Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology-University "Federico II" of Naples, Italy.
Hermanas Hospitalarias, Villa San Giuseppe Hospital, Ascoli Piceno, Italy; FoRiPsi, Rome, Italy.
J Affect Disord. 2013 Nov;151(2):540-550. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2013.06.041. Epub 2013 Jul 12.
The aim of this study was to assess whether different affective temperaments could be related to a specific mood disorder diagnosis and/or to different therapeutic choices in inpatients admitted for an acute relapse of their primary mood disorder.
Hundred and twenty-nine inpatients were consecutively assessed by means of the Structured and Clinical Interview for axis-I disorders/Patient edition and by the Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris, and San Diego auto-questionnaire, Young Mania Rating Scale, Hamilton Scale for Depression and for Anxiety, Brief Psychiatry Rating Scale, Clinical Global impression, Drug Attitude Inventory, Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, and Symptoms Checklist-90 items version, along with records of clinical and demographic data.
The following prevalence rates for axis-I mood diagnoses were detected: bipolar disorder type I (BD-I, 28%), type II (31%), type not otherwise specified (BD-NOS, 33%), major depressive disorder (4%), and schizoaffective disorder (4%). Mean scores on the hyperthymic temperament scale were significantly higher in BD-I and BD-NOS, and in mixed and manic acute states. Hyperthymic temperament was significantly more frequent in BD-I and BD-NOS patients, whereas depressive temperament in BD-II ones. Hyperthymic and irritable temperaments were found more frequently in mixed episodes, while patients with depressive and mixed episodes more frequently exhibited anxious and depressive temperaments. Affective temperaments were associated with specific symptom and psychopathology clusters, with an orthogonal subdivision between hyperthymic temperament and anxious/cyclothymic/depressive/irritable temperaments. Therapeutic choices were often poorly differentiated among temperaments and mood states.
Cross-sectional design; sample size.
Although replication studies are needed, current results suggest that temperament-specific clusters of symptoms severity and psychopathology domains could be described.
本研究旨在评估不同的情感气质是否与特定的心境障碍诊断相关，以及与因主要心境障碍急性复发而住院的患者的不同治疗选择相关。
129 名住院患者连续接受了轴 I 障碍的结构性和临床访谈/患者版，以及孟菲斯、比萨、巴黎和圣地亚哥自动问卷的情绪评估、Young 躁狂评定量表、汉密尔顿抑郁和焦虑量表、简要精神病评定量表、临床总体印象、药物态度量表、巴瑞特冲动量表、多伦多述情障碍量表和症状清单-90 项版本评估，以及记录临床和人口统计学数据。
发现以下轴 I 心境诊断的患病率：I 型双相情感障碍（BD-I，28%）、II 型（31%）、未特定型（BD-NOS，33%）、重性抑郁障碍（4%）和精神分裂情感障碍（4%）。在 BD-I 和 BD-NOS 以及混合和躁狂急性状态中，高活力气质量表的平均得分显著较高。BD-I 和 BD-NOS 患者中高活力气质更为常见，而 BD-II 患者中则为抑郁气质。混合发作中更常出现高活力和易怒气质，而抑郁和混合发作的患者更常表现出焦虑和抑郁气质。情感气质与特定的症状和精神病学集群相关，高活力气质与焦虑/环性/抑郁/易怒气质之间存在正交细分。治疗选择在气质和心境状态之间往往区分不佳。
横断面设计；样本量。
尽管需要进行复制研究，但目前的结果表明，可以描述症状严重程度和精神病学领域的气质特异性集群。
