Comprehensive psychiatry · 2013
Response to treatments in youth with disruptive behavior disorders.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Masi Gabriele, Muratori Pietro, Manfredi Azzurra, Lenzi Francesca, Polidori Lisa, Ruglioni Laura, Muratori Filippo, Milone Annarita
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Predictors of poor response to treatments in youths with disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs), including conduct disorder (CD) and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), are under-studied. Multimodal psychosocial interventions are the best option, but a significant portion of patients needs adjunctive pharmacotherapy. The concept of "psychopathy", and namely, the callous (lack of empathy and guilt) and unemotional (shallow emotions) trait, has been considered a possible specifier indicating a more severe subgroup of patients. We explored whether the callous-unemotional trait (CU) may affect the response to multimodal treatment in referred youths with DBDs.
METHOD: 118 youths (102 males, age range 6-14years, mean age 11.1±2.5years) completed a 12-month multimodal intervention, 48 of whom (41%) needed an associated pharmacotherapy. The patients were assessed according to psychopathological profile (Child Behavior Checklist, CBCL), severity and improvement (Clinical Global Impression-Severity and Improvement scores, CGI-S and CGI-I), functional impairment (Children-Global Assessment Scale, C-GAS), and psychopathic dimension (Antisocial Process Screening Device, APSD), including CU dimension.
RESULTS: 58 patients (49.2%) were non-responders. They had more frequently a diagnosis of CD than ODD, presented a comorbid mood disorder, higher CBCL scores in rule-breaking behavior, and higher APSD ("psychopathic") scores. Subjects with higher or lower CU differed only according to the rate of responders (35% vs. 60%, p<.05). The linear blockwise regression indicated that pre-treatment functional impairment (C-GAS) and baseline CU trait were predictors of non-response. The logistic regression indicated that only the value of baseline APSD-CU trait was a predictor of non-response.
CONCLUSIONS: A careful assessment of baseline clinical functioning and psychopathological features, namely the psychopathic traits, can identify the most problematic patients, and has specific prognostic and treatment implications.
METHOD: 118 youths (102 males, age range 6-14years, mean age 11.1±2.5years) completed a 12-month multimodal intervention, 48 of whom (41%) needed an associated pharmacotherapy. The patients were assessed according to psychopathological profile (Child Behavior Checklist, CBCL), severity and improvement (Clinical Global Impression-Severity and Improvement scores, CGI-S and CGI-I), functional impairment (Children-Global Assessment Scale, C-GAS), and psychopathic dimension (Antisocial Process Screening Device, APSD), including CU dimension.
RESULTS: 58 patients (49.2%) were non-responders. They had more frequently a diagnosis of CD than ODD, presented a comorbid mood disorder, higher CBCL scores in rule-breaking behavior, and higher APSD ("psychopathic") scores. Subjects with higher or lower CU differed only according to the rate of responders (35% vs. 60%, p<.05). The linear blockwise regression indicated that pre-treatment functional impairment (C-GAS) and baseline CU trait were predictors of non-response. The logistic regression indicated that only the value of baseline APSD-CU trait was a predictor of non-response.
CONCLUSIONS: A careful assessment of baseline clinical functioning and psychopathological features, namely the psychopathic traits, can identify the most problematic patients, and has specific prognostic and treatment implications.