Täschner K L
Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr. 1983 Jul;51(7):235-48. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1002229.
From 237 patients examined for drug-induced psychoses, 50 cannabis psychoses were examined according to the criterion "main cause of addiction" and 107 were examined according to the criterion "consumption during the last three months before hospitalization". The cannabis psychoses were compared to the other drug-induced psychoses as well as to a control group consisting of 219 schizophrenic patients. General agreement was found with the other drug-induced psychoses as well as with the group of schizophrenic patients. The variation from the symptomatology of the schizophrenics is generally common to both the cannabis psychoses and the other drug-induced psychoses. Judging by the results of our investigations, it must be concluded that there is no disease "cannabis psychosis" in its own right, just as the disease "drug-induced psychosis" also does not exist in its own right. While there is a certain slight drug-specific psychopathological undertone, it does not entitle us to speak of a syndromatic or indeed a nosological entity. The psychopathological cross section does not permit a differentiation in the individual psychoses groups mentioned, although this has often been attempted in the literature. That there are no relevant psychopathological differences between cannabis psychoses and endogenous schizophrenia could, for one, be based on the fact that we are observing the final stage of one and the same underlying pathological process. In this case both syndromes would in practice be endogenous psychoses, with the cause not being known in one case. The psychopathologic similarity of these two psychoses forms could, however, also be based on the assumption that cannabis psychoses are triggered schizophrenias, so that we could in both cases be dealing with one and the same disease. We see the solution to the problem of diagnosing symptomatic psychoses, and in particular cannabis psychoses, in making a diagnosis that takes the etiology into consideration in addition to the syndrome diagnosis.
在对237名药物性精神病患者进行检查时,根据“成瘾主要原因”标准对50例大麻精神病患者进行了检查,根据“住院前最后三个月内的使用情况”标准对107例患者进行了检查。将大麻精神病与其他药物性精神病以及由219名精神分裂症患者组成的对照组进行了比较。发现与其他药物性精神病以及精神分裂症患者组总体一致。大麻精神病和其他药物性精神病与精神分裂症患者症状学的差异通常是常见的。从我们的调查结果来看,必须得出结论,不存在独立的“大麻精神病”这种疾病,就如同也不存在独立的“药物性精神病”这种疾病一样。虽然存在某种轻微的药物特异性精神病理特征,但这并不足以让我们将其称为一种综合征或确切的病种实体。精神病理横断面不允许在上述各个精神病组之间进行区分,尽管文献中经常尝试这样做。大麻精神病和内源性精神分裂症之间不存在相关的精神病理差异,一方面可能是基于这样一个事实,即我们正在观察同一个潜在病理过程的最终阶段。在这种情况下,这两种综合征在实际中都将是内源性精神病,只是在一种情况下病因不明。然而,这两种精神病形式的精神病理相似性也可能基于这样一种假设,即大麻精神病是由精神分裂症引发的,这样在这两种情况下我们可能面对的是同一种疾病。我们认为,对于症状性精神病,特别是大麻精神病的诊断问题,解决办法是除了进行综合征诊断外,还要做出考虑病因的诊断。