Phenomenology and treatment of Catatonia: A descriptive study from north India.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Studies on clinical features of catatonia in the Indian population are few in number.
AIM: To study the phenomenology, clinical profile and treatment response of subjects admitted to the psychiatry inpatient with catatonia.
MATERIALS AND
METHODS
Detailed treatment records of all the inpatients were scanned for the period January 2004 to December 2008. Patients with catatonia (diagnosed as two symptoms as per the Bush Francis Catatonia Rating scale) were included.
RESULTS
During the study period, 1056 subjects were admitted in the inpatient unit, of which 51 (4.8% of the total admissions) had catatonic features and had been rated on the Bush Francis Catatonia Rating scale. The mean age of the sample was 30.02 years (SD=14.6; range 13-69), with an almost equal gender ratio. Most of the patients presenting with catatonia were diagnosed as having psychotic disorders (40; 74.8%), of which the most common diagnosis was schizophrenia (27; 52.9%) of the catatonic subtype (20; 39.2%). Three subjects with primary diagnosis of a psychotic disorder had comorbid depression. Other diagnoses included mood disorders (7; 13.72%) and organic brain syndromes (04; 7.9%). According to the Bush Francis Rating scale, the common signs and symptoms exhibited by the subjects were mutism (94.1%), followed by immobility/stupor (78.5%), staring (78.4%), negativism (74.5%), rigidity (63%) and posturing/catalepsy (61.8%). All the patients were initially treated with lorazepam. Electroconvulsive therapy was required in most cases (42; 82.35%).
CONCLUSION
The common symptoms of catatonia are mutism, immobility/stupor, staring, posturing, negativism and rigidity. The most common underlying psychiatric diagnosis was schizophrenia.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.