An investigation of gender differences in social phobia.

The present study was an exploratory investigation of gender differences in a large sample of persons with social phobia. Potential differences in demographic characteristics, comorbidity, severity of fear, and situations feared were examined. No differences were found on history of social phobia, social phobia subtype, or comorbidity of additional anxiety disorders, mood disorders, or avoidant personality disorder. However, women exhibited more severe social fears as indexed by several assessment instruments. Some differences between men and women also emerged in their report of severity of fear in specific situations. Women reported significantly greater fear than men while talking to authority, acting/performing/giving a talk in front of an audience, working while being observed, entering a room when others are already seated, being the center of attention, speaking up at a meeting, expressing disagreement or disapproval to people they do not know very well, giving a report to a group, and giving a party. Men reported significantly more fear than women regarding urinating in public bathrooms and returning goods to a store. Additionally, there were some differences in the proportion of men and women reporting fear in different situations. Specifically, more women than men reported fear of going to a party, and more men than women reported fear of urinating in a public restroom. Gender differences among patients with social phobia are discussed in the context of traditional sex-role expectations.

Functional impairment in social phobia.

BACKGROUND: This study examined the nature of impairment of functioning in persons with social phobia and assessed the validity of two new rating scales for describing impairment in social phobia. METHOD: In 32 patients with social phobia and 14 normal control subjects, impairment was assessed using the Disability Profile and the Liebowitz Self-Rated Disability Scale, new instruments designed to provide clinician- and patient-rated descriptive measures of current and lifetime functional impairment related to emotional problems. Validity of the new scales was assessed by measuring internal consistency, comparing scores for patients and controls, and comparing scores with those on standard measures of disability, social phobia symptoms, and social support. RESULTS: More than half of all social phobic patients reported at least moderate impairment at some time in their lives, due to social anxiety and avoidance, in areas of education, employment, family relationships, marriage/romantic relationships, friendships/social network, and other interests. Social phobic patients were rated more impaired than normal controls on nearly all items on both measures. Both scales were internally consistent, with Cronbach's alpha coefficients for lifetime and current disability subscales in the range of .87 to .92. Significant positive correlations of scores on the new scales with scores on coadministered standard scales of social phobia symptoms and disability demonstrated concurrent validity. Disability was not significantly correlated with measures of social support. CONCLUSION: Social phobia is associated with impairment in most areas of functioning, and the new scales appear useful in assessing functional impairment related to social phobia.

Reversible monoamine oxidase-A inhibitors in social phobia.

Placebo-controlled studies of standard and reversible monoamine oxidase-A (MAO-A) inhibitors in social phobia are reviewed. Four studies utilized several common measures, including the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale and the Hamilton Anxiety Scale. Efficacy for phenelzine, moclobemide, and brofaromine appeared comparable across studies on both categorical and dimensional measures, as did placebo results. In terms of patient characteristics, baseline social phobia ratings were similar across studies, but initial Hamilton Anxiety Scale scores differed. Although the reason for this is uncertain, it is more likely due to rater differences than to patient differences.

Psychopharmacologic treatment of child and adolescent obsessive compulsive disorder.

Recent evidence now suggests that OCD is much more common in young people than previously thought, affecting up to 200,000 children and adolescents in the United States alone. Unlike many childhood disorders, OCD appears remarkably similar for children and adults in terms of both clinical presentations and treatment response. The treatments of choice for OCD are antidepressants with potent serotonergic reuptake blocking effects such as fluoxetine and clomipramine. Both medications appear to be equally effective in terms of symptom remission, with different investigators reporting response rates in the range of 50% to 75%. Recent evidence suggests, however, that fluoxetine may be tolerated more easily than clomipramine and may be associated with less relapse upon discontinuation. Behavior therapy, either alone or in combination with medication, has been shown to be an effective alternative treatment. In spite of the increasing recognition of the disorder in both adults and children, only a handful of treatment outcome studies of child and adolescent OCD have been conducted and much work remains to be done in this area.

Treatment of social phobia with drugs other than benzodiazepines.

Social phobia is emerging as an important cause of psychiatric morbidity. Reasons for this are described, as are clinical issues of importance to social phobia, including the extensive associated distress and disability. The use of phenelzine, atenolol, buspirone, fluoxetine, and moclobemide are described. Diagnostic and transcultural aspects of social phobia are described.