An acceptance and commitment therapy-based intervention for opioid use disorder risk in individuals with cancer: A treatment development study.

This paper describes the iterative development of an evidence-based behavioral intervention for individuals with cancer at risk for opioid use disorder, using the National Institutes of Health Stage Model for Behavioral Intervention Development. Adult patients with cancer from an outpatient palliative care clinic at an academic cancer center, with moderate to high risk of opioid misuse, were enrolled in a treatment development study that aimed to increase psychological flexibility. In this intervention, psychological flexibility is the posited mechanism of change for reduction of opioid use disorder risk. Patients completed baseline (pre-intervention) assessments, a six-session behavioral intervention based in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, post-intervention assessments, and a semi-structured exit interview. Ten patients with moderate to high risk of opioid misuse completed the intervention. Patients rated the intervention as highly acceptable and were generally highly satisfied. Patients reported finding the coping skills helpful (e.g., mindfulness, cognitive defusion) and reported a preference for more sessions. These treatment development efforts have implications for the development and design of acceptance- and mindfulness-based, targeted interventions for individuals with cancer, receiving palliative care and at risk for opioid use disorder. Specifically, this six-session behavioral intervention to increase psychological flexibility was acceptable to patients and ready to be studied in a pilot RCT.

A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of the Feasibility and Acceptability of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Comorbid Social Anxiety Disorder in a Routine Practice Setting.

A prior open trial of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for comorbid social anxiety disorder (SAD) and depression showed clinically significant improvement over the course of 16 sessions. The aim of the current study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of ACT for this population in a pilot randomized trial within a routine practice setting. Patients (n = 26) were randomly assigned to 16 weeks of medication treatment as usual (mTAU) versus mTAU plus ACT (mTAU + ACT). Results showed that a significantly greater percentage of patients in mTAU not only dropped out of the study but also dropped out of treatment at the practice altogether, compared to patients in mTAU + ACT. Overall, results from this study suggest that having a comparison condition of mTAU alone in a randomized trial in a routine practice setting is not feasible and that patients with comorbid forms of SAD may require psychotherapy to remain engaged in treatment in standard clinical practice. Preliminary results for patients within the mTAU + ACT condition on treatment satisfaction and outcomes were comparable to results from the prior open trial, suggesting that ACT itself is worthy of further investigation. Further modifications to the study design may be needed to develop a feasible and acceptable comparison condition against which to test ACT for comorbid SAD in a routine practice setting.

Judgment towards emotions as a mediator of the relationship between emotional eating and depression symptoms in bariatric surgery candidates.

PURPOSE: Emotional eating is common in bariatric surgery candidates, and often is associated with depression and poorer weight loss outcomes following surgery. However, less is known about other modifiable risk factors that may link depression and emotional eating. The aim of the current study was to examine facets of mindfulness as potential mediators of the relationship between emotional eating and depression severity in bariatric surgery candidates. METHODS: Bariatric surgery candidates (n = 743) were referred by their surgeons for a comprehensive psychiatric pre-surgical evaluation that included self-report questionnaires assessing depression severity, emotional overeating, and facets of mindfulness. Mediation effects were examined for each mindfulness facet based on prior research. RESULTS: Only the nonjudging mindfulness facet significantly mediated the relationship between emotional eating and depression, suggesting that greater emotional eating may be associated with greater depression severity through higher levels of judgement towards thoughts and emotions. A reverse mediation analysis showed that depression severity was not a significant mediator of the relationship between nonjudging and emotional eating. CONCLUSION: Fostering a nonjudgmental stance towards thoughts and feelings may be helpful in improving eating habits that would support greater post-surgical success. Other clinical and research implications are discussed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, descriptive study.

Exploring the Optimal Factor Structure of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire: Associations Between Mindfulness Facets and Dimensions of Psychopathology.

Recent studies of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) and its condensed version (FFMQ-SF) fail to replicate the initially proposed five-factor structure in clinical samples. Failure to adequately understand the dimensionality of common mindfulness measures within clinical samples, therefore, represents an important gap in the current literature. The increasing popularity of mindfulness-based interventions warrants further investigation of differential associations between facets of mindfulness and different forms of psychopathology. We examined (a) the underlying structure of the FFMQ and FFMQ-SF, and (b) associations between FFMQ and FFMQ-SF facets and dimensions of psychopathology (i.e., internalizing and substance use disorders) in two large clinical samples (N = 2,779). Results from bass-ackwards analyses suggested similarly defensible five- and six-factor model solutions in terms of fit. The five-factor model was optimal when factoring in parsimony. Exploratory structural equation modeling revealed that all FFMQ facets with the exception of observe were negatively associated with the internalizing factor. Associations with substance use disorders were more complex. In both samples, five-factor FFMQ and FFMQ-SF models were determined to best represent these data. Whereas deficits in all FFMQ facets with the exception of observe correspond with lower internalizing psychopathology, a more nuanced association was observed with substance use disorders.

Intuitive eating buffers the link between internalized weight stigma and body mass index in stressed adults.

Internalized weight stigma (IWS) is independently associated with less intuitive eating (i.e., eating based on endogenous hunger/satiety cues) and higher Body Mass Index (BMI), and intuitive eating training is commonly conceptualized as protective against the effects of IWS on poor behavioral health. The 3-way relationship between IWS, intuitive eating, and BMI has yet to be examined, and it is unclear whether the link between IWS and BMI is buffered by high intuitive eating. This secondary preliminary analysis examined baseline data of stressed adults with poor diet (N = 75, 70% female, 64.1% White, 42.7% with overweight/obesity) in a parent clinical trial that tested the effects of yoga on diet and stress. Validated self-report surveys of IWS and intuitive eating were analyzed with objectively-assessed BMI. Moderated regression analyses using the SPSS PROCESS macro tested whether intuitive eating moderated the IWS-BMI link. The analysis revealed IWS was positively associated with BMI except among people with high intuitive eating. Results extend observational findings linking intuitive eating to lower BMI, and offer preliminary support for the hypothesis that this link may hold even among those with greater IWS. It's possible that individuals with lower BMI and greater IWS may gravitate more towards intuitive eating than those with greater BMI, and/or intuitive eating may be an important target for ameliorating the adverse association of IWS with behavioral and physical health indicators linked to BMI. Continued work is warranted in larger, more generalizable samples using causal and prospective designs.

Conducting Outcomes Research in a Clinical Practice Setting: The Effectiveness and Acceptability of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) in a Partial Hospital Program.

Multiple challenges exist integrating research into clinical practice, particularly in acute care settings where randomized controlled trials may be impractical or unethical. Partial or day hospitals are one such setting. As compared to outpatients and inpatients, relatively little research is conducted or reported in partial hospital program (PHP) patients, leaving providers in this setting without a solid empirical basis from which to draw. We report treatment outcomes and patient satisfaction from the first 750 patients enrolled in a clinical research PHP utilizing the acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) treatment model. ACT is a well-established, transdiagnostic behavior therapy. However, to date no study has examined the use of ACT in acute day hospitals. We hypothesized that applying ACT with this patient group would result in significantly improved depression, anxiety, functioning, and quality of life from intake to discharge. We additionally expected that patients would report high satisfaction with ACT treatment groups. Patients (n = 750 full sample, n = 518 completed treatment) completed daily measures of symptoms, functioning, and ACT processes at intake and discharge, and postgroup satisfaction surveys. Results showed significant improvements in symptoms and impairment. ACT process variables also increased over the course of treatment. Importantly, patient satisfaction was high for all groups. Thus, ACT provides an appropriate, flexible, effective, and satisfactory model for this patient group. A comparison of our findings using ACT to the limited research using other models in PHP settings is discussed, as well as challenges in the overall process of integrating research into routine clinical care.

Patients with borderline personality disorder and bipolar disorder: a descriptive and comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder (BPD) are each significant public health problems. It has been frequently noted that distinguishing BPD from bipolar disorder is challenging. Consequently, reviews and commentaries have focused on differential diagnosis and identifying clinical features to distinguish the two disorders. While there is a burgeoning literature comparing patients with BPD and bipolar disorder, much less research has characterized patients with both disorders. In the current report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we compare psychiatric outpatients with both BPD and bipolar disorder to patients with BPD without bipolar disorder and patients with bipolar disorder without BPD. METHODS: Psychiatric outpatients presenting for treatment were evaluated with semi-structured interviews. The focus of the current study is the 517 patients with both BPD and bipolar disorder (n = 59), BPD without bipolar disorder (n = 330), and bipolar disorder without BPD (n = 128). RESULTS: Compared to patients with bipolar disorder, the patients with bipolar disorder and BPD had more comorbid disorders, psychopathology in their first-degree relatives, childhood trauma, suicidality, hospitalizations, time unemployed, and likelihood of receiving disability payments. The added presence of bipolar disorder in patients with BPD was associated with more posttraumatic stress disorder in the patients as well as their family, more bipolar disorder and substance use disorders in their relatives, more childhood trauma, unemployment, disability, suicide attempts, and hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with both bipolar disorder and BPD have more severe psychosocial morbidity than patients with only one of these disorders.

Emotion regulation accounts for associations between mindfulness and depression across and within diagnostic categories.

BACKGROUND: Previous research shows that mindfulness and emotion regulation (ER) are highly related to each other. Preliminary evidence in small clinical populations show that ER may partially account for the relationship between mindfulness and depressive symptoms. The present study aimed to investigate which diagnostic categories were associated with depressive symptoms after controlling for ER in a heterogeneous sample of treatment-seeking patients. METHODS: A large sample of psychiatric outpatients (N = 911) completed the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID), Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS), and Clinically Useful Depression Outcome Scale (CUDOS). Partial correlations were conducted to evaluate to what degree the relationship between depression scores and facets of mindfulness were accounted for by ER scores. RESULTS: When controlling for baseline mindfulness, the relationship between emotion dysregulation and depression symptoms remained significant for all data points; however, when controlling for baseline emotion dysregulation, the association between mindfulness and depression was not significant in the majority of cases. Nonjudging was most resistant to this result. CONCLUSIONS: Although mindfulness is negatively associated with depressive symptoms, this association may be better accounted for by emotion dysregulation.

DSM-5 anxious distress specifier in patients with bipolar depression.

BACKGROUND: DSM-5 introduced the anxious distress specifier in recognition of the significance of anxiety in patients who are depressed. Studies have supported the validity of the specifier in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). In this report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we examined the validity of the specifier in patients with bipolar depression. METHODS: Forty-nine patients with a principal diagnosis of bipolar depression and 369 with MDD were evaluated with semi-structured diagnostic interviews, including the DSM-5 Anxious Distress Specifier Interview (DADSI). The patients were rated on measures of depression, anxiety, and irritability, and completed self-report measures. RESULTS: The majority of patients with bipolar depression met the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier, no different than the frequency in patients with MDD. The DADSI was significantly correlated with other measures of anxiety, and more highly correlated with other measures of anxiety than with measures of depression and irritability. Patients with panic and generalized anxiety disorder scored higher on the DADSI than patients without an anxiety disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study indicate that anxious distress is common in patients with bipolar depression and support the validity of the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier.

Principal Diagnoses in Psychiatric Outpatients With Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: Implications for Screening Recommendations.

In this study, we examined the prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in 3800 psychiatric outpatients with different principal diagnoses. For all disorders identified as a principal diagnosis, we compared patients' odds ratios of PTSD to all other patients in the sample. Approximately one-sixth of the sample (n = 663, 17.4%) was diagnosed with PTSD, including 417 patients with current PTSD and 246 with PTSD in partial remission. Patients with principal bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder (MDD) demonstrated higher rates of PTSD compared with those without principal bipolar and MDD. For most psychiatric outpatients with PTSD, the principal diagnosis for which they seek treatment is not PTSD, but rather a mood disorder. This highlights the importance of screening for PTSD, particularly in patients with a principal diagnosis for which the prevalence of PTSD is relatively high, namely, MDD, bipolar disorder, panic disorder, and borderline personality disorder.

Is the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier sufficient for measuring anxiety in depressed patients? Implications for measurement-based care.

BACKGROUND: We examined whether a self-report measure of the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier, the Clinically Useful Depression Outcome Scale Anxious Distress Specifier Subscale (CUDOS-A), was as valid as a broader measure of the severity of anxiety, the Clinically Useful Anxiety Outcome Scale (CUXOS), in patients with depression. METHODS: Two hundred ninety-four patients with major depressive disorder were administered a semi-structured interview. The patients completed self-report measures of depression, anxiety, and irritability. Sensitivity to change was examined in a subset of patients. RESULTS: Both the CUDOS-A and CUXOS were more highly correlated with measures of anxiety than with measures of the other symptom domains. Patients with anxiety disorders scored significantly higher on both measures than did patients with no current anxiety disorder. Both measures were equally correlated with measures of coping, general well-being, and functioning. A large effect size of treatment was found for both measures (CUDOS-A: d = 1.2; CUXOS: d = 1.3). CONCLUSIONS: Both the CUDOS-A and CUXOS were valid self-report measures of anxiety symptom severity in patients with depression. Because anxiety is common in patients with depression, the addition of a small number of items assessing the DSM-5 anxious distress criteria should be added to depression measures and used in measurement-based care efforts.

Applying the inclusion/exclusion criteria in placebo-controlled studies to a clinical sample: A comparison of medications.

BACKGROUND: We previously compared the inclusion/exclusion criteria in the studies of vortioxetine to other antidepressants and found that they were significantly more restrictive in the vortioxetine studies. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that the differences in psychiatric inclusion/exclusion criteria used in the studies of some antidepressants resulted in differences in generalizability to clinical samples. METHODS: We applied the inclusion and exclusion criteria used in 161 antidepressant efficacy trials to 1,271 patients presenting to an outpatient practice who received a principal diagnosis of major depressive disorder. The patients underwent a thorough diagnostic evaluation. We compared the percentage of patients that would be excluded in studies of different medications. RESULTS: The percentage of patients that would have been excluded was significantly higher in the vortioxetine studies than other medications. For the 15 medications that were included in at least 5 trials, we computed the mean percentage of patients that would be excluded. The values ranged from 76.0% (for fluoxetine) to 99.1% (for quetiapine). LIMITATIONS: While our calculations were based on the exclusion criteria stated in the published articles, we have no way of knowing how these criteria were actually applied. CONCLUSION: Studies of different medications vary in how representative the samples are of patients in clinical practice. The variability in the inclusion/exclusion criteria used to select samples for antidepressant efficacy trials, and the evidence that studies of different medications vary in their generalizability, makes it more difficult to interpret network analyses comparing the relative efficacy of medications.

Nonsuicidal Self-Injury and Suicide: Differences Between Those With and Without Borderline Personality Disorder.

Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is associated with borderline personality disorder (BPD), but it also occurs in nonclinical samples (Briere & Gil, 1998), inflicting serious harm and serving as a precursor to suicide attempts (Klonsky, May, & Glenn, 2013). Therefore, the DSM-5 proposed a nonsuicidal self-injury disorder (NSSID) and suicidal behavior disorder. Because this addition requires reconciliation with current BPD criteria, the authors' study evaluated type and frequency of NSSI and suicide attempts in 3,795 outpatients. Both were found in those without BPD, although the behaviors increased when some symptoms and full criteria for BPD were met. Wound/skin picking, scratching, and hitting were most common. Cutting was the fifth most common self-injury for those with BPD and the eighth most common for those without the disorder. Therefore, increased clinical attention is warranted for such self-injury, which may go unnoticed but indicate significant distress. Findings suggest that NSSID/suicidal behavior disorder may account for self-injury outside of BPD.

Understanding the severity of depression: do nondepressive symptoms influence global ratings of depression severity?

OBJECTIVE: Almost all depression measures have been developed without discussing how to best conceptualize and assess the severity of depression. It is therefore not surprising that measures differ in both how items are rated and item content. The question that we address in the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project is whether a measure of depression severity should include symptoms that are frequent in depressed patients but are defining features of other disorders (eg, anxiety, irritability). METHODS: Patients were evaluated with a semi-structured interview and severity ratings were made of each symptom of major depressive disorder (MDD) as well as anxiety, irritability, and somatization. Patients were also rated on the Clinical Global Index of severity (CGI). RESULTS: Three of the 5 nondepressive symptoms (psychic anxiety, somatic anxiety, and subjective anger) were significantly correlated with the CGI. The correlation between the sum of all 5 nondepressive symptoms and the CGI was significantly lower than the correlation between the sum of the depressive symptom severity ratings (0.12 vs 0.52, z = 11.0, p < .001). The partial correlation between the CGI and the nondepressive symptom severity ratings (after controlling for the total depressive symptom ratings) was nonsignificant. DISCUSSION: After accounting for the severity of depressive symptoms, the severity of the nondepressive symptoms was not associated with global ratings of depressive severity. These findings raise questions regarding the appropriateness of including ratings of anxiety, irritability, and somatization on a measure that purportedly assesses the severity of depression.

Symptom presence versus symptom intensity in understanding the severity of depression: Implications for documentation in electronic medical records.

BACKGROUND: Data mining efforts have been applied to research data bases to develop statistical models for predicting outcomes. Electronic medical records have the potential to enable efforts to apply statistical techniques to mine large clinical data bases. Of course, such prediction algorithms will only be as good as the data that is available to input. The question that we address in the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project is how much information might be gained from dimensional ratings of symptom severity over and above that which is accounted for when determining symptom presence. Such results could have implications for how medical record documentation should be established. METHODS: Patients were evaluated with a semi-structured interview, and the presence of each symptom of major depressive disorder (MDD) was recorded. Patients were also rated on the Clinical Global Index of Severity (CGI-S). RESULTS: A multiple regression analysis entering the presence of MDD symptoms as predictors of the CGI had a cumulative R2 of 0.26. A multiple regression analysis entering all symptom severity ratings as predictors of the CGI had a cumulative R2 of 0.40. LIMITATIONS: The study was based on patients presenting for outpatient treatment to a single clinical practice. Symptoms that are not diagnostic criteria for MDD were not examined. DISCUSSION: Research institutions interested in using data mining statistical approaches of electronic medical records should consider having the clinicians rate whether symptoms are mild, moderate or severe and not just whether they are present or absent.

Have Treatment Studies of Depression Become Even Less Generalizable? Applying the Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria in Placebo-Controlled Antidepressant Efficacy Trials Published over 20 Years to a Clinical Sample.

BACKGROUND: Antidepressants are amongst the most frequently prescribed medications. More than a decade ago, our clinical research group applied a prototypic set of inclusion/exclusion criteria used in an antidepressant efficacy trial (AET) to patients presenting for treatment in our outpatient practice and found that most patients would not qualify for the trial. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we apply the psychiatric inclusion/exclusion criteria used in 158 placebo-controlled studies to a large sample of depressed patients who presented for outpatient treatment to determine the range and extent of the representativeness of samples treated in AETs and whether this has changed over time. METHOD: We applied the inclusion and exclusion criteria used in 158 AETs to 1,271 patients presenting to an outpatient practice who received a principal diagnosis of major depressive disorder. The patients underwent a thorough diagnostic evaluation. RESULTS: Across all 158 studies, the percentage of patients that would have been excluded ranged from 44.4 to 99.8% (mean = 86.1%). The percentage of patients that would have been excluded was significantly higher in the studies published in 2010 through 2014 compared to the studies published from 1995 to 2009 (91.4 vs. 83.8%, t(156) = 3.74, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Only a minority of depressed patients seen in clinical practice are likely to be eligible for most AETs. The generalizability of AETs has decreased over time. It is unclear how generalizable the results of AETs are to patients treated in real-world clinical practice.

Should childhood conduct disorder be necessary to diagnose antisocial personality disorder in adults?

BACKGROUND: Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) is the only DSM personality disorder that requires a diagnosis of conduct disorder (CD) during childhood. Previous research comparing adults diagnosed with ASPD with adults who meet all ASPD criteria except for a history of CD (referred to in this study as adult antisocial syndrome [AAS]) have reported mixed results. This study sought to clarify the differences among adults with ASPD, adults with AAS, and a large psychiatric outpatient control group. METHODS: A series of semi-structured interviews were conducted with 2,691 psychiatric outpatients. We compared groups on demographic variables, psychiatric comorbidity, symptom presentation, parental history, and psychosocial morbidity. RESULTS: Significant differences were found among ASPD, AAS, and controls in regard to demographic variables, comorbidity, symptom presentation, and parental history. The ASPD and AAS groups were similarly impaired with respect to global functioning, occupational and social functioning, and suicidality. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that by including a history of CD in ASPD criteria, our diagnostic system excludes an important group of later-onset patients who also require attention and resources. Implications, limitations, and future directions are discussed.

Screening for Borderline Personality Disorder in Psychiatric Outpatients With Major Depressive Disorder and Bipolar Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a serious illness that is frequently underdiagnosed. A previous psychometric analysis of the 9 BPD criteria in DSM-IV/DSM-5 found that the affective instability criterion functioned well as a screen for the disorder. A limitation of that initial study was that the performance of the BPD criteria was examined in a diagnostically heterogeneous sample, including those with a low likelihood of having BPD. The present study from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project examined the operating characteristics of the BPD criteria in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder. METHODS: From December 1995 to April 2014, 3,674 psychiatric outpatients were evaluated with a semistructured diagnostic interview for DSM-IV BPD. The operating characteristics of the BPD criteria were examined in 3 nonoverlapping groups of patients: those with a principal diagnosis of MDD, those with a principal diagnosis of bipolar disorder, and all remaining patients. RESULTS: The sensitivity and negative predictive value of the affective instability criterion were greater than 90% in patients with MDD, bipolar disorder, or other diagnoses. Of the 9 BPD criteria, the affective instability criterion achieved the highest sensitivity and negative predictive value in all 3 diagnostic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the phenomenological overlap between BPD and mood disorders, inquiry about affective instability functions well as a clinically useful screen for BPD in patients with MDD and bipolar disorder. In patients presenting for the treatment of MDD or bipolar disorder, clinicians should screen for BPD in the same way that they screen for other comorbid psychiatric disorders-by inquiring about a single feature of the disorder (ie, affective instability), the presence of which captures almost all patients with the disorder and the absence of which rules out the disorder.

Validity of the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier for major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: DSM-5 introduced the anxious distress specifier in recognition of the clinical significance of anxiety in depressed patients. Recent studies that supported the validity of the specifier did not use measures that were designed to assess the criteria of the specifier but instead approximated the DSM-5 criteria from scales that were part of an existing data base. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we examined the validity of the specifier diagnosed with a semistructured interview. METHODS: Two hundred sixty patients with a principal diagnosis of major depressive disorder were evaluated with semistructured diagnostic interviews. The patients were rated on clinician rating scales of depression, anxiety and irritability, and completed self-report measures. RESULTS: Approximately three-quarters of the depressed patients met the criteria for the anxious distress specifier. Patients with anxious distress had a higher frequency of anxiety disorders, particularly panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder, as well as higher scores on measures of anxiety, depression, and anger. The patients meeting the anxious distress subtype reported higher rates of drug use disorders, poorer functioning during the week before the evaluation, and poorer coping ability compared to the patients who did not meet the anxious distress specifier. Moreover, anxious distress was associated with poorer functioning and coping after controlling for the presence of an anxiety disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study indicate that anxious distress is common in depressed patients and support the validity of the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier.

Screening for Bipolar Disorder and Finding Borderline Personality Disorder: A Replication and Extension.

The authors' group previously reported that patients who screened positive on the Mood Disorders Questionnaire (MDQ), the most frequently studied screening scale for bipolar disorder, were as likely to be diagnosed with borderline personality disorder (BPD) as with bipolar disorder. A limitation of that study was that the authors examined the performance of the MDQ in patients presenting for various psychiatric disorders, including depression. The recognition of bipolar disorder and its differential diagnosis with BPD is of greatest clinical relevance in depressed patients. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, the authors attempted to replicate their initial findings in a new sample of psychiatric outpatients, and they also examined the performance of the MDQ in depressed patients. The results of the present study were consistent with the original report, thereby indicating that the MDQ is not effective in helping distinguish bipolar disorder from BPD.