Antipsychotics for schizophrenia spectrum disorders with catatonic symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Whilst antipsychotics are the mainstay of treatment for schizophrenia spectrum disorders, there have been numerous attempts to identify biomarkers that can predict treatment response. One potential marker may be psychomotor abnormalities, including catatonic symptoms. Early studies suggested that catatonic symptoms predict poor treatment response, whilst anecdotal reports of rare adverse events have been invoked against antipsychotics. The efficacy and safety of antipsychotics in the treatment of this subtype of schizophrenia have rarely been studied in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of any single antipsychotic medication with another antipsychotic or with other pharmacological agents, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), other non-pharmacological neuromodulation therapies (e.g. transcranial magnetic stimulation), or placebo for treating positive, negative, and catatonic symptoms in people who have schizophrenia spectrum disorders with catatonic symptoms. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials, which is based on CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, the ISRCTN registry, and WHO ICTRP, on 19 September 2021. There were no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the register. We also manually searched reference lists from the included studies, and contacted study authors when relevant. SELECTION CRITERIA: All RCTs comparing any single antipsychotic medication with another antipsychotic or with other pharmacological agents, ECT, other non-pharmacological neuromodulation therapies, or placebo for people who have schizophrenia spectrum disorders with catatonic symptoms. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: two review authors independently inspected citations, selected studies, extracted data, and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes, we planned to calculate risk ratios and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous outcomes, we planned to calculate mean differences between groups and their 95% CI. We assessed risk of bias for the included studies, and created a summary of findings table; however, we did not assess the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach because there was no quantitative evidence in the included study. MAIN RESULTS: Out of 53 identified reports, one RCT including 14 hospitalised adults with schizophrenia and catatonic symptoms met the inclusion criteria of the review. The study, which was conducted in India and lasted only three weeks, compared risperidone with ECT in people who did not respond to an initial lorazepam trial.   There were no usable data reported on the primary efficacy outcomes of clinically important changes in positive, negative, or catatonic symptoms. Whilst both study groups improved in catatonia scores on the Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS), the ECT group showed significantly greater improvement at week 3 endpoint (mean +/- estimated standard deviation; 0.68 +/- 4.58; N = 8) than the risperidone group (6.04 +/- 4.58; N = 6; P = 0.035 of a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measures originally conducted in the trial). Similarly, both groups improved on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores by week 3, but ECT showed significantly greater improvement in positive symptoms scores compared with risperidone (P = 0.04). However, data on BFCRS scores in the ECT group appeared to be skewed, and mean PANSS scores were not reported, thereby precluding further analyses of both BFCRS and PANSS data according to the protocol.  Although no cases of neuroleptic malignant syndrome were reported, extrapyramidal symptoms as a primary safety outcome were reported in three cases in the risperidone group. Conversely, headache (N = 6), memory loss (N = 4), and a prolonged seizure were reported in people receiving ECT. These adverse effects, which were assessed as specific for antipsychotics and ECT, respectively, were the only adverse effects reported in the study. However, the exact number of participants with adverse events was not clearly reported in both groups, precluding further analysis.  Our results were based only on a single study with a very small sample size, short duration of treatment, unclear or high risk of bias due to unclear randomisation methods, possible imbalance in baseline characteristics, skewed data, and selective reporting. Data on outcomes of general functioning, global state, quality of life, and service use, as well as data on specific phenomenology and duration of catatonic symptoms, were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found only one small, short-term trial suggesting that risperidone may improve catatonic and positive symptoms scale scores amongst people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and catatonic symptoms, but that ECT may result in greater improvement in the first three weeks of treatment. Due to small sample size, methodological shortcomings and brief duration of the study, as well as risk of bias, the evidence from this review is of very low quality. We are uncertain if these are true effects, limiting any conclusions that can be drawn from the evidence. No cases of neuroleptic malignant syndrome were reported, but we cannot rule out the risk of this or other rare adverse events in larger population samples.  High-quality trials continue to be necessary to differentiate treatments for people with symptoms of catatonia in schizophrenia spectrum disorders. The lack of consensus on the psychopathology of catatonia remains a barrier to defining treatments for people with schizophrenia. Better understanding of the efficacy and safety of antipsychotics may clarify treatment for this unique subtype of schizophrenia.

ANTECEDENTES: Aunque los antipsicóticos son la base del tratamiento de los trastornos del espectro de la esquizofrenia, ha habido numerosos intentos de identificar biomarcadores que puedan predecir la respuesta al tratamiento. Un posible marcador podrían ser las anomalías psicomotoras, incluidos los síntomas catatónicos. Los estudios más antiguos indican que los síntomas catatónicos predicen una respuesta deficiente al tratamiento, mientras que se han alegado informes anecdóticos de eventos adversos poco frecuentes contra los antipsicóticos. La eficacia y la seguridad de los antipsicóticos en el tratamiento de este subtipo de esquizofrenia rara vez se han estudiado en ensayos controlados aleatorizados (ECA). OBJETIVOS: Comparar los efectos de cualquier fármaco antipsicótico único con otro antipsicótico o con otros agentes farmacológicos, terapia electroconvulsiva (TEC), otras terapias de neuromodulación no farmacológicas (p. ej., estimulación magnética transcraneal) o placebo para el tratamiento de los síntomas positivos, negativos y catatónicos en personas que presentan trastornos del espectro de la esquizofrenia con síntomas catatónicos. MÉTODOS DE BÚSQUEDA: El 19 de septiembre de 2021 se realizaron búsquedas en el registro de ensayos basados en estudios del Grupo Cochrane de Esquizofrenia (Cochrane Schizophrenia Group), que se basa en CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, el registro ISRCTN y la ICTRP de la OMS. No hubo limitaciones de idioma, fecha, tipo de documento o estado de publicación para la inclusión de los registros en el registro. También se realizaron búsquedas manuales en las listas de referencias de los estudios incluidos y se estableció contacto con los autores de los estudios cuando fue pertinente. CRITERIOS DE SELECCIÓN: Todos los ECA que compararan cualquier fármaco antipsicótico único con otro antipsicótico o con otros agentes farmacológicos, TEC, otras terapias de neuromodulación no farmacológicas o placebo en personas que presentan trastornos del espectro de la esquizofrenia con síntomas catatónicos. OBTENCIÓN Y ANÁLISIS DE LOS DATOS: Dos autores de la revisión inspeccionaron de forma independiente las citas, seleccionaron los estudios, extrajeron los datos y evaluaron la calidad de los estudios. Para los desenlaces binarios se planeó calcular las razones de riesgos y sus intervalos de confianza (IC) del 95% sobre la base de la intención de tratar. Para los desenlaces continuos se planeó calcular las diferencias de medias entre los grupos y sus IC del 95%. Se evaluó el riesgo de sesgo de los estudios incluidos y se creó una tabla de resumen de los hallazgos. Sin embargo, no se evaluó la certeza de la evidencia mediante el método GRADE porque no hubo evidencia cuantitativa en el estudio incluido. RESULTADOS PRINCIPALES: De los 53 informes identificados, un ECA que incluyó a 14 adultos hospitalizados con esquizofrenia y síntomas catatónicos cumplió con los criterios de inclusión de la revisión. El estudio, realizado en la India y que sólo duró tres semanas, comparó la risperidona con la TEC en personas que no respondieron a una prueba inicial con lorazepam. No se informaron datos utilizables sobre los desenlaces principales de eficacia de cambios clínicamente importantes en los síntomas positivos, negativos o catatónicos. Aunque ambos grupos del estudio mejoraron en las puntuaciones de catatonia en la Bush­Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS), el grupo de TEC mostró una mejoría significativamente mayor en el desenlace a las tres semanas (media +/­ desviación estándar estimada; 0,68 +/­ 4,58; n = 8) que el grupo de risperidona (6,04 +/­ 4,58; n = 6; p = 0,035 de un análisis de varianza (ANOVA) de dos vías para medidas repetidas realizado originalmente en el ensayo). Asimismo, ambos grupos mejoraron en las puntuaciones de la Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) a las tres semanas, pero la TEC mostró una mejoría significativamente mayor en las puntuaciones de los síntomas positivos en comparación con la risperidona (p = 0,04). Sin embargo, los datos sobre las puntuaciones de la BFCRS en el grupo de TEC parecieron estar sesgados, y no se informaron las puntuaciones medias de la PANSS, lo que impidió realizar más análisis de los datos de la BFCRS y la PANSS según el protocolo. Aunque no se informaron casos de síndrome neuroléptico maligno, en tres casos del grupo de risperidona se notificaron síntomas extrapiramidales como un desenlace principal de seguridad. Por el contrario, en las personas que recibieron TEC se informó cefalea (n = 6), pérdida de memoria (n = 4) y una convulsión prolongada. Estos efectos adversos, que se evaluaron como específicos de los antipsicóticos y de la TEC, respectivamente, fueron los únicos efectos adversos notificados en el estudio. Sin embargo, el número exacto de participantes con eventos adversos no se informó claramente en ambos grupos, lo que impidió realizar un análisis más profundo. Los resultados de esta revisión se basaron en un solo estudio con un tamaño muestral muy pequeño, una duración corta del tratamiento, un riesgo de sesgo incierto o alto debido a métodos de asignación al azar poco claros, un posible desequilibrio en las características iniciales, datos sesgados y un informe selectivo. No se informaron datos sobre los desenlaces de funcionalidad general, estado global, calidad de vida ni uso de los servicios, así como tampoco datos sobre la fenomenología específica ni la duración de los síntomas catatónicos. CONCLUSIONES DE LOS AUTORES: Solo se encontró un ensayo pequeño, a corto plazo, que indica que la risperidona podría mejorar las puntuaciones de la escala de síntomas catatónicos y positivos entre las personas con trastornos del espectro de la esquizofrenia y síntomas catatónicos, pero que la TEC podría producir una mayor mejoría en las primeras tres semanas de tratamiento. Debido al pequeño tamaño muestral, las deficiencias metodológicas y la breve duración del estudio, así como el riesgo de sesgo, la evidencia de esta revisión es de calidad muy baja. No hay confianza en que estos efectos sean verdaderos, lo que limita cualquier conclusión que se pueda sacar a partir de la evidencia. No se notificaron casos de síndrome neuroléptico maligno, pero no se puede descartar el riesgo de este u otros eventos adversos poco frecuentes en muestras poblacionales más grandes. Aún se necesitan ensayos de calidad alta para diferenciar los tratamientos en las personas con síntomas de catatonia en los trastornos del espectro de la esquizofrenia. La falta de consenso sobre la psicopatología de la catatonia todavía es un obstáculo para definir los tratamientos para las personas con esquizofrenia. Un mejor conocimiento de la eficacia y la seguridad de los antipsicóticos podría aclarar el tratamiento de este subtipo único de esquizofrenia.

Benzodiazepines for catatonia in people with schizophrenia or other serious mental illnesses.

BACKGROUND: Catatonia is a debilitating disorder of movement and volition associated with schizophrenia and some other mental illnesses. People with catatonia are more likely to require hospitalisation and highly supervised care than those without the disorder. They also have an increased risk of secondary complications such as pneumonia, malnutrition and dehydration. The mainstay of treatment has been drug therapies and electroconvulsive therapy. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of benzodiazepines with other drugs, placebo or electroconvulsive therapy for catatonia in people with schizophrenia or other similar serious mental illnesses (SMIs). SEARCH METHODS: We updated our previous search (28 February 2007) by searching the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (9 November 2016; 6 February 2019). This register is compiled by systematic searches of major resources (including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, BIOSIS, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, and registries of clinical trials) and their monthly updates, handsearches, grey literature, and conference proceedings, with no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records into the register. We also manually searched reference lists from studies selected by the search. SELECTION CRITERIA: All controlled clinical trials that randomised people who have schizophrenia or other similar SMI and experiencing catatonia to receive benzodiazepines or another relevant treatment. We included studies that met our inclusion criteria and reported usable data. We excluded those not meeting our inclusion criteria or those not reporting usable data. We contacted authors when we required further information; and if we received no response, we put those studies aside as 'awaiting assessment'. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis using a fixed-effect model. We completed a 'Risk of bias' assessment for the included study and generated a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: The searches found 130 citations, from which we could identify 22 possibly relevant studies. From these, we could only include one study. This study had a relatively small sample size of 17 participants who received lorazepam or oxazepam and were drug free for one week before the trial started. The only usable data reported by this study were clinically important change in symptoms of catatonia measured as 50% improvement on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). There was no difference in the numbers of participants showing a clinically important change in their catatonic symptoms (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.42 to 2.16; participants = 17; studies = 1; very low quality evidence).No data were reported for other important outcomes of hospital stay, clinically important change in satisfaction with care, global state, adverse effects or general functioningWe did find a few studies meeting our inclusion criteria but they reported no usable data. We had to exclude these. Although poorly reported, these studies do illustrate that relevant studies have been undertaken - they are not impossible to design and conduct. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of the results from this review, which was a head-to-head comparison of two benzodiazepine monotherapies, does not show a clear difference in effect. No data were available for benzodiazepines compared to placebo or standard care. The lack of usable data and very low quality of data available makes it impossible to draw firm conclusions and further studies with a high-quality methodology and reporting are required in order to determine more definitively the outcomes associated with benzodiazepine use in the clinical management of catatonia in persons with schizophrenia and other SMI.

Zuclopenthixol acetate for acute schizophrenia and similar serious mental illnesses.

BACKGROUND: Medication used for acute aggression in psychiatry must have rapid onset of effect, low frequency of administration and low levels of adverse effects. Zuclopenthixol acetate is said to have these properties. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the clinical effects of zuclopenthixol acetate for the management of acute aggression or violence thought to be due to serious mental illnesses, in comparison to other drugs used to treat similar conditions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia's Group Trials Register (July 2011). We supplemented this by citation searching and personal contact with authors and relevant pharmaceutical companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised clinical trials involving people thought to have serious mental illnesses comparing zuclopenthixol acetate with other drugs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors extracted and cross-checked data independently. We calculated fixed-effect relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data. We analysed by intention-to-treat. We used mean differences (MD) for continuous variables. MAIN RESULTS: We found no data for the primary outcome, tranquillisation. Compared with haloperidol, zuclopenthixol acetate was no more sedating at two hours (n = 40, 1 RCT, RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.34). People given zuclopenthixol acetate were not at reduced risk of being given supplementary antipsychotics (n = 134, 3 RCTs, RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.30) although additional use of benzodiazepines was less (n = 50, 1 RCT, RR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.47). People given zuclopenthixol acetate had fewer injections over seven days compared with those allocated to haloperidol IM (n = 70, 1 RCT, RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.84, NNT 4, CI 3 to 14). We found no data on more episodes of aggression or harm to self or others. One trial (n = 148) reported no significant difference in adverse effects for people receiving zuclopenthixol acetate compared with those allocated haloperidol at one, three and six days (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.27). Compared with haloperidol or clotiapine, people allocated zuclopenthixol did not seem to be at more risk of a range of movement disorders (< 20%). Three studies found no difference in the proportion of people getting blurred vision/dry mouth (n = 192, 2 RCTs, RR at 24 hours 0.90, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.70). Similarly, dizziness was equally infrequent for those allocated zuclopenthixol acetate compared with haloperidol (n = 192, 2 RCTs, RR at 24 hours 1.15, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.88). There was no difference between treatments for leaving the study before completion (n = 522, RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.31). One study reported no difference in adverse effects and outcome scores, when high dose (50-100 mg/injection) zuclopenthixol acetate was compared with low dose (25-50 mg/injection) zuclopenthixol acetate. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations on the use of zuclopenthixol acetate for the management of psychiatric emergencies in preference to 'standard' treatment have to be viewed with caution. Most of the small trials present important methodological flaws and findings are poorly reported. This review did not find any suggestion that zuclopenthixol acetate is more or less effective in controlling aggressive acute psychosis, or in preventing adverse effects than intramuscular haloperidol, and neither seemed to have a rapid onset of action. Use of zuclopenthixol acetate may result in less numerous coercive injections and low doses of the drug may be as effective as higher doses. Well-conducted pragmatic randomised controlled trials are needed.

Benzodiazepines for catatonia in people with schizophrenia and other serious mental illnesses.

BACKGROUND: Catatonia is a debilitating disorder of movement and volition associated with schizophrenia and some other mental disorders. People in a catatonic state have increased risk of secondary complications such as pneumonia, malnutrition and dehydration. The mainstay of treatment has been drug therapies and electroconvulsive therapy. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of benzodiazepines with other drugs, placebo or electroconvulsive therapy for people with catatonia. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (March 2007) and manually searched reference lists from the selected studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: All relevant randomised controlled clinical trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We (RCG, GW) extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we would have calculated relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis using a fixed-effect model. MAIN RESULTS: No studies could be included. We did find studies reporting no usable data that we had to exclude or assign to those awaiting assessment. These studies, although poorly reported, do illustrate that relevant studies have been undertaken, and are not impossible. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Studies have been justified and undertaken in the past. This justification remains as relevant as ever. Further studies with a high-quality methodology and reporting are required and it may be for countries where catatonia is seen often to take a lead in this area.

Internalizing stigma associated with mental illness: findings from a general population survey in Jamaica.

OBJECTIVES: The culture of stigma associated with mental illness is particularly intense when persons who are normally victims of that stigmatization (mentally ill persons and their family members) themselves act negatively toward others whom they associate with mental illness. We attempt to determine the extent of this internalization and assimilation of stigmatizing attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors in persons who are at risk for such stigmatization in Jamaica. METHODS: Data from a 2006 national survey on mental health were analyzed. Demographic variables, the presence or absence of mental illness in respondents and in their family members, and responses pertaining to behaviors and attitudes toward mentally ill persons were examined. Subsamples (respondents with mental illness, respondents with a family member with mental illness, respondents with neither) were compared using the chi-square test. RESULTS: Respondents with family members with mental illness were less likely to demonstrate a number of different manifestations of stigmatization than others (P=0.009-0.019). Respondents with mental illness showed no difference in the demonstration of a number of different manifestations of stigmatization from other respondents (P=0.069-0.515). CONCLUSIONS: The small number of mentally ill respondents resulted in low statistical power for demonstrating differences between that subgroup and other respondents. The significantly more positive attitudes and behavior of respondents with family members with mental illness suggest that some benefit may be gained by creating more opportunities for the general public to interact with persons with mental illness.

Internalizing stigma associated with mental illness: findings from a general population survey in Jamaica

OBJECTIVES. The culture of stigma associated with mental illness is particularly intense when persons who are normally victims of that stigmatization (mentally ill persons and their family members) themselves act negatively toward others whom they associate with mental illness. We attempt to determine the extent of this internalization and assimilation of stigmatizing attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors in persons who are at risk for such stigmatization in Jamaica. METHODS. Data from a 2006 national survey on mental health were analyzed. Demographic variables, the presence or absence of mental illness in respondents and in their family members, and responses pertaining to behaviors and attitudes toward mentally ill persons were examined. Subsamples (respondents with mental illness, respondents with a family member with mental illness, respondents with neither) were compared using the chi-square test. RESULTS. Respondents with family members with mental illness were less likely to demonstrate a number of different manifestations of stigmatization than others (P = 0.009–0.019). Respondents with mental illness showed no difference in the demonstration of a number of different manifestations of stigmatization from other respondents (P = 0.069–0.515). CONCLUSIONS. The small number of mentally ill respondents resulted in low statistical power for demonstrating differences between that subgroup and other respondents. The significantly more positive attitudes and behavior of respondents with family members with mental illness suggest that some benefit may be gained by creating more opportunities for the general public to interact with persons with mental illness.

Internalizing stigma associated with mental illness: findings from a general population survey in Jamaica

OBJECTIVES: The culture of stigma associated with mental illness is particularly intense when persons who are normally victims of that stigmatization (mentally ill persons and their family members) themselves act negatively toward others whom they associate with mental illness. We attempt to determine the extent of this internalization and assimilation of stigmatizing attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors in persons who are at risk for such stigmatization in Jamaica. METHODS: Data from a 2006 national survey on mental health were analyzed. Demographic variables, the presence or absence of mental illness in respondents and in their family members, and responses pertaining to behaviors and attitudes toward mentally ill persons were examined. Subsamples (respondents with mental illness, respondents with a family member with mental illness, respondents with neither) were compared using the chi-square test. RESULTS: Respondents with family members with mental illness were less likely to demonstrate a number of different manifestations of stigmatization than others (P = 0.009-0.019). Respondents with mental illness showed no difference in the demonstration of a number of different manifestations of stigmatization from other respondents (P = 0.069-0.515). CONCLUSIONS: The small number of mentally ill respondents resulted in low statistical power for demonstrating differences between that subgroup and other respondents. The significantly more positive attitudes and behavior of respondents with family members with mental illness suggest that some benefit may be gained by creating more opportunities for the general public to interact with persons with mental illness.

OBJETIVOS:La cultura del estigma asociado con las enfermedades mentales es especialmente intensa cuando las mismas personas que normalmente son víctimas de la estigmatización (personas con enfermedades mentales y los miembros de su familia) actúan de forma negativa hacia otras personas a las que asocian con enfermedades mentales. El objetivo de este trabajo fue determinar el grado de esta interiorización y la asimilación de actitudes, juicios y comportamientos estigmatizadores en personas en riesgo de sufrir este tipo de estigmatización en Jamaica. MÉTODOS: Se analizaron los datos de la encuesta nacional sobre salud mental de 2006. Se examinaron las variables demográficas, la presencia o ausencia de enfermedades mentales en los encuestados y los miembros de su familia y las respuestas relacionadas con el comportamiento y las actitudes hacia las personas que sufren enfermedades mentales. Se compararon tres submuestras (encuestados con enfermedades mentales, encuestados que tenían familiares con enfermedades mentales y encuestados sin ninguna de las características anteriores) mediante la prueba de la ji al cuadrado. RESULTADOS: Los encuestados que tenían familiares con enfermedades mentales presentaron menos probabilidad de mostrar diversas manifestaciones de estigmatización que los otros subgrupos (P = 0,009-0,019). No se encontraron diferencias significativas entre los encuestados con alguna enfermedad mental y los otros subgrupos en cuanto a la demostración de diversas manifestaciones de estigmatización (P = 0,069-0,515). CONCLUSIONES: El pequeño número de encuestados con enfermedades mentales dio como resultado un bajo poder estadístico para mostrar diferencias entre ese subgrupo y los otros. Las actitudes y el comportamiento significativamente más positivos observados en los encuestados que tenían miembros de su familia con enfermedades mentales indican que se pueden obtener beneficios si se crean más oportunidades para que la población...