Children born with the genetic mutation known as 22q Some kinds of psychosis are brought on by specific conditions or circumstances that include the following:. Brief psychotic disorder, sometimes called brief reactive psychosis, can occur during periods of extreme personal stress like the death of a family member.
Someone experiencing brief reactive psychosis will generally recover in a few days to a few weeks, depending on the source of the stress. Psychosis can be triggered by the use of alcohol or drugs, including stimulants such as methamphetamine and cocaine. Some prescription drugs like steroids and stimulants can also cause symptoms of psychosis. People who have an addition to alcohol or certain drugs can experience psychotic symptoms if they suddenly stop drinking or taking those drugs.
A head injury or an illness or infection that affects the brain can cause symptoms of psychosis. Psychotic disorders can be triggered by stress , drug or alcohol use, injury, or illness. They can also appear on their own. The following types of disorders may have psychotic symptoms:. When someone has bipolar disorder , their moods swing from very high to very low.
When their mood is high and positive, they may have symptoms of psychosis. They may feel extremely good and believe they have special powers. When their mood is depressed, the individual may have psychotic symptoms that make them feel angry, sad, or frightened. These symptoms include thinking someone is trying to harm them.
This is major depression with psychotic symptoms. Schizophrenia is a lifelong disease that is generally accompanied by psychotic symptoms. Psychosis is diagnosed through a psychiatric evaluation. Medical tests and X-rays may be used to determine whether there is an underlying illness causing the symptoms.
For example, small children often have imaginary friends with whom they talk. This just represents imaginative play, which is completely normal for children. Treating psychosis may involve a combination of medications and therapy. Migration especially from a developing country — associated with a 3-fold increased risk of schizophrenia.
Increased risk also demonstrated in children of migrants second generation effect. Urban living — associated with a 2. This risk increases with heavier use, use starting in adolescence, and use of compounds with a high tetrahydrocannabinol content. Perhaps because of such ambiguities, most people who receive the psychosis-risk label will never actually become psychotic, according to Allen Francis, a psychiatrist emeritus at Duke University and chair of the group that created the DSM-IV.
In a study, for example, a team led by psychiatrist Patrick McGorry of the University of Melbourne in Australia found that six out of every 10 people deemed at high risk of psychosis did not end up developing it. False diagnoses are problematic, Francis says, because of the perils of unnecessary treatment. People recognized as having mental health disorders are often prescribed antipsychotic drugs, which can be dangerous, he notes. Side effects can include significant weight gain, increases in blood glucose and cholesterol levels, and movement problems.
If a patient is falsely labeled, he or she can end up enduring those side effects unnecessarily. To improve the accuracy of such verdicts, researchers are trying to identify better warning signs of psychosis, such as finding genetic signatures that may foretell the illness and anatomical patterns that doctors might see in brain scans. Some scientists are working on parallel projects geared toward finding biological markers that can help them predict other mental disorders, such as bipolar disorder and major depression.
At the moment, treating people such as Mike with nondrug remedies can minimize the hazards of misdiagnoses. For Mike, a course of cognitive-behavior therapy and, eventually, a low dose of antidepressants controlled the worst of his symptoms. No one knows for sure whether Mike was in danger of becoming psychotic, but he is slowly improving. Such cases will warrant consideration as the DSM-5 Psychotic Disorders Work Group decides whether to adopt attenuated psychosis syndrome as a valid diagnosis, reject it entirely, or include it as a provisional diagnosis and request more research.
The final decision will be made public by May Already a subscriber? A third paper 49 describes the Psychosis Polyrisk Score PPS , which was developed to measure the multivariable exposure to several risk factors that could contribute to the development of psychosis. Polygenetic risk scores 28 have recently been used to examine prediction, but the use of non-genetic factors has been more limited. It is possible that prediction of transition to psychosis will be improved by incorporating not only clinical factors, but also factors from domains that might contribute to a greater understanding of the interaction between clinical, environmental and neurobiological factors 9.
These domains may include neuroimaging, electrophysiology or serology, either individually or in combination. Based on the comprehensive reviews 50 and meta-analyses discussed below, over 50 treatment studies have been conducted in the CHR literature. However, in addition to the 20 randomized controlled trials RCTs examining the impact of treatment for individuals at CHR, there are also small pilot studies, open trials and trials that recruit mixed populations, such as those that include both CHR individuals and first episode psychosis patients.
In these trials, treatment modalities are highly variable and include cognitive behavior therapy CBT , cognitive remediation, family interventions, integrative psychological therapy, antipsychotics, omega-3 fatty acids, d-serine and glycine The most common outcomes were transition to a psychotic disorder, APS and global functioning. We have previously reviewed in detail the key RCTs where 10 used a psychosocial treatment, seven were pharmacological and three used a combination treatment We present a brief summary below.
The most common and probably most successful intervention to date is CBT. In the two RCTs that compared an active treatment to CBT, one did not show any transition or symptom differences between supportive therapy and CBT 55 and the other demonstrated that the Non-Directive Reflective Listening condition was superior to the CBT condition in decreasing the distress related to attenuated psychotic symptoms However, in these studies both groups demonstrated improvement and again, transition rates were low.
Only one RCT used a family intervention comparing three sessions of psychoeducation on stress management to Family Focused Therapy FFT , which was an session therapy of symptom management, communication, social and problem-solving Although there were no differences in transition rates, improvement in negative symptoms and social and role functioning was observed in both groups.
Consisting of CBT, skills training, cognitive remediation, and a psychoeducational multifamily group, IPT significantly reduced transition to psychosis at both and month follow-up compared to supportive counselling. Results of two RCTs comparing N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor modulators D-serine or glycine to placebo reported that there no effect of glycine on any measure 59 , however, the use of D-serine study demonstrated a significant improvement in negative symptoms compared to placebo Mixed results have emerged from trials of antipsychotics both with and without psychosocial treatments 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , Generally antipsychotics failed to reduce transition but did improve APS.
Similarly, there have been mixed results from the three RCTs comparing omega-3 fatty acids to placebo 66 , 67 , Numerous recently published meta-analyses have attempted to synthesise treatment efficacy on a diverse set of outcomes including transition to a psychotic disorder 69 , 70 , social functioning 71 , attenuated psychotic symptoms 72 , 73 and negative symptoms Reviews have examined the treatment evidence using both conventional pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis NMA.
An NMA allows for evaluations between multiple treatments i. Although NMAs have several advantages, one such advantage being the ability to compare interventions that have not been directly compared in an RCT, it is recommended that researchers report and compare the results from both pairwise and NMAs for a comprehensive understanding of the literature None of these NMAs were able to show that any one treatment was more effective in reducing transition, APS or negative symptoms.
This does not mean that the treatments had no effect, it means is that none of the treatments differed from one another in terms of effectiveness. This may be due to several factors. In all these NMAs, the analyses typically included very few trials and often treatment comparisons were represented by a single trial.
Thus, the networks had sparse connections, which inevitably led to imprecise estimates and wide confidence intervals. However, there have been several pairwise meta-analyses published either in conjunction with the NMA or independently. In the pairwise meta-analysis by Devoe et al.
The main limitation of this pairwise meta-analysis was the lack of consistency in the comparison conditions e. However, the conclusion that CBT was superior at preventing transition to psychosis is informative as the results were based exclusively on direct evidence.
CBT was also associated with trend-level reductions in attenuated psychotic symptoms compared to control treatment at 12 months There was, however, no evidence for any one treatment being effective in reducing negative symptoms 74 , or social functioning in CHR individuals The limitations of these analyses were that most RCTs were not designed to target negative symptoms or functioning as primary outcomes. However, this Cochrane Review had some methodological flaws as the last search they conducted was in August and subsequently published the review 2 years later.
The most concerning element of the Cochrane Review is that the largest Omega-3 study i. This study included participants and concluded that Omega-3 clearly failed to replicate the findings of the first trial, and that Omega-3 was not effective at preventing transition relative to placebo. Furthermore, at least one meta-analyses published before the Cochrane Review, included three Omega-3 trials and had already concluded that there is no aggregate evidence that Omega-3 reduces transition at any timepoint A more detailed criticism of this review addressing its methodological concerns has been published by Nelson et al.
As a further update to the literature, a recent search in SCOPUS for trials published between July and October was conducted and revealed three relevant RCTs examining the efficacy of: cannabidiol 79 , oxytocin 80 and systemic therapy 81 in CHR individuals. The trial examining systemic therapy showed a trend towards significant improvements in positive and depressive symptoms as well as social support and self-esteem, relative to supportive therapy The cannabidiol RCT 79 found that it may partially normalize alterations in parahipppocampal, striatal and midbrain function linked with the CHR state.
Finally, the oxytocin RCT 80 found that, relative to placebo, the administration of oxytocin was associated with increased hippocampal blood flow, although the effect at the second timepoint was not maintained after adjustment for the effect of global blood flow. Overall, it is the psychosocial treatments, in particular CBT, that have demonstrated significant improvements in CHR individuals relative to monitoring or placebo.
Several issues may have impacted the results of these trials including some methodological concerns. Fourth, many of the studies report multiple outcomes, even those for which the treatment was unlikely to have been designed. For example, most trials presented functioning as an outcome, yet none of the trials reviewed were designed specifically to improve functioning. Finally, heterogeneity in CHR samples is another critical confound in these studies, as will be discussed later in this article.
However, what must be emphasized is that it is possible that any kind of treatment might be helpful for CHR youth, as trial participants did show improvements particularly in clinical symptoms, even though there may not have been significant differences between the treatments being compared.
Furthermore, potential differences may have been obscured if participants were receiving other treatments, such as medication or support, supplementary to treatment not under experimental investigation. For example, in the omega-3 RCT 68 , both omega-3 and placebo groups received cognitive-behavioural case management CBCM and possibly antidepressants, which may have limited the measurable efficacy of omega-3 One issue that has been raised several times is the heterogenous presentation of CHR samples.
This clinical heterogeneity has likely played a role in the outcomes of many clinical trials. Heterogeneity is first observed at the diagnostic level In addition to attenuated psychotic symptoms, these young people often suffer from comorbidities, in particular anxiety and depression 86 , 87 , Poor social and role functioning is common and is at times, equivalent to those experiencing a first episode of psychosis Many, but not all, have negative symptoms 89 , 90 , 91 and in some cases, these negative symptoms endure long enough that they are identified as being persistent negative symptoms As a group, CHR individuals have problems with neurocognition, which tends to be intermediary to healthy controls and those with a first episode of psychosis 93 , Attenuated psychotic symptoms typically decline overtime in longitudinal studies and there are CHR individuals who achieve complete remission within the first few months or even weeks 83 , although the differences in those who remit early versus later have not been established.
The outcome trajectories in CHR youth display the same heterogeneity as is found in clinical presentation.
However, far less is known about the individuals who meet CHR criteria, but will not go on to develop a psychotic illness 3. Unfortunately, even where there is remission of symptoms, there is still evidence of poor functioning. Recent papers from NAPLS 98 further differentiated those who did not convert to psychosis into three groups based on symptom ratings at 24 months: 1 those in remission defined as having subthreshold ratings on attenuated psychotic symptoms, 2 symptomatic individuals defined as those who continue to have non-worsening attenuated psychotic symptoms and 3 progression where attenuated psychotic symptoms either worsened or new symptoms emerged.
Individuals from the three trajectory groups differed in functioning, cognition and a range of symptoms at 24 months.
Recent studies have also provided support for heterogeneous trajectories in CHR outcome In one study, using latent profile analysis, three separate classes of at-risk individuals emerged Moreover, the rates of conversion to psychosis in Class 3 were A second very recent study, using group-based multi-trajectory modelling 99 , a novel analysis method, which parses out groupings based on the outcomes, described three distinct profiles that were observed in a large sample of CHR individuals.
Although the profiles vary in these three projects, they all describe three outcome trajectories mild, moderate and severe. These analyses provided further support for heterogeneity in the presentation, symptomatology and outcome found in CHR individuals.
Thus, the need to address heterogeneity in the CHR field has important implications for both assessment and treatment. However, it is important to recognize that a research paradigm for studying CHR heterogeneity has opened new directions for both clinical staging and transdiagnostic models of research Concentrated efforts have already been made to develop a more complete understanding of those at CHR of developing psychosis, to predict who may go on to develop psychosis, and to intervene to prevent the later occurrence of psychosis.
However, as this review has described, there are uncertainties in the management of CHR individuals some of which can be attributed to limited treatments to prevent transition to psychosis, as well as the need for interventions for those who do not make the transition to psychosis yet continue to present with many difficulties. Negative symptoms are a major concern but are rarely addressed, and social functioning, which reportedly has a role in later conversion, has never been specifically addressed.
Moreover, there is a lack of specific diagnostic tools that can properly identify CHR individuals and potential subtypes. Although there are promising ongoing efforts using different modalities to develop diagnostic biomarkers, such as neuroimaging, electrophysiology, neurocognition, serology, these are in the early stages. Thus, what is currently needed are sensitive and specific diagnostic criteria, validation of biomarkers, and proof of effectiveness of both psychological interventions and therapeutic agents Lieberman and colleagues note that although imaging, electrophysiologic and serologic measures are showing promise as diagnostic markers, they require validation in studies with large CHR samples.
The methodology has to be rigorous and reliable enough that it can be applied robustly across multiple sites and eventually implemented and obtained in community settings With respect to treatment, consideration of the heterogeneity of the clinical high-risk population would lead to specific treatments for specific subgroups being tested with the modality of treatment studies being specifically designed to address the presenting problem.
In addition to the heterogeneity mentioned above, there is retrospective evidence that some individuals may develop a first episode of psychosis without passing through an identifiable CHR period , One implication is that if the majority of CHR youth do not develop a psychotic illness and there are individuals who may develop a psychosis without passing through the CHR stage, then the CHR stage, although the most likely, may not be the only pathway to full-blown psychotic disorders.
As outlined in this review, future CHR research must be collaborative, accessible and harmonized with respect to criteria and outcomes. Unfortunately, there have been critics of the field raising issues that are often unfounded , , and which have had to be addressed in thorough counter arguments by experts in the field Thankfully, there are already initiatives underway that have adopted these steps.
Experimental medicine studies, the intent of which is to test new entities aimed at specific targets, may be considered for this population. Finding preventive treatments for psychosis is an aim of the NIMH Accelerating Medicine Partnership between industry, investigators and government.
Finally, recent funding opportunities from NIMH propose to establish large research networks encompassing many international sites that will rapidly recruit large numbers of CHR individuals in order to dissect the heterogeneity and predict differential outcomes to inform future treatment development, which represent a huge step forward for the field.
Incorporating our knowledge from past work into these exciting new opportunities has established a promising future for the CHR field. McGlashan, T. Yung, A. Mapping the onset of psychosis: the comprehensive assessment of at-risk mental states. Psychiatry 39 , — PubMed Article Google Scholar.
Fusar-Poli, P. Predicting psychosis: meta-analysis of transition outcomes in individuals at high clinical risk. Psychiatry 69 , — Cannon, T. Prediction of psychosis in youth at high clinical risk: a multisite longitudinal study in North America.
0コメント