potential component, and Symptom Checklist 90 were applied subsequently to assess the psychological status of participants. Results: Participants in the malingering group presented lower scores in the binomial forced-choice digit memory test and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, lower P3 amplitude, and simultaneously higher scores in the Symptom Checklist 90 than the other two groups. The actual intelligence quotient of participants with malingering tendencies ranged mostly between normal and marginal damage, and they often reported elevated whole scale scores in the Symptom Checklist 90. The Cooperation Index (defined as the ratio of positive symptom distress index to global severity index, CI) was proposed and validated to function as an embedded validity indicator of the Symptom Checklist 90, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.938. When valued at 1.28, CI has the highest classification ability in differentiating malingering from non-malingering. Combined with the CI and P3 amplitude, the area under the ROC curve for malingering diagnosis further reached 0.952. Conclusion: Any non-optimal effort in a forensic context will lead to unexpected deviation in psychology evaluation results. CI is a potential candidate to act as an embedded validity indicator of the Symptom Checklist 90. The combination of CI and P3 amplitude can help to identify malingering in participants after severe traumatic brain injury.

Forensic Implications of the Parasomnias.

Although many sleep-related behaviors are benign, others can result in physical or sexual aggression toward bed partners or others. Individuals who engage in sleep-related violence (SRV) and sexual behavior in sleep (SBS) may face legal sanctions for their behavior. Attorneys or legal decision-makers may call on an expert to evaluate a defendant and opine about the veracity of an alleged parasomnia diagnosis, the criminal responsibility of the defendant, and his risk of violence to others. This article reviews the phenomena of SRV and SBS and guides evaluators in the forensic considerations relevant to parasomnias.

An overview of malingering and deception in neuropsychiatric cases.

Forensic practitioners must shoulder special responsibilities when evaluating over-stated pathology (e.g., malingering) as well as simulated adjustment. Such determinations may modify or even override other clinical findings. As a result, practitioners must be alert to their own misassumptions that may unintentionally bias their conclusions about response styles. Detection strategies for malingering-based on unlikely or markedly amplified presentations-are highlighted in this article. Given page constraints, assessment methods for feigning are succinctly presented with their applications to administrative, civil, and criminal referrals.

Forensic neuropsychiatric evaluation of a personal injury case.

Civil litigation involving the forensic neuropsychiatric evaluation of a personal injury case requires an assessment of damages and causation. The expert witness is obliged to integrate data from three critical sources of information: the review of records; the results of neuropsychological testing; and the findings from the clinical examination. In civil litigation involving a personal injury claim, the expert witness can be expected to address causation and prognosis of any neuropsychiatric damages. We discuss the undertaking of a forensic neuropsychiatric evaluation, psychiatric disorders often encountered in personal injury litigation, provide case vignettes and describe a number of special types of forensic neuropsychiatric evaluations, for example, Workers' Compensation, VA Disability and Social Security Disability.

Multivariate base rates of potentially problematic scores on the NIH Toolbox Emotion Battery.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the normal frequency of obtaining one or more scores considered potentially problematic based on normative comparisons when completing the NIH Toolbox Emotion Battery (NIHTB-EB). METHOD: Participants (N = 753; ages 18-85, 62.4% women, 66.4% non-Hispanic White) from the NIHTB norming study completed 17 scales of emotional functioning fitting into three subdomains (i.e., Negative Affect, Psychological Well-being, Social Satisfaction). Scores were considered potentially problematic if they were 1 SD above/below the mean, depending on the orientation of the scale, and cutoffs for 1.5 and 2 SD were also included for reference. Multivariate base rates quantified the rate at which participants obtained one or more potentially problematic scale or subdomain scores. RESULTS: The portion of participants obtaining one or more potentially problematic scores on the NIHTB-EB scales and subdomains was 61.2 and 23.2%, respectively. Participants who were younger (i.e., 18-49) or had less education had higher rates of potentially problematic scores within specific subdomains. There were no significant differences by sex or race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated scores on the NIHTB-EB were common in the normative sample and related to education/age. The multivariate base rates provided indicate obtaining one or more potentially problematic scores on the NIHTB-EB is broadly normal among adults, which may guard against overinterpreting a single score as clinically significant. These base rates should be considered in the context of other assessment findings, such as interviews, medical history or informant reports, to ensure that true emotional problems are not dismissed, and normal variation in emotional functioning is not pathologized.

Validity assessment in Eastern Europe: cross-validation of the Dot Counting Test and MODEMM against the TOMM-1 and Rey-15 in a Romanian mixed clinical sample.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated performance validity in the understudied Romanian clinical population by exploring classification accuracies of the Dot Counting Test (DCT) and the first Romanian performance validity test (PVT) (Memory of Objects and Digits and Evaluation of Memory Malingering/MODEMM) in a heterogeneous clinical sample. METHODS: We evaluated 54 outpatients (26 females; MAge = 62.02; SDAge = 12.3; MEducation = 2.41, SDEducation = 2.82) with the Test of Memory Malingering 1 (TOMM-1), Rey Fifteen Items Test (Rey-15) (free recall and recognition trials), DCT, MODEMM, and MMSE/MoCA as part of their neuropsychological assessment. Accuracy parameters and base failure rates were computed for the DCT and MODEMM indicators against the TOMM-1 and Rey-15. Two patient groups were constructed according to psychometrically defined credible/noncredible performance (i.e., pass/fail both TOMM-1 and Rey-15). RESULTS: Similar to other cultures, a cutoff of ≥18 on the DCT E score produced the best combination between sensitivity (0.50-0.57) and specificity (≥0.90). MODEMM indicators based on recognition accuracy, inconsistencies, and inclusion false positives generated 0.75-0.86 sensitivities at ≥0.90 specificities. Multivariable models of MODEMM indicators reached perfect sensitivities at ≥0.90 specificities against two PVTs. Patients who failed the TOMM-1 and Rey-15 were significantly more likely to fail the DCT and MODEMM than patients who passed both PVTs. CONCLUSIONS: Our results offer proof of concept for the DCT's cross-cultural validity and the applicability of the MODEMM on Romanian clinical examinees, further recommending the use of heterogeneous validity indicators in clinical assessments.

EMG measured reaction time as a predictor of invalid symptom report in psychosomatic patients.

Background: Symptom validity tests (SVTs) and performance validity tests (PVTs) are important tools in sociomedical assessments, especially in the psychosomatic context where diagnoses mainly depend on clinical observation and self-report measures. This study examined the relationship between reaction times (RTs) and scores on the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS). It was proposed that slower RTs and larger standard deviations of reaction times (RTSDs) would be observed in participants who scored above the SIMS cut-off (>16). Methods: Direct surface electromyography (EMG) was used to capture RTs during a computer-based RT test in 152 inpatients from a psychosomatic rehabilitation clinic in Germany. Correlation analyses and Mann-Whitney U were used to examine the relationship between RTs and SIMS scores and to assess the potential impact of covariates such as demographics, medical history, and vocational challenges on RTs. Therefore, dichotomized groups based on each potential covariate were compared. Results: Significantly longer RTs and larger RTSDs were found in participants who scored above the SIMS cut-off. Current treatment with psychopharmacological medication, diagnosis of depression, and age had no significant influence on the RT measures. However, work-related problems had a significant impact on RTSDs. Conclusion: There was a significant relationship between longer and more inconsistent RTs and indicators of exaggerated or feigned symptom report on the SIMS in psychosomatic rehabilitation inpatients. Findings from this study provide a basis for future research developing a new RT-based PVT.

Research Progress and Application Prospect of Facial Micro-Expression Analysis in Forensic Psychiatry.

Research on facial micro-expression analysis has been going on for decades. Micro-expression can reflect the true emotions of individuals, and it has important application value in assisting auxiliary diagnosis and disease monitoring of mental disorders. In recent years, the development of artificial intelligence and big data technology has made the automatic recognition of micro-expressions possible, which will make micro-expression analysis more convenient and more widely used. This paper reviews the development of facial micro-expression analysis and its application in forensic psychiatry, to look into further application prospects and development direction.

Factitious disorder imposed on self: A retrospective study of 2232 cases from health insurance databases.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with factitious disorder imposed on self (FDIS) seek medical care for deliberately falsified problems. Although a large amount of work has been published, the scientific literature lacks robust data on FDIS. The present study aimed to estimate the annual mean of in-hospital FDIS codings in France, describe the sociodemographic characteristics of subjects with FDIS, assess healthcare utilisation and medical nomadism, and describe the pathologies most frequently associated with FDIS. METHOD: Subjects with at least one coding of FDIS in French health insurance databases between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2017 were included. Subjects younger than 18 years of age at the time of first coding were excluded from the study. Sociodemographic data of subjects and diagnoses associated with the first coding of FDIS were collected. Healthcare utilisation and medical nomadism were analysed descriptively from one year before to one year after the first FDIS coding. RESULTS: 2232 subjects were included, representing an average of 248 new in-hospital FDIS codings per year. The subjects included were 58.2% female. The mean age at diagnosis was 48.5 years. In the year following the first coding of FDIS, 1268 subjects (56.8%) were re-hospitalised at least once, including 159 (7.1%) with at least one new coding for FDIS. From one year before to one year after the first coding of FDIS, 66% of the subjects included had received at least one prescription for benzodiazepines, 58.3% for antidepressants, and 42.6% for antipsychotics. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings bring new data working towards a better understanding of FDIS. The consumption of psychotropic drugs is particularly frequent in patients with FDIS.

Overcoming defensive responding in the estimation of prevalence of non-medical use of prescription stimulants.

BACKGROUND: Prevalence of Non-Medical Use of Prescription Stimulants (NMUPS) is estimated to be high among young adults enrolled in college. However, precise estimation of the prevalence of NMUPS is challenging owing to biases affecting self-report of sensitive and potentially illegal behaviors. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to estimate the prevalence and risk factors of NMUPS using the crosswise randomized response technique (CRRT) and compare findings to the traditionally-used direct self-report (DSR) method. METHODS: This study utilized a cross-sectional, randomized experimental design to survey adult undergraduate students at a major southeastern university in the United States. Eligible respondents were randomly assigned to a DSR group or a CRRT group. Those in the DSR group were presented a direct question about NMUPS, but those in the CRRT group were asked to indicate whether their response to the NMUPS question was the 'same' or 'different' compared to a random non-sensitive question. RESULTS: Prevalence of NMUPS was found to be 18.6% (95% CI:18.5%-18.7%) in the DSR group and 32.5% (95% CI:32.1%-32.9%; p = 0.003) in the CRRT group. Logistic regression analysis predicting NMUPS in the DSR group showed that it was significantly associated with positive expectancies (OR:3.50; 95% CI:2.44-5.02), negative expectancies (OR:0.49; 95% CI:0.35-0.68), perceived norms (OR:1.71; 95% CI:1.27-2.29), and religious beliefs (OR:0.69; 95% CI:0.52-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: The setting and mechanism of the survey is likely closely related to the validity of prevalence estimation of sensitive behaviors. This study found that prevalence of sensitive behaviors such as NMUPS is significantly higher when respondents are provided increased anonymity.

Medical fears of the malingering soldier: 'phony cronies' and the Repat in 1960s Australia.

The fear of the malingering soldier or veteran has existed in Australia since its first nationwide military venture in South Africa. The establishment of the Repatriation Department in 1917 saw the medical, military and political fields work collectively, to some extent, to support hundreds of thousands of men who returned from their military service wounded or ill. Over the next decades the medical profession occasionally criticised the Repatriation Department's alleged laxness towards soldier recipients of military pensions, particularly those with less visible war-related psychiatric conditions. In 1963 this reached a crescendo when a group of Australian doctors drew battle lines in the correspondence pages of the Medical Journal of Australia, accusing the Repatriation Department of directing a 'national scandal', and provoking responses by both the Minister for Repatriation and the Chairman of the War Pensions Assessment Appeal Tribunal. Although this controversy and its aftermath does allow for closer investigation of the inner workings of the Repatriation Department, the words of the doctors themselves about 'phony cronies', 'deadbeats' and 'drongoes' also reveal how the medical fear of the malingering soldier, and particularly the traumatised soldier-malingerer, lingered into the early 1960s and beyond. This paper will analyse the medical conceptualisation of the traumatised soldier in the 1960s in relation to historical conceptions of malingering, the increasingly tenuous position of psychiatry, as well as the socio-medical 'sick role', and will explore possible links with the current soldier and veteran suicide crisis in Australia.

Review of Statistical and Methodological Issues in the Forensic Prediction of Malingering from Validity Tests: Part II-Methodological Issues.

Forensic neuropsychological examinations to detect malingering in patients with neurocognitive, physical, and psychological dysfunction have tremendous social, legal, and economic importance. Thousands of studies have been published to develop and validate methods to forensically detect malingering based largely on approximately 50 validity tests, including embedded and stand-alone performance and symptom validity tests. This is Part II of a two-part review of statistical and methodological issues in the forensic prediction of malingering based on validity tests. The Part I companion paper explored key statistical issues. Part II examines related methodological issues through conceptual analysis, statistical simulations, and reanalysis of findings from prior validity test validation studies. Methodological issues examined include the distinction between analog simulation and forensic studies, the effect of excluding too-close-to-call (TCTC) cases from analyses, the distinction between criterion-related and construct validation studies, and the application of the Revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (QUADAS-2) in all Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) validation studies published within approximately the first 20 years following its initial publication to assess risk of bias. Findings include that analog studies are commonly confused for forensic validation studies, and that construct validation studies are routinely presented as if they were criterion-reference validation studies. After accounting for the exclusion of TCTC cases, actual classification accuracy was found to be well below claimed levels. QUADAS-2 results revealed that extant TOMM validation studies all had a high risk of bias, with not a single TOMM validation study with low risk of bias. Recommendations include adoption of well-established guidelines from the biomedical diagnostics literature for good quality criterion-referenced validation studies and examination of implications for malingering determination practices. Design of future studies may hinge on the availability of an incontrovertible reference standard of the malingering status of examinees.

Quo Vadis Forensic Neuropsychological Malingering Determinations? Reply to Drs. Bush, Faust, and Jewsbury.

The thoughtful commentaries in this volume of Drs. Bush, Jewsbury, and Faust add to the impact of the two reviews in this volume of statistical and methodological issues in the forensic neuropsychological determination of malingering based on performance and symptom validity tests (PVTs and SVTs). In his commentary, Dr. Bush raises, among others, the important question of whether such malingering determinations can still be considered as meeting the legal Daubert standard which is the basis for neuropsychological expert testimony. Dr. Jewsbury focuses mostly on statistical issues and agrees with two key points of the statistical review: Positive likelihood chaining is not a mathematically tenable method to combine findings of multiple PVTs and SVTs, and the Simple Bayes method is not applicable to malingering determinations. Dr. Faust adds important narrative texture to the implications for forensic neuropsychological practice and points to a need for research into factors other than malingering that may explain PVT and SVT failures. These commentaries put into even sharper focus the serious questions raised in the reviews about the scientific basis of present practices in the forensic neuropsychological determination of malingering.