A clinically useful self-report measure of the DSM-5 mixed features specifier of major depressive disorder

Clinical distinctions in symptomatology and psychiatric comorbidities between misdiagnosed bipolar I and bipolar II disorder versus major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

To explore the demographic and clinical features of current depressive episode that discriminate patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD) from those with bipolar I (BP-I) and bipolar II (BP-II) disorder who were misdiagnosed as having MDD .

METHODS

The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) assessment was performed to establish DSM-IV diagnoses of MDD, and BP-I and BP-II, previously being misdiagnosed as MDD. Demographics, depressive symptoms and psychiatric comorbidities were compared between 1463 patients with BP-I, BP-II and MDD from 8 psychiatric settings in mainland China. A multinomial logistic regression model was performed to assess clinical correlates of diagnoses.

RESULTS

A total of 14.5% of the enrolled patients initially diagnosed with MDD were eventually diagnosed with BP. Broad illness characteristics including younger age, higher prevalence of recurrence, concurrent dysthymia, suicidal attempts, agitation, psychotic features and psychiatric comorbidities, as well as lower prevalence of insomnia, weight loss and somatic symptoms were featured by patients with BP-I and/or BP-I, compared to those with MDD. Comparisons between BP-I and BP-II versus MDD indicated distinct symptom profiles and comorbidity patterns with more differences being observed between BP-II and MDD, than between BP-I and MDD .

CONCLUSION

The results provide evidence of clinically distinguishing characteristics between misdiagnosed BP-I and BP- II versus MDD. The findings have implications for guiding more accurate diagnoses of bipolar disorders.

Validity of the DSM-5 Mixed Features Specifier Interview

OBJECTIVES

To examine the reliability and validity of a semi-structured interview assessing the features of the DSM-5 mixed features specifier. Our goal was to develop an instrument that could be used for both diagnostic and severity measurement purposes.

METHODS

Four hundred fifty-nine psychiatric patients in a depressive episode were interviewed by a trained diagnostic rater who administered semi-structured interviews including the DSM-5 Mixed Features Specifier Interview (DMSI). We examined the inter-rater reliability and psychometric properties of the DMSI. The patients were rated on clinician rating scales of depression, anxiety, and irritability, and measures of psychosocial functioning, suicidality, and family history of bipolar disorder.

RESULTS

The DMSI had excellent joint-interview interrater reliability. More than twice as many patients met the DSM-5 mixed features specifier criteria during the week before the assessment than for the majority of the episode (9.4% vs. 3.9%). DMSI total scores were more highly correlated with a clinician-rated measure of manic symptoms than with measures of depression and anxiety. More patients with bipolar depression met the mixed features specifier than patients with MDD. Amongst patients with MDD, those with mixed features more frequently had a family history of bipolar disorder, were more frequently diagnosed with anxiety disorders, attention deficit disorder, and borderline personality disorder, more frequently had attempted suicide, and were more severely depressed, anxious, and irritable.

CONCLUSION

The DMSI is a reliable and valid measure of the presence of the DSM-5 mixed features specifier in depressed patients as well as the severity of the features of the specifier.

Patient-reported outcomes on sleep quality and circadian rhythm during treatment with intravenous ketamine for treatment-resistant depression

Background

Intravenous (IV) ketamine is a rapid acting antidepressant used primarily for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). It has been suggested that IV ketamine's rapid antidepressant effects may be partially mediated via improved sleep and changes to the circadian rhythm.

Objectives

This study explores IV ketamine's association with changes in patient-reported sleep quality and circadian rhythm in an adult population with TRD.

Methods

Adult patients (18-64 years) with TRD scheduled for IV ketamine treatment were recruited to complete patient rated outcomes measures on sleep quality using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and circadian rhythm using the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ). Over a 4-week course of eight ketamine infusions, reports were obtained at baseline (T0), prior to second treatment (T1), prior to fifth treatment (T2), and 1 week after eighth treatment (T3).

Results

Forty participants with TRD (mean age = 42.8, 45% male) were enrolled. Twenty-nine (72.5%) had complete follow-up data. Paired t tests revealed statistically significant improvements at the end of treatment in sleep quality (PSQI) (p = 0.003) and depressive symptoms (Clinically Useful Depression Outcome Scale-Depression, p < 0.001) while circadian rhythm (MEQ) shifted earlier (p = 0.007). The PSQI subscale components of sleep duration (p = 0.008) and daytime dysfunction (p = 0.001) also improved. In an exploratory post hoc analysis, ketamine's impact on sleep quality was more prominent in patients with mixed features, while its chronobiotic effect was prominent in those without mixed features.

Conclusion

IV ketamine may improve sleep quality and advance circadian rhythm in individuals with TRD. Effects may differ in individuals with mixed features of depression as compared to those without. Since this was a small uncontrolled study, future research is warranted.

Identifying the DSM-5 mixed features specifier in depressed patients: A comparison of measures

BACKGROUND

A commonly used measure to assess mixed features in depressed patients is the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), which only partially aligns with the DSM-5 criteria. Different algorithms on the YMRS have been used to approximate the DSM-5 mixed features criteria. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we examined the agreement and validity of different approaches towards assessing the mixed features specifier.

METHODS

Three hundred nine depressed psychiatric patients were interviewed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, the DSM-5 Mixed Features Specifier Interview (DMSI) and the YMRS. Seven definitions of mixed features were examined, two based on the DMSI and five from the YMRS.

RESULTS

The prevalence of mixed features varied 8-fold amongst the 7 definitions. The level of agreement between the YMRS definitions and the DMSI was poor. For each definition, mixed features were significantly more common in patients with bipolar disorder than major depressive disorder. A family history of bipolar disorder was significantly associated with the DMSI assessment of mixed features but none of the YMRS approaches.

LIMITATIONS

The ratings on the measures were not independent of each other. The sample size was too small to compare the patients with bipolar I and bipolar II disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

While there was evidence of validity for both the DSM-5 and YMRS approaches towards identifying mixed features, the 2 approaches are not interchangeable. The algorithm on the YMRS used to classify patients has a significant impact on prevalence.

Prevalence of mixed features in patients with first-episode depression: An exploratory multicentric study

Background and Aim

There is limited literature on the prevalence of mixed features in patients with depression, especially from countries in Asia. Our aim was to evaluate the prevalence of "mixed features" in patients with first-episode depression.

Materials and Methods

Patients with first-episode depression were evaluated for the presence of mixed features as per the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM)-5 criteria. They were additionally evaluated on Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS).

Results

About one-sixth (16%) of the patients fulfilled the DSM-5 criteria for the mixed features specifier. The most common manic/hypomanic clinical feature was increased talkativeness or pressure of speech, followed by elevated expansive mood (12.5%), and inflated self-esteem or grandiosity was the least common feature (8.7%). Those with mixed features had higher prevalence of comorbid tobacco dependence and psychotic symptoms. In terms of frequency of depressive symptoms as assessed on HDRS, compared to those without mixed features, those with mixed features had higher frequency of symptoms such as depressed mood, insomnia during early hours of morning, work and activities, agitation, gastrointestinal somatic symptoms, genital symptoms, hypochondriasis, and poorer insight.

Conclusion

Mixed features specifier criteria were fulfilled by 16% patients with first-episode depression. This finding suggests that the extension of this specifier to depression can be considered as a useful step in understanding the symptom profile of patients with depression.

A comparative study of prevalence of mixed features in patients with unipolar and bipolar depression

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of data on the mixed specifier from developing countries like India.

AIM

In this background, the present study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of "mixed specifier" in patients with unipolar depression and bipolar depression. The additional aim was to evaluate the sociodemographic and clinical correlates of the mixed specifier.

METHODOLOGY

110 patients (51 diagnosed with current episode unipolar depression and 59 diagnosed with current episode bipolar depression) were evaluated on DSM-5 criteria for mixed specifier for depression, Clinically Useful Depression Outcome Scale, Koukopoulos Mixed Depression Rating Scale, Hamilton depression rating scale (HDRS) and Young mania rating scale.

RESULT

According to DSM-5, 11 (21.56%) out of the 51 patients with unipolar depression fulfilled at least 3 out of the 7 criteria for the mixed specifier for depression, and 14 (23.72%) out of 59 patients with bipolar depression fulfilled the criteria for the mixed specifier, with no significant difference in the prevalence across the 2 groups. There was no significant difference in the sociodemographic and clinical profile of those with and without mixed features in both unipolar and bipolar depression groups. However, those with mixed and without mixed features differ on certain depressive symptoms as assessed on HDRS.

CONCLUSIONS

About one-fifth of patients with unipolar and bipolar depression have mixed features during the acute phase of depression.

The clinical characterization of the adult patient with bipolar disorder aimed at personalization of management

Bipolar disorder is heterogeneous in phenomenology, illness trajectory, and response to treatment. Despite evidence for the efficacy of multimodal-ity interventions, the majority of persons affected by this disorder do not achieve and sustain full syndromal recovery. It is eagerly anticipated that combining datasets across various information sources (e.g., hierarchical "multi-omic" measures, electronic health records), analyzed using advanced computational methods (e.g., machine learning), will inform future diagnosis and treatment selection. In the interim, identifying clinically meaningful subgroups of persons with the disorder having differential response to specific treatments at point-of-care is an empirical priority. This paper endeavours to synthesize salient domains in the clinical characterization of the adult patient with bipolar disorder, with the overarching aim to improve health outcomes by informing patient management and treatment considerations. Extant data indicate that characterizing select domains in bipolar disorder provides actionable information and guides shared decision making. For example, it is robustly established that the presence of mixed features - especially during depressive episodes - and of physical and psychiatric comorbidities informs illness trajectory, response to treatment, and suicide risk. In addition, early environmental exposures (e.g., sexual and physical abuse, emotional neglect) are highly associated with more complicated illness presentations, inviting the need for developmentally-oriented and integrated treatment approaches. There have been significant advances in validating subtypes of bipolar disorder (e.g., bipolar I vs. II disorder), particularly in regard to pharmacological interventions. As with other severe mental disorders, social functioning, interpersonal/family relationships and internalized stigma are domains highly relevant to relapse risk, health outcomes, and quality of life. The elevated standardized mortality ratio for completed suicide and suicidal behaviour in bipolar disorder invites the need for characterization of this domain in all patients. The framework of this paper is to describe all the above salient domains, providing a synthesis of extant literature and recommendations for decision support tools and clinical metrics that can be implemented at point-of-care.

The Appalachia Mind Health Initiative (AMHI): a pragmatic randomized clinical trial of adjunctive internet-based cognitive behavior therapy for treating major depressive disorder among primary care patients

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a leading cause of disease morbidity. Combined treatment with antidepressant medication (ADM) plus psychotherapy yields a much higher MDD remission rate than ADM only. But 77% of US MDD patients are nonetheless treated with ADM only despite strong patient preferences for psychotherapy. This mismatch is due at least in part to a combination of cost considerations and limited availability of psychotherapists, although stigma and reluctance of PCPs to refer patients for psychotherapy are also involved. Internet-based cognitive behaviorial therapy (i-CBT) addresses all of these problems.

METHODS

Enrolled patients (n = 3360) will be those who are beginning ADM-only treatment of MDD in primary care facilities throughout West Virginia, one of the poorest and most rural states in the country. Participating treatment providers and study staff at West Virginia University School of Medicine (WVU) will recruit patients and, after obtaining informed consent, administer a baseline self-report questionnaire (SRQ) and then randomize patients to 1 of 3 treatment arms with equal allocation: ADM only, ADM + self-guided i-CBT, and ADM + guided i-CBT. Follow-up SRQs will be administered 2, 4, 8, 13, 16, 26, 39, and 52 weeks after randomization. The trial has two primary objectives: to evaluate aggregate comparative treatment effects across the 3 arms and to estimate heterogeneity of treatment effects (HTE). The primary outcome will be episode remission based on a modified version of the patient-centered Remission from Depression Questionnaire (RDQ). The sample was powered to detect predictors of HTE that would increase the proportional remission rate by 20% by optimally assigning individuals as opposed to randomly assigning them into three treatment groups of equal size. Aggregate comparative treatment effects will be estimated using intent-to-treat analysis methods. Cumulative inverse probability weights will be used to deal with loss to follow-up. A wide range of self-report predictors of MDD heterogeneity of treatment effects based on previous studies will be included in the baseline SRQ. A state-of-the-art ensemble machine learning method will be used to estimate HTE.

DISCUSSION

The study is innovative in using a rich baseline assessment and in having a sample large enough to carry out a well-powered analysis of heterogeneity of treatment effects. We anticipate finding that self-guided and guided i-CBT will both improve outcomes compared to ADM only. We also anticipate finding that the comparative advantages of adding i-CBT to ADM will vary significantly across patients. We hope to develop a stable individualized treatment rule that will allow patients and treatment providers to improve aggregate treatment outcomes by deciding collaboratively when ADM treatment should be augmented with i-CBT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04120285 . Registered on October 19, 2019.

Mixed Depression: A Mini-Review to Guide Clinical Practice and Future Research Developments

The debate on mixed states (MS) has been intense for decades. However, several points remain controversial from a nosographic, diagnostic, and therapeutic point of view. The different perspectives that have emerged over the years have turned into a large, but heterogeneous, literature body. The present review aims to summarize the evidence on MS, with a particular focus on mixed depression (MxD), in order to provide a guide for clinicians and encourage the development of future research on the topic. First, we review the history of MS, focusing on their different interpretations and categorizations over the centuries. In this section, we also report alternative models to traditional nosography. Second, we describe the main clinical features of MxD and list the most reliable assessment tools. Finally, we summarize the recommendations provided by the main international guidelines for the treatment of MxD. Our review highlights that the different conceptualizations of MS and MxD, the variability of clinical pictures, and the heterogeneous response to pharmacological treatment make MxD a real challenge for clinicians. Further studies are needed to better characterize the phenotypes of patients with MxD to help clinicians in the management of this delicate condition.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) recommendations for the management of patients with bipolar disorder with mixed presentations

OBJECTIVES

The 2018 Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) guidelines provided clinicians with pragmatic treatment recommendations for bipolar disorder (BD). While these guidelines included commentary on how mixed features may direct treatment selection, specific recommendations were not provided-a critical gap which the current update aims to address.

METHOD

Overview of research regarding mixed presentations in BD, with treatment recommendations developed using a modified CANMAT/ISBD rating methodology. Limitations are discussed, including the dearth of high-quality data and reliance on expert opinion.

RESULTS

No agents met threshold for first-line treatment of DSM-5 manic or depressive episodes with mixed features. For mania + mixed features second-line treatment options include asenapine, cariprazine, divalproex, and aripiprazole. In depression + mixed features, cariprazine and lurasidone are recommended as second-line options. For DSM-IV defined mixed episodes, with a longer history of research, asenapine and aripiprazole are first-line, and olanzapine (monotherapy or combination), carbamazepine, and divalproex are second-line. Research on maintenance treatments following a DSM-5 mixed presentation is extremely limited, with third-line recommendations based on expert opinion. For maintenance treatment following a DSM-IV mixed episode, quetiapine (monotherapy or combination) is first-line, and lithium and olanzapine identified as second-line options.

CONCLUSION

The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope these guidelines provide valuable support for clinicians providing care to patients experiencing mixed presentations, as well as further influence investment in research to improve diagnosis and treatment of this common and complex clinical state.

Reliability and validity of clinically useful depression outcome scale identifying mixed features in patients with manic episode

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to explore the reliability, validity, and feasibility of Clinically Useful Depression Outcome Scale (CUDOS) in screening mixed features in patients diagnosed with mania.

METHODS

A total of 109 patients with (hypo-) manic episode were recruited. The reliability of Chinese version of CUDOS (CUDOS-C) were analyzed with Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Spearman correlation coefficient was used to analyze the validity by comparing the correlation between CUDOS-C and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), 32-item Hypomania Checklist (HCL-32). The score of MINI (hypo-) manic episode with mixed features-DSM-5 Module-Chinese version(MINI-M-C) ≥ 2 was considered as the gold standard of mixed features, and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to calculate the optimal cut-off values of CUDOS-C score.

RESULTS

The Cronbach's alpha value of CUDOS-C was 0.898, and the ICC of CUDOS-C test-retest was 0.880 (95% CI: 0.812-0.923, p < .05).The CUDOS-C score was significantly correlated with PHQ-9 score (r = 0.893, p = .000), but not with HCL-32 score(r = 0.088, p = .364).The area under ROC curve was 0.909 (95% CI: 0.855 to 0.963, p < .001) for CUDOS-C identifying mixed features in mania. The optimal cut-off value was 11 with a sensitivity of 0.854 and a specificity of 0.868. The CUDOS-C (score ≥ 12) identified 40.4% of the patients with mixed features, which was higher than those diagnosed by clinicians (18.3%) and screened using MINI-M-C (37.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate the CUDOS-C is a reliable and valid self-administered questionnaire for assessing depressive symptoms and screening patients with mixed mania.

Psychometric properties of the Clinically Useful Depression Outcome Scale supplemented with DSM-5 Mixed subtype questionnaire in Chinese patients with mood disorders

BACKGROUND

With the modification of DSM-5 mixed features specifier, a brief scale to screen mixed features in patients with mood disorders is needed in clinical practice. This study aimed to explore the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Clinically Useful Depression Outcome Scale supplemented with DSM-5 Mixed subtype (CUDOS-M-C) for the Chinese patients with mood disorders.

METHODS

Overall, 300 patients with major depressive episode were recruited. All participants were assessed using CUDOS-M-C, Young Mania Rating Scale, Hamilton Anxiety Scale and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to calculate the optimal cut-off values of CUDOS-M-C score. The reliability and validity of CUDOS-M-C were examined using Cronbach's alpha, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and principal component analysis (PCA).

RESULTS

The results of PCA indicated two-factor structure as the best solution for CUDOS-M-C, which explained 54.82% of cumulative variance. The Cronbach's alpha was 0.892 and the ICC was 0.853. The area under the ROC curve of the CUDOS-M-C for participants with mixed depression was 0.927 (p<0.001) and the suitable cut-off value was 8, with a sensitivity of 91.6% and specificity of 79.9%.

LIMITATIONS

Most of the patients were recruited from eastern China and further research with larger sample is warranted. And this study did not perform confirmatory factor analysis to identify the generalization of factor structure of CUDOS-M-C. Besides, the study performed the test-retest reliability of CUDOS-M-C and further analysis is needed to ascertain the patient's post-treatment changes.

CONCLUSION

The CUDOS-M-C demonstrated to have satisfactory psychometric properties as a self-report scale, and could be applied to screen patients with mixed depression in clinical practice.

The 2020 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders

OBJECTIVES

To provide advice and guidance regarding the management of mood disorders, derived from scientific evidence and supplemented by expert clinical consensus to formulate s that maximise clinical utility.

METHODS

Articles and information sourced from search engines including PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Google Scholar were supplemented by literature known to the mood disorders committee (e.g. books, book chapters and government reports) and from published depression and bipolar disorder guidelines. Relevant information was appraised and discussed in detail by members of the mood disorders committee, with a view to formulating and developing consensus-based recommendations and clinical guidance. The guidelines were subjected to rigorous consultation and external review involving: expert and clinical advisors, key stakeholders, professional bodies and specialist groups with interest in mood disorders.

RESULTS

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists mood disorders clinical practice guidelines 2020 (MDcpg²⁰²⁰) provide up-to-date guidance regarding the management of mood disorders that is informed by evidence and clinical experience. The guideline is intended for clinical use by psychiatrists, psychologists, primary care physicians and others with an interest in mental health care.

CONCLUSION

The MDcpg²⁰²⁰ builds on the previous 2015 guidelines and maintains its joint focus on both depressive and bipolar disorders. It provides up-to-date recommendations and guidance within an evidence-based framework, supplemented by expert clinical consensus.

MOOD DISORDERS COMMITTEE

Gin S Malhi (Chair), Erica Bell, Darryl Bassett, Philip Boyce, Richard Bryant, Philip Hazell, Malcolm Hopwood, Bill Lyndon, Roger Mulder, Richard Porter, Ajeet B Singh and Greg Murray.

The clinical characterization of the adult patient with depression aimed at personalization of management

Depression is widely acknowledged to be a heterogeneous entity, and the need to further characterize the individual patient who has received this diagnosis in order to personalize the management plan has been repeatedly emphasized. However, the research evidence that should guide this personalization is at present fragmentary, and the selection of treatment is usually based on the clinician's and/or the patient's preference and on safety issues, in a trial-and-error fashion, paying little attention to the particular features of the specific case. This may be one of the reasons why the majority of patients with a diagnosis of depression do not achieve remission with the first treatment they receive. The predominant pessimism about the actual feasibility of the personalization of treatment of depression in routine clinical practice has recently been tempered by some secondary analyses of databases from clinical trials, using approaches such as individual patient data meta-analysis and machine learning, which indicate that some variables may indeed contribute to the identification of patients who are likely to respond differently to various antidepressant drugs or to antidepressant medication vs. specific psychotherapies. The need to develop decision support tools guiding the personalization of treatment of depression has been recently reaffirmed, and the point made that these tools should be developed through large observational studies using a comprehensive battery of self-report and clinical measures. The present paper aims to describe systematically the salient domains that should be considered in this effort to personalize depression treatment. For each domain, the available research evidence is summarized, and the relevant assessment instruments are reviewed, with special attention to their suitability for use in routine clinical practice, also in view of their possible inclusion in the above-mentioned comprehensive battery of measures. The main unmet needs that research should address in this area are emphasized. Where the available evidence allows providing the clinician with specific advice that can already be used today to make the management of depression more personalized, this advice is highlighted. Indeed, some sections of the paper, such as those on neurocognition and on physical comorbidities, indicate that the modern management of depression is becoming increasingly complex, with several components other than simply the choice of an antidepressant and/or a psychotherapy, some of which can already be reliably personalized.

Depression Preceding Diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder

This paper focuses on depression that precedes an onset of manifest bipolar disorder as early stage bipolar disorder. First, we review how to pragmatically identify the clinical characteristics of patients presenting with an episode of depression who subsequently go on to develop episodes of mania or hypomania. The existing literature shows a strong consensus: accurate identification of depression with early onset and recurrent course with multiple episodes, subthreshold hypomanic and/or mixed symptoms, and family history of bipolar disorder or completed suicide have been shown by multiple authors as signs pointing to bipolar diagnosis. This contrasts with relatively limited information available to guide management of such "pre-bipolar" (pre-declared bipolar) patients, especially those in the adult age range. Default assumption of unipolar depression at this stage carries significant risk. Antidepressants are still the most common pharmacological treatment used, but clinicians need to be aware of their potential harm. In some patients with unrecognized bipolar depression, antidepressants can not only produce switch to (hypo)mania, but also mixed symptoms, or worsening of depression with an increased risk of suicide. We review pragmatic management strategies in the literature beyond clinical guidelines that can be considered for this at-risk group encompassing the more recent child and adolescent literature. In the future, genetic research could make the early identification of bipolar depression easier by generating informative markers and polygenic risk scores.

Validity of the Shahin Mixed Depression Scale: A Self-Rated Instrument Designed to Measure the Non-DSM Mixed Features in Depression

BACKGROUND

The DSM5-defined mixed features in depression do not include psychomotor agitation, irritability or distractibility because they are considered overlapping symptoms. A growing number of modern psychiatrists have expressed dissatisfaction with this and proposed alternative sets of mixed symptoms that are much more common and clinically relevant. Among such alternative criteria were those proposed by Koukopoulos. He utilized the research diagnostic criteria of agitated depression (RDC-A) as a mixed depression subtype, and validated another form of mixed depression, the Koukopoulos criteria for mixed depression (K-DMX).

PURPOSE

This study provides psychometric validation for the first self-rated scale designed to measure the most common mixed symptoms in depression as proposed by Koukopoulos.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a multicenter cross-sectional study of 170 patients with unipolar depression. They completed the Shahin Mixed Depression Scale (SMDS) and underwent expert interviews as a gold standard reference. SMDS' psychometric properties were assessed, including Cronbach's alpha, factor analysis, sensitivity, specificity, predictive value and accuracy.

RESULTS

We found significant association and agreement between mixity according to SMDS and the gold standard (K-DMX and RDC-A according to expert interview) with good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.87), high sensitivity (=91.4%), specificity (=98.0%), positive predictive value (=96.9%), negative predictive value (= 94.2%) and accuracy (=95.2%). Factor analysis identified one factor for psychomotor agitation and another for mixity without psychomotor agitation.

CONCLUSION

SMDS was a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the frequently encountered and clinically relevant mixed features in depression.

Diagnostic Issues of Depressive Disorders from Kraepelinian Dualism to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition

Because the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV) was mainly influenced by the neo-Kraepelinian approach, its categorical approach to defining mental disorders has been criticized from the viewpoint of etiological neutrality. In the context of bridging the gap between "presumed etiologies-based symptomatology" and "identifiable pathophysiological etiologies," the content in 5th edition, the DSM-5, has been revised to incorporate a combination of categorical and dimensional approaches. The most remarkable change of note regarding the diagnostic classification of depressive disorders in the DSM-5 is the splitting of mood disorders into bipolar disorders and depressive disorders, which is in accordance with the deconstruction of the Kraepelinian dualism for psychoses. The transdiagnostic specifiers "with mixed features," "with psychotic features," and "with anxious distress" are introduced to describe the relationships of depressive disorders with bipolar disorders, schizophrenia, and generalized anxiety disorder, respectively, in a dimensional manner. The lowering of the diagnostic threshold for major depressive disorder (MDD) may be caused by the addition of "hopelessness" to the subjective descriptors of depressive mood and the elimination of "bereavement exclusion" from the definition of MDD. Since the heterogeneity of MDD is equivalent to the Wittgensteinian "games" analogy, the different types of MDD are related not by a single essential feature but rather by "family resemblance." Network analyses of MDD symptoms may therefore need further review to elucidate the connections among interrelated symptoms and other clinical elements.

Disagreement and factors between symptom on self-report and clinician rating of major depressive disorder: A report of a national survey in China

BACKGROUND

Measurement-based care (MBC) is a popular strategy of clinical management for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). The consistency of self-report and clinical measurements is of importance, but whether individual symptom severity is in agreement for both self-report and clinician rating in MDD has not been comprehensively tested. This study aimed to test whether individual symptom severity of MDD was in agreement between self-report and clinician rating, and to explore factors affecting the agreement.

METHODS

In the National Survey on Symptomatology of Depression (NSSD) of China, 3275 patients with a major depressive episode were evaluated by both self-report and a clinician-rated version of 62 questions.

RESULTS

On average, 59% of all patients reached absolute agreement with their research clinicians. Among all questions, 73% returned with moderate positive strength of correlation, followed by 27% with low positive correlation. In 77% of the total questions, there was a tendency to rate higher in the self-report version compared with the clinician-rated version. After classifying the symptoms by six major domains, it was found that patients and clinicians showed more consistent answers in history and somatic questions (81% and 65% reached agreement), and that there were more differences in mood, energy, and anxiety questions (up to 56% in full agreement). "Outpatient", "high financial status", "poor working condition", and "high education level" were found to be significant positive predictors for patients rating higher than clinicians or patients and clinicians reaching agreement as opposed to clinicians rating higher than patients.

LIMITATIONS

The cross-sectional nature of our study undermines the interpretation of the results across the MDD treatment course.

CONCLUSIONS

It is sufficient to use the self-report version of a questionnaire to screen, monitor, and detect remission for MDD symptoms. Complete assessment of depression severity should take both clinician-rated scales and self-reported measures into consideration. Factors other than source of admission, financial status, working condition, and education level should be further investigated for the discrepancy between self-report and clinician rating.

Chris Cornell, the Black Hole Sun, and the Seasonality of Suicide

PURPOSE

Seattle-inspired rock and roll superstar Chris Cornell died by suicide in May 2017. In the northern hemisphere, May represents the peak of the widely replicated but still unexplained seasonal spring rhythm in suicide. Years earlier, Cornell had suffered openly from recurrent bouts of severe depression, and his early musical lyrics do indeed suggest an enduring sensitivity to the vicissitudes of depressed and suicidal states. Cornell's most famous song, Black Hole Sun, suggests a mixed mood state, the incidence of which also peaks in the spring. The present work explores Cornell's May suicide from a chronobiologic perspective.

METHODS

Review of Cornell's lyrics and literature on suicide.

RESULTS

Cornell's lyrics contain clear indicators of mixed depressive and seasonal imagery, highlighting 3 fundamental axioms of suicidology: (1) the yearly suicide rhythm peaks in May in the northern hemisphere, (2) mixed depressive states are particularly lethal, and (3) the suicide risk increases dramatically when recovering from depression and mood turns mixed.

CONCLUSIONS

Cornell, in his life and music, left us with a novel and important hypothesis about the spring seasonality of suicide, namely, that the yearly suicide risk becomes maximal when winter turns to spring and there emerges a deadly mixed mood state under a May photoperiod, i.e., the suicide risk is maximal when a Black Hole Sun occurs in May. It is hoped that Cornell's legacy and sensitive hypothesis inspire research into the etiology and treatment of the spring seasonality of suicide risk and mixed mood states.

LIMITATIONS

The Cornell hypothesis was formulated based in part on several speculative inferences regarding the course of his functioning just prior to his suicide.

Mixed States: Modelling and Management

Our current conceptualisation of mixed states, defined as co-occurring manic and depressive symptoms, is unlikely to advance our knowledge or inform clinical practice. Episodes of mixed states can no longer be coded in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), and the 'mixed features specifier' fails to capture the most common mixed state presentations. This reflects a lack of understanding of both the importance of mixed states and their underlying pathophysiology. Indeed, research into the nature of mixed states is scarce and uninformative, and most clinical practice guidelines fail to provide advice regarding their management. In this paper, we proffer a reconceptualisation of mixed states that provides a framework for informing clinical practice and research. It is based on the ACE model, which deconstructs mood disorders into three domains of symptoms: activity, cognition, and emotion. Symptoms within each domain vary independently over time and in different directions (towards either excitation or inhibition). By deconstructing mood disorders into component domains, mixed states can be explained as the product of different domains varying 'out of sync'. In most cases, the aetiology of mixed states is unknown. Alongside such idiopathic mixed states, we describe three potential causes of mixed states that are important to consider when formulating management: transitions, ultradian cycling, and treatment-emergent affective switches. In addition to providing guidance on the identification of various kinds of mixed states, we discuss practical strategies for their management, including the monitoring of ACE domains and functioning, to inform the use of psychoeducation and lifestyle changes, psychotherapy, pharmacology, and electroconvulsive therapy.

Feasibility of the Korean version of the Bipolar Depression Rating Scale in Adolescents with Early-Onset Bipolar Disorder

OBJECTIVE

This study explores the feasibility and psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (BDRS) in adolescents with Early-onset bipolar disorders.

METHODS

Fifty-three participants (aged 13-18) with early-onset bipolar disorders (40 depressed and 18 euthymic, 5 patients were assessed at depressed state and reassessed after remission) were recruited. All participants were assessed using the BDRS, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), the Montgomery-Asperg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), and the Modified Overt Aggression scale (MOAS).

RESULTS

BDRS exhibited good internal validity and significant correlations with the HAM-D and the MADRS. In item to scale correlations, all items on the BDRS were significantly correlated with the BDRS total scores except for 'increased motor drive' and 'increased speech', 'depressed mood' and 'worthlessness' showed the highest mean scores and endorsement rates. BDRS score of the depressed group was significantly higher compared with the euthymic group. Three factors (i.e., psychosomatic, mood, and mixed) were identified in the principal component analysis and hierarchical cluster analysis of the BDRS.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we report that the Korean version of BDRS is a feasible and reliable tool for the assessment of depression in adolescents with Early-onset bipolar disorders.

A clinically useful self-report measure of psychiatric patients' satisfaction with the initial evaluation

Patient satisfaction is one component of the quality of care. Studies of satisfaction in samples of established patients are biased because dissatisfied patients are more likely to have dropped out of treatment. We, therefore, sought to develop a new instrument assessing patients' satisfaction with the initial psychiatric evaluation. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project we describe the development, reliability, and validity of the Clinically Useful Patient Satisfaction Scale (CUPSS). The CUPSS is a brief, self-administered questionnaire covering 3 areas: clinician's attitude and behavior, office environment and staff, and overall satisfaction. A sample of psychiatric outpatients (n=412) and partial hospital patients (n=500) completed the measure immediately after their initial meeting with the psychiatrist. The scale had high internal consistency, and all item-scale correlations were significant. All items were significantly correlated with each of the indicators of global satisfaction. There was sufficient variability in satisfaction ratings to detect differences amongst clinicians. The results of the present study of psychiatric outpatients and partial hospital patients indicate that the CUPSS was minimally to not at all burdensome to complete, it had good psychometric properties, and it can discriminate amongst clinicians.

Measures of the DSM-5 mixed-features specifier of major depressive disorder

During the past two decades, a number of studies have found that depressed patients frequently have manic symptoms intermixed with depressive symptoms. While the frequency of mixed syndromes are more common in bipolar than in unipolar depressives, mixed states are also common in patients with major depressive disorder. The admixture of symptoms may be evident when depressed patients present for treatment, or they may emerge during ongoing treatment. In some patients, treatment with antidepressant medication might precipitate the emergence of mixed states. It would therefore be useful to systematically inquire into the presence of manic/hypomanic symptoms in depressed patients. We can anticipate that increased attention will likely be given to mixed depression because of changes in the DSM-5. In the present article, I review instruments that have been utilized to assess the presence and severity of manic symptoms and therefore could be potentially used to identify the DSM-5 mixed-features specifier in depressed patients and to evaluate the course and outcome of treatment. In choosing which measure to use, clinicians and researchers should consider whether the measure assesses both depression and mania/hypomania, assesses all or only some of the DSM-5 criteria for the mixed-features specifier, or assesses manic/hypomanic symptoms that are not part of the DSM-5 definition. Feasibility, more so than reliability and validity, will likely determine whether these measures are incorporated into routine clinical practice.

Guidelines for the recognition and management of mixed depression

A significant minority of people presenting with a major depressive episode (MDE) experience co-occurring subsyndromal hypo/manic symptoms. As this presentation may have important prognostic and treatment implications, the DSM-5 codified a new nosological entity, the "mixed features specifier," referring to individuals meeting threshold criteria for an MDE and subthreshold symptoms of (hypo)mania or to individuals with syndromal mania and subthreshold depressive symptoms. The mixed features specifier adds to a growing list of monikers that have been put forward to describe phenotypes characterized by the admixture of depressive and hypomanic symptoms (e.g., mixed depression, depression with mixed features, or depressive mixed states [DMX]). Current treatment guidelines, regulatory approvals, as well the current evidentiary base provide insufficient decision support to practitioners who provide care to individuals presenting with an MDE with mixed features. In addition, all existing psychotropic agents evaluated in mixed patients have largely been confined to patient populations meeting the DSM-IV definition of "mixed states" wherein the co-occurrence of threshold-level mania and threshold-level MDE was required. Toward the aim of assisting clinicians providing care to adults with MDE and mixed features, we have assembled a panel of experts on mood disorders to develop these guidelines on the recognition and treatment of mixed depression, based on the few studies that have focused specifically on DMX as well as decades of cumulated clinical experience.

A pragmatic approach to the diagnosis and treatment of mixed features in adults with mood disorders

Mixed features specifier (MFS) is a new nosological entity defined and operationalized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), 5th Edition. The impetus to introduce the MFS and supplant mixed states was protean, including the lack of ecological validity, high rates of misdiagnosis, and guideline discordant treatment for mixed states. Mixed features specifier identifies a phenotype in psychiatry with greater illness burden, as evidenced by earlier age at onset, higher episode frequency and chronicity, psychiatric and medical comorbidity, suicidality, and suboptimal response to conventional antidepressants. Mixed features in psychiatry have historical, conceptual, and nosological relevance; MFS according to DSM-5, is inherently neo-Kraepelinian insofar as individuals with either Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) or Bipolar Disorder (BD) may be affected by MFS. Clinicians are encouraged to screen all patients presenting with a major depressive episode (or hypomanic episode) for MFS. Although "overlapping symptoms" were excluded from the diagnostic criteria (eg, agitation, anxiety, irritability, insomnia), clinicians are encouraged to probe for these nonspecific symptoms as a possible proxy of co-existing MFS. In addition to conventional antidepressants, second generation antipsychotics and/or conventional mood stabilizers (eg, lithium) may be considered as first-line therapies for individuals with a depressive episode as part of MDD or BD with mixed features.

Evaluating response to mood stabilizers in patients with mixed depression: A study of agreement between three different mania rating scales and a depression rating scale

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to evaluate agreement between three pairs formed by one of three mania scales (Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS], Bech-Rafaelsen Mania Scale [BRMS], or the Clinician-Administered Rating Scale for Mania [CARS-M]) and a single depression scale (21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [21-HAM-D]) for evaluation of response to mood stabilizers in patients with mixed bipolar disorder.

METHODS

Between 2010 and 2014, 68 consecutive bipolar type I and II outpatients with mixed depression as per DSM-IV-TR and Cincinnati criteria were included in this 8-week open-label trial to randomly receive carbamazepine, lithium carbonate, or valproic acid as monotherapy.

RESULTS

Patterns of response (defined as a reduction of at least 50% in one of the mania scales and on the 21-HAM-D) were strikingly similar: 21-HAM-D+YMRS=22.1%, 21-HAM-D+BRMS=20.6%, and 21-HAM-D+CARS-M=23.5% (p<0.368). Assessment of agreement revealed very high kappa coefficients: 21-HAM-D+YMRS vs. 21-HAM-D+CARS-M, kappa=0.87; 21-HAM-D+YMRS vs. 21-HAM-D+BRMS, kappa=0.78; 21-HAM-D+CARS-M vs. 21-HAM-D+BRMS, kappa=0.91 (p<0.001).

LIMITATIONS

The decision to combine a depression rating scale with any one mania rating scale to assess treatment response in patients with mixed depression is questionable.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that any one of the three tested mania rating scales (YMRS, BRMS, and CARS-M) can be combined with the 21-HAM-D to assess treatment response in patients with mixed bipolar disorder. This should give clinicians an added measure of confidence in using this strategy until valid, and specific instruments are developed for assessment of mixed states.

Discriminating Between Bipolar Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder

Rates of misdiagnosis between major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder have been reported to be substantial, and the consequence of such misdiagnosis is likely to be a delay in achieving effective control of symptoms, in some cases spanning many years. Particularly in the midst of a depressive episode, or early in the illness course, it may be challenging to distinguish the 2 mood disorders purely on the basis of cross-sectional features. To date, no useful biological markers have been reliably shown to distinguish between bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder.

The State of the Art of the DSM-5 "with Mixed Features" Specifier

The new DSM-5 “with mixed features” specifier (MFS) has renewed the interest of the scientific community in mixed states, leading not only to new clinical studies but also to new criticisms of the current nosology. Consequently, in our paper we have reviewed the latest literature, trying to understand the reactions of psychiatrists to the new nosology and its epidemiological, prognostic, and clinical consequences. It seems that the most widespread major criticism is the exclusion from the DSM-5 MFS of overlapping symptoms (such as psychomotor agitation, irritability, and distractibility), with a consequent reduction in diagnostic power. On the other hand, undoubtedly the new DSM-5 classification has helped to identify more patients suffering from a mixed state by broadening the narrow DSM-IV-TR criteria. As for the clinical presentation, the epidemiological data, and the therapeutic outcomes, the latest literature does not point out a univocal point of view and further research is needed to fully assess the implications of the new DSM-5 MFS. It is our view that a diagnostic category should be preferred to a specifier and mixed states should be better considered as a spectrum of states, according to what was stated many years ago by Kraepelin.