Læknablaðið : fylgirit - 01.08.2003, Síða 26

Læknablaðið : fylgirit - 01.08.2003, Síða 26
I ABSTRACTS / 27TH NORDIC PSYCHIATRIC CONGRESS Method: The sample comprised 55 patients. Character was assessed with the Karolinska Psychodynamic Profile, and relationship pat- terns with the Core Conflictual Relationship Theme. The DSM-III- R, self-report questionnaires assessing symptoms and personality were used. Thirty-six patients who engaged in psychotherapy com- pleted follow-up assessments 6 months after treatment termination, and 10 patients, who did not enter treatment, completed follow-up assessments 3 years after intake. The psychotherapists involved were all well trained and had long professional experience. Results: After long-term psychotherapy, patients reported a de- creased level of character pathology and symptomatic suffering, as well as improved relationship patterns. There were, however, very few significant associations between change in character and change in symptoms or maladaptive relationships. Duration of treatment and frequency of sessions were not related to change. Conclusions: The patients benefited from treatment, but neither the psychoanalytic theory regarding a close association between character, symptoms and relationship patterns, nor the psychoana- lytic theory of structural change received support from our results. S-IV/1 Thursday 14/8,11:00-12:30 Psychodynamic personality profile in early severe mental disorders Jyrki Heikkila MD, Psychiatric Services, City of Turku and Department of Psychiatry, University of Turku, Turku, Kunnallissairaalantie 20, rak. 4, FIN-20700 Tlirku, Finland. Hasse Karlsson, Hilkka Virtanen, Raimo K.R. Salokangas jyrki.heikkila@turkii.fi Objective: Personality may alter liability/vulnerability, manifesta- tion, and course of a disorder. The aim of this study was to investi- gate how enduring psychodynamic personalily traits are associated with psychopathology in early severe mental disorders. Methods: The study included 61 successive patients suffering from their first episode of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or severe niajor depression. Personality was assessed with the Karolinska Psychodynaniic Profile (KAPP) -interview, including 18 items. Results: Personality profile differed only weakly a) in the three diagnostic groups, b) in patients with and without schizophrenia, and c) in patients with and without psychosis. However, in a logistic regression adjusting for age, sex, and diagnosis, several KAPP items were strongly associated with symptoms clusters derived from the BPRS. The cluster including emotional withdrawal, psychomotor retardation, and blunted affect had the most frequent associations with the KAPP items. Conclusions: We found no significant evidence of a diagnosis-speci- fic psychodynamic personality profile in severe mental disorders. Certain personality traits may predict negative emotional symp- toms in a manifest disorder. A comparison with a non-psychiatric control group from another study suggests that there may be significant dysfunctional personality traits which are common to all severe mental disorder groups in our study. S-IV/2 Thursday 14/8,11:00-12:30 Screening for prodromal symptoms of psychosis Hcininiaa M, Research Psychiatrist, University of Turku, Department of Psychiatry, Kunnallissairaalantie 20, SF-20700 Turku, Finland. Salokangas RKR, Huttunen J, Rekola J, Heinisuo AM, Ristkari T, McGlashan TH. markus.heinimaa@utu.fi Background: In connection with the DEEP-study we developed the PROD-screen, an instrument for screening for prodromal sympto- matology, both for self-rating and telephone interviews. According to the data from this study PROD-screen functions well with mixed samples and with first degree relatives of schizophrenic patients, being able to distinguish prodromal cases (as defined by SIPS instrument, McGlashan) from noncases. However, when used in clinically highly relevant population of new psychiatric outpatients, PROD-screen scores do not differentiate between SIPS positive and SIPS negative cases, presumably due to high Ievels of symp- toms reported in this sample in general. This is a major drawback as clinical samples probably contain a higher base rate of true pro- dromal cases, only effective screening is achieved. Aims: We developed this screening procedure to more qualitative direction by also including reports of verbal responses to symptom queries presented in the screen, and using these verbal responses as the basis for deciding screen positivity. Method: On all symptom questions responded with “Yes” the subject was asked to give a detailed description of what kind of symptom prompted him/her to respond positively. The evaluation of these symptom descriptions was made independently by two experienced psychiatrists, who made a consensus decision on which subjects were asked for more extensive research interview. Rcsults: We have screened new attenders to psychiatric open care systematically and as for now 406 screens have been evaluated. Positive predictive value of positive screening result for prodromal state according to SIPS has been 61%. Condusion: Adding evaluation of qualitative data to PROD-screen makes it a powerful tool for detecting prodromal syndromes. S-IV/3 Thursday 14/8, 11:00-12:30 General health and vulnerability to psychosis Korkcila JA, Clinical Lecturer, Psychiatric Clinic, Univeristy of Turku, Kunnallissairaa- lantie 20,20700 Turku, Finland. Suomela T, Heinimaa M, Huttunen J, Ristkari T, Plathin M, Salokangas RKR. jyrki. korkeila@postikaista.net The sample comprises 157 subjects from the Detection of Early Psychosis project. The SIPS was used as a gold standard to deter- mine the presence of vulnerability to psychosis. The psychiatric diagnoses were made according to SCID. General health and re- lated symptoms were also probed. There were significant differen- ces between those without psychiatric symptoms (58%) and those witli mild psychiatric symptoms (9%), those vulnerable to psychosis (1 %) or psychotic (16%) in respect to reporting excellent general health (p<0.01). There were no significant differences between the groups pertaining to diagnosed CNS illnesses. The level of general 26 L/EKNABLAÐIÐ / FYLGIRIT 48 2003/89
Síða 1
Síða 2
Síða 3
Síða 4
Síða 5
Síða 6
Síða 7
Síða 8
Síða 9
Síða 10
Síða 11
Síða 12
Síða 13
Síða 14
Síða 15
Síða 16
Síða 17
Síða 18
Síða 19
Síða 20
Síða 21
Síða 22
Síða 23
Síða 24
Síða 25
Síða 26
Síða 27
Síða 28
Síða 29
Síða 30
Síða 31
Síða 32
Síða 33
Síða 34
Síða 35
Síða 36
Síða 37
Síða 38
Síða 39
Síða 40
Síða 41
Síða 42
Síða 43
Síða 44
Síða 45
Síða 46
Síða 47
Síða 48
Síða 49
Síða 50
Síða 51
Síða 52
Síða 53
Síða 54
Síða 55
Síða 56
Síða 57
Síða 58
Síða 59
Síða 60
Síða 61
Síða 62
Síða 63
Síða 64
Síða 65
Síða 66
Síða 67
Síða 68
Síða 69
Síða 70
Síða 71
Síða 72
Síða 73
Síða 74
Síða 75
Síða 76
Síða 77
Síða 78
Síða 79
Síða 80
Síða 81
Síða 82
Síða 83
Síða 84
Síða 85
Síða 86
Síða 87
Síða 88
Síða 89
Síða 90
Síða 91
Síða 92

x

Læknablaðið : fylgirit

Beinleiðis leinki

Hvis du vil linke til denne avis/magasin, skal du bruge disse links:

Link til denne avis/magasin: Læknablaðið : fylgirit
https://timarit.is/publication/991

Link til dette eksemplar:

Link til denne side:

Link til denne artikel:

Venligst ikke link direkte til billeder eller PDfs på Timarit.is, da sådanne webadresser kan ændres uden advarsel. Brug venligst de angivne webadresser for at linke til sitet.