Psychoneuroendocrinology · 2020
The relevance of chronic stress for the acute stress reaction in people at elevated risk for psychosis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Söder Eveline, Krkovic Katarina, Lincoln Tania M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Theoretical models and empirical evidence suggest that alterations of the acute stress reaction are a vulnerability indicator of psychosis. However, more studies are needed that use laboratory stressors and a multimodal assessment of the stress reaction. Furthermore, it needs to be clarified whether alterations of the acute stress reaction result from the chronic stress level.
METHODS: We recruited participants at familial (n = 32) and symptomatic risk (n = 43) for psychosis and a low-risk control group (n = 35). We assessed their chronic stress levels (self-report, hair cortisol concentrations) and self-reported (subjective, affective, paranoia) as well as physiological (heart rate, skin conductance level, cortisol) reactions to the Trier Social Stress Test.
RESULTS: The groups did not differ in their acute stress reaction but both at-risk groups showed higher levels of self-reported chronic stress. Chronic stress predicted changes in negative affect, paranoia and skin conductance level in the total sample.
CONCLUSIONS: We could not confirm that alterations of the acute stress reaction are an early vulnerability indicator of psychosis and conclude that they might develop at a later time-point on the trajectory to psychosis. The high chronic stress level of the at-risk groups might constitute an intermediate state that increases the likelihood of altered stress reactions in later risk stages. To test this, future work needs to investigate the temporal order between chronic stress levels, acute stress reactions and symptom development across the psychosis continuum.
METHODS: We recruited participants at familial (n = 32) and symptomatic risk (n = 43) for psychosis and a low-risk control group (n = 35). We assessed their chronic stress levels (self-report, hair cortisol concentrations) and self-reported (subjective, affective, paranoia) as well as physiological (heart rate, skin conductance level, cortisol) reactions to the Trier Social Stress Test.
RESULTS: The groups did not differ in their acute stress reaction but both at-risk groups showed higher levels of self-reported chronic stress. Chronic stress predicted changes in negative affect, paranoia and skin conductance level in the total sample.
CONCLUSIONS: We could not confirm that alterations of the acute stress reaction are an early vulnerability indicator of psychosis and conclude that they might develop at a later time-point on the trajectory to psychosis. The high chronic stress level of the at-risk groups might constitute an intermediate state that increases the likelihood of altered stress reactions in later risk stages. To test this, future work needs to investigate the temporal order between chronic stress levels, acute stress reactions and symptom development across the psychosis continuum.