A biopsychosocial model as a guide for psychoeducation and treatment of depression.

Effective treatment of severe or chronic unipolar depression requires the combination of pharmacological and psychotherapeutic interventions, and demands a theoretical paradigm integrating biological and psychosocial aspects of depression. Supported by recent research, we propose in our article a biopsychosocial diathesis-stress model of depression. Its basic aim is psychoeducational: to provide therapists, patients, and their environment a constructive conceptual framework to understand depressive complaints, vulnerability, and stress. The core of the model consists of the concept of psychobiological vulnerability, which is determined by risk factors-of a biogenetic, psychological, somatic, and societal nature-and by protective factors. Life events with an idiosyncratic, stress-inducing value interact with this vulnerability, triggering severe or chronic distress that affects the individual's resilience and leads to symptoms of depression. The pathogenesis of depression is symbolized by a negative downward loop, in which interactions among symptoms, vulnerability, and stressors drive the patient toward a depressive condition. Moreover, experiencing recurrent depression influences psychobiological vulnerability, the occurrence of stressors, and tremendously increases the risk of further relapse. The model stresses the self-evident integration of biological and psychological therapeutic interventions that need to focus on symptom reduction and on relapse prevention. Moreover, it offers the patient and therapist a psychoeducational context in which the individual's vulnerability and depressive symptoms can be treated. Finally, applications of the depression model as a therapeutic approach to severe depression in the phases of remoralization, symptom reduction, and relapse prevention are presented.

The ADP-IV questionnaire: differential validity and concordance with the semi-structured interview.

The Assessment of DSM-IV Personality Disorders questionnaire (ADP-IV) is a self-report measure of the DSM-IV Axis II personality disorders (PDs). The ADP-IV assesses for each DSM-IV criterion its typicality as well as the accompanying distress and impairment. This study investigates two important aspects of the construct validity of the ADP-IV: (a) the differential validity (i.e., the ability to differentiate between a sample of the general Flemish population ( n = 659) and a sample of psychiatric inpatients ( n = 487) with a high prevalence of clinical PD diagnoses, and patients with and without a PD in the psychiatric sample; (b) the convergent validity with the SCID-II semi-structured interview in a population of psychiatric inpatients ( n = 59). The results indicate a good differential validity: the dimensional scales and the categorical measures discriminated well between both groups and between patients with and without a PD diagnosis in the psychiatric sample. Concerning the concordance with the SCID-II, a decent level of agreement is exemplified by a correlation of.67 between the dimensional total scores of both instruments and by kappa coefficients for an "any" Axis II diagnosis at the.50 level. In conclusion, the results indicate that the ADP-IV is an efficient method for assessing PD in dimensional and categorical ways.