Department of Psychiatry, PGIMER (Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research), Chandigarh, India.
Asian J Psychiatr. 2014 Feb;7(1):6-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajp.2013.07.006. Epub 2013 Aug 22.
Although catatonia is known to psychiatrists for more than a century, it is still poorly understood, often under recognized, have inspired debate and criticism about nosological status of the catatonic syndrome in recent times without reaching its conclusion. It can present with a number of psychiatric and medical illnesses and is easily treatable, though treatment response varies depending upon the underlying condition and can lead on to a multitude of complications, if not treated. Some issues are more than forty catatonic signs are available to scientific audience for diagnosis; threshold number for labelling varies according to the nosological system followed and the underlying condition; and mood stabilizers like carbamazepine and lithium are helpful in some cases of idiopathic periodic catatonia. Researchers have been asking for a separate diagnostic category for catatonia since long and the debate has gained pace over the last few years, with new editions of both DSM and ICD coming up. Therefore, this paper looks at the controversies associated with the diagnosis and classification of catatonia, the arguments and counter-arguments and future directions, in crisp.
尽管刻板症在精神科医生中已经存在了一个多世纪，但它仍然知之甚少，经常被忽视。最近，关于刻板症候群的分类地位引发了争论和批评，但尚未得出结论。它可以表现为多种精神和医学疾病，且易于治疗，但治疗反应取决于潜在的病情，并可能导致多种并发症，如果不治疗的话。一些问题是，超过四十种刻板症候可供科学界用于诊断；标记的阈值数量根据所遵循的分类系统和潜在的病情而有所不同；卡马西平和锂等心境稳定剂在某些特发性周期性刻板症病例中是有帮助的。研究人员长期以来一直要求为刻板症设立一个单独的诊断类别，近年来，随着 DSM 和 ICD 的新版本的出现，这一争论愈演愈烈。因此，本文着眼于与刻板症的诊断和分类相关的争议、论点和反论点以及未来的方向。
