Nightmares and psychiatric symptoms: A systematic review of longitudinal, experimental, and clinical trial studies.

Nightmares occur across a wide range of psychiatric disorders, but outside of PTSD presentations are infrequently considered a treatment priority. We aimed to assess evidence for a contributory causal role of nightmares to the occurrence of psychiatric disorders, and vice versa. A systematic review was conducted of longitudinal, experimental, and clinical trial studies. Twenty-four longitudinal, sixteen trials, and no experimental studies were identified. Methodological shortcomings were common, especially the use of single-item nightmare assessment. Thirty-five studies assessed the path from nightmares to psychiatric symptoms. Depression (n = 10 studies), PTSD (n = 10) and anxiety (n = 5) were the most commonly assessed outcomes in trials. Most were not designed to assess the effect of nightmare treatment on psychiatric symptoms. Treating nightmares led to moderate reductions in PTSD and depression, small to moderate reductions in anxiety, and potentially moderate reductions in paranoia. Nightmares increased the risk of later suicide outcomes (n = 10), but two small pilot trials indicated that treating nightmares might potentially prevent recovery of suicidal ideation. PTSD treatment led to large reductions in trauma-related nightmares (n = 3). The limited literature suggests that treating nightmares may be one route to lessening threat-based disorders in particular, suggestive of a causal relationship. Overall, however, nightmares in most disorders are greatly understudied.

Association of loneliness and social network size in adulthood with childhood maltreatment: Analyses of a population-based and a clinical sample.

BACKGROUND: Perceived loneliness and objective social network size are related but distinct factors, which negatively affect mental health and are prevalent in patients who have experienced childhood maltreatment (CM), for example, patients with persistent depressive disorder (PDD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD). This cross-diagnostic study investigated whether loneliness, social network size, or both are associated with self-reported CM. METHODS: Loneliness and social network size were assessed in a population-based sample at two time points (Study 1, N = 509), and a clinical group of patients with PDD or BPD (Study 2, N = 190) using the UCLA Loneliness Scale and the Social Network Index. Further measures were the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire, and standard depression rating scales. Linear regression analyses were applied to compare associations of loneliness or social network size with CM. Multiple mediation analyses were used to test the relative importance of loneliness and social network size in the relationship between CM and depressive symptoms. RESULTS: In both studies, loneliness showed a stronger association than social network size with CM. This was particularly marked for emotional neglect and emotional abuse. Loneliness but not social network size mediated the relationship between CM and depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Loneliness is particularly associated with self-reported CM, and in this respect distinct from the social network size. Our results underline the importance of differentiating both psychosocial constructs and suggest focusing on perceived loneliness and its etiological underpinnings by mechanism-based psychosocial interventions.

Loneliness is associated with maladaptive schema modes in patients with persistent depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVES: Though loneliness represents a public health concern, this complex unpleasant feeling is commonly neglected in psychiatric care and may constitute a new treatment target in clinical groups particularly prone to feeling lonely and socially isolated, e.g., persistent depressive disorder (PDD). Schema modes encompass a set of distinct cognitive-affective patterns that may contribute to loneliness and social isolation. Aim of this study was to examine the interplay between subjective loneliness and objective social network size with schema modes in patients with PDD as well as healthy controls (HC). METHOD: Sixty-two PDD patients (DSM-5; 35 female, Mage = 40.5, SD = 12.4) and 71 HC (60 female, Mage = 28.1, SD = 10.1) were assessed cross-sectionally using the following self-report measures: UCLA Loneliness Scale, Social Network Index (SNI), and Schema-Mode-Inventory, revised version (SMI-r). Correlational and multiple linear regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: PDD patients reported significantly higher scores of loneliness and maladaptive schema modes and a smaller social network than HC. Loneliness was significantly positively associated with the modes Vulnerable Child, Detached Protector, Bully and Attack, and Punitive Parent, and negatively with Contented Child and Healthy Adult in both groups. In contrast, social network size was only positively associated with the Contented Child mode. CONCLUSION: Loneliness is highly prevalent in PDD and in contrast to social network size associated with maladaptive schema modes. Therapeutically addressing these schema modes with specific techniques may represent a mechanism-based intervention for patients suffering from loneliness and should be investigated in clinical trials.

Identifying potential mechanisms between childhood trauma and the psychological response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany: a longitudinal study.

Childhood maltreatment (CM) has been associated with adverse psychosocial outcomes during the pandemic, but the underlying mechanisms are unclear. In a prospective online study using baseline and 10-week follow-up data of 391 German participants, we applied multiple mediation analyses to test to what extent COVID-19 perceived stressors mediate the association between CM and later adverse psychosocial outcomes compared to established mediators of rumination and insecure attachment. We also explored the relative importance of different COVID-19 related stressors in predicting adverse psychological trajectories using elastic net regression. Results showed that CM was longitudinally associated with all adverse psychosocial outcome. COVID-19 perceived stressors, rumination, and insecure attachment mediated this relationship and full mediation was observed for the outcomes anxiety, stress and psychological well-being. COVID-19-related concerns about the future was most strongly and consistently associated with adverse psychosocial functioning. These findings provide preliminary evidence that COVID-19 perceived stressors, in particular concerns about the future, may be a key mechanism underlying the development of adverse psychosocial outcomes in individuals with a CM history. Thus, COVID-19 perceived stressors may require a higher priority for prevention and treatment efforts in vulnerable groups. Our results warrant replication in more representative cross-cultural samples.

Differential psychological response to the COVID-19 pandemic in psychiatric inpatients compared to a non-clinical population from Germany.

The COVID-19 pandemic is an inherently stressful situation, which may lead to adverse psychosocial outcomes in various populations. Yet, individuals may not be affected equally by stressors posed by the pandemic and those with pre-existing mental disorders could be particularly vulnerable. To test this hypothesis, we assessed the psychological response to the pandemic in a case-control design. We used an age-, sex- and employment status-matched case-control sample (n = 216) of psychiatric inpatients, recruited from the LMU Psychiatry Biobank Munich study and non-clinical individuals from the general population. Participants completed validated self-report measures on stress, anxiety, depression, paranoia, rumination, loneliness, well-being, resilience, and a newly developed index of stressors associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Multiple linear regression analyses were conducted to assess the effects of group, COVID-19-specific stressors, and their interaction on the different psychosocial outcomes. While psychiatric inpatients reported larger mental health difficulties overall, the impact of COVID-19-specific stressors was lower in patients and not associated with worse psychological functioning compared to non-clinical individuals. In contrast, depressive symptoms, rumination, loneliness, and well-being were more strongly associated with COVID-19-specific stressors in non-clinical individuals and similar to the severity of inpatients for those who experienced the greatest COVID-19-specific stressor impact Contrary to expectations, the psychological response to the pandemic may not be worse in psychiatric inpatients compared to non-clinical individuals. Yet, individuals from the general population, who were hit hardest by the pandemic, should be monitored and may be in need of mental health prevention and treatment efforts.

The COVID-19 Pandemic Mental Health Questionnaire (CoPaQ): psychometric evaluation and compliance with countermeasures in psychiatric inpatients and non-clinical individuals.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly impacted people's lives across a broad spectrum of psychosocial domains. We report the development and psychometric evaluation of the self-report COVID-19 Pandemic Mental Health Questionnaire (CoPaQ), which assesses COVID-19 contamination anxiety, countermeasure necessity and compliance, mental health impact, stressor impact, social media usage, interpersonal conflicts, paranoid ideations, institutional & political trust, conspiracy beliefs, and social cohesion. Further, we illustrate the questionnaire's utility in an applied example investigating if higher SARS-Cov-2 infection rates in psychiatric patients could be explained by reduced compliance with preventive countermeasures. METHODS: A group of 511 non-clinical individuals completed an initial pool of 111 CoPaQ items (Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/3evn9/ ) and additional scales measuring psychological distress, well-being, and paranoia to assess construct validity and lifetime mental health diagnosis for criterion validity. Factor structure was determined by exploratory factor analyses and validated by conducting confirmatory factor analysis in the accompanying longitudinal sample (n = 318) and an independent psychiatric inpatient sample primarily admitted for major depressive-, substance abuse-, personality-, and anxiety disorders (n = 113). Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach's Alpha and McDonald's Omega. For the applied research example, Welch t-tests and correlational analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Twelve out of 16 extracted subscales were retained in the final questionnaire version, which provided preliminary evidence for adequate psychometric properties in terms of factor structure, internal consistency, and construct and criterion validity. Our applied research example showed that patients exhibited greater support for COVID-19 countermeasures than non-clinical individuals. However, this requires replication in future studies. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that the CoPaQ is a comprehensive and valid measure of the psychosocial impact of the pandemic and could allow to a degree to disentangle the complex psychosocial phenomena of the pandemic as exemplified by our applied analyses.

The Psychosocial Burden on Liver Transplant Recipients during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Due to the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, multiple measures have been implemented including social distancing and curfews. Both the disease and measures might cause stress, particularly in persons at risk, such as liver transplant (LT) recipients. Here, we evaluated the impact on psychosocial well-being of LT recipients. METHODS: Seventy-nine LT recipients and 83 nontransplanted controls participated in this study. Questionnaires comprising the WHO-five well-being index (WHO-5), the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Loneliness Scale, and the preliminary COVID-19 Pandemic Mental Health Questionnaire (CoPaQ) were distributed among them. For the WHO-5 and UCLA Loneliness Scale, means of sum scores were compared between both groups, while a comparison on item level was conducted for the CoPaQ. RESULTS: The general well-being was similar in LT recipients and controls (WHO-5: 64.0 ± 20.5% vs. 66.4 ± 17.3%), while the UCLA Loneliness Scale indicated a higher level of perceived social isolation (1.90 ± 0.51 vs. 1.65 ± 0.53, p = 0.001). The CoPaQ indicated higher risk perception regarding health issues, in particular concerning the fear of having severe consequences in case of a COVID-19 infection (3.1 ± 1.1 vs. 2.2 ± 1.3, p < 0.001), higher risk-avoiding behavior and stronger adherence to pandemic measures in LT recipients. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, LT recipients displayed a higher risk perception, a more pronounced risk-avoiding behavior and a higher perception of loneliness, while the overall well-being was comparable to nontransplanted controls.

Catastrophic cognitions about coronavirus: the Oxford psychological investigation of coronavirus questionnaire [TOPIC-Q].

BACKGROUND: Cognitive therapies are developed on the principle that specific cognitive appraisals are key determinants in the development and maintenance of mental health disorders. It is likely that particular appraisals of the coronavirus pandemic will have explanatory power for subsequent mental health outcomes in the general public. To enable testing of this hypothesis we developed a questionnaire assessing coronavirus-related cognitions. METHODS: 12 285 participants completed online a 46-item pool of cognitions about coronavirus and six measures of different mental health problems. The sample was randomly split into derivation and validation samples. Exploratory factor analyses determined the factor structure, selection of items, and model fit in the derivation sample. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) then tested this model in the validation sample. Associations of the questionnaire with mental health outcomes were examined. RESULTS: The 26-item, seven-factor, Oxford Psychological Investigation of Coronavirus Questionnaire [TOPIC-Q] was developed. CFA demonstrated a good model fit (χ2 = 2108.43, df = 278, p < 0.001, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.950, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.942, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.033, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.038). The factors were: cognitions about (1) safety and vulnerability, (2) negative long-term impact, (3) having the virus, (4) spreading the virus, (5) social judgment, (6) negative self, and (7) being targeted. The questionnaire explained significant variance in depression (45.8%), social anxiety (37.3%), agoraphobia (23.2%), paranoia (27.3%), post-traumatic stress disorder (57.1%), and panic disorder (31.4%). Cognitions about negative long-term impact had the greatest explanatory power across disorders. CONCLUSIONS: TOPIC-Q provides a method to assess appraisals of the pandemic, which is likely to prove helpful both in longitudinal studies assessing mental health outcomes and in delivery of psychological therapy.

Loneliness, Social Isolation and Their Difference: A Cross-Diagnostic Study in Persistent Depressive Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder.

Background: Interpersonal difficulties are a key feature of persistent depressive disorder (PDD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD). Caught in a vicious circle of dysfunctional interpersonal transaction, PDD and BPD patients are at great risk of experiencing prolonged loneliness. Loneliness, in turn, has been associated with the development of mental disorders and chronic illness trajectories. Besides, several factors may contribute to the experience of loneliness across the lifespan, such as social network characteristics, a history of childhood maltreatment (CM), and cognitive-affective biases such as rejection sensitivity (RS). This cross-diagnostic study approached the topic of perceived loneliness by comparing PDD and BPD patients with healthy controls (HC) in its interplay with symptom burden, social network characteristics, RS as well as CM. Method: Thirty-four PDD patients (DSM-5; 15 female, Mage = 38.2, SD = 12.3), 36 BPD patients (DSM-5; 19 female, Mage = 28.8, SD = 9.2), and 70 age- and gender-matched HC were assessed cross-sectionally using the following self-report measures: UCLA Loneliness Scale, Social Network Index (SNI; size, diversity, and embeddedness), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II), Borderline Symptom List (BSL-23), Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ), and Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire (RSQ). Results: Both patient groups reported significantly higher levels of perceived loneliness, symptom severity, and smaller social network characteristics compared to HC. Loneliness was significantly correlated with severity of self-reported clinical symptoms in PDD and at trend level in BPD. Besides, loneliness tended to be related to social network characteristics for all groups except PDD patients. Both PDD and BPD patients showed higher RS as well as CTQ scores than HC. A history of emotional abuse and emotional neglect was associated with loneliness, and this association was mediated by RS as demonstrated by an exploratory mediation analysis. Discussion: Loneliness is highly prevalent in PDD and BPD patients and contributes to the overall symptom burden. Interestingly, loneliness showed an association with prior experiences of CM as well as current RS. We therefore propose a comprehensive model on how intra- und interpersonal aspects may interplay in the dynamics of loneliness in light of CM. Finally, this model may have further implications for psychotherapeutic interventions.

Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Nightmares for Patients with Persecutory Delusions (Nites): An Assessor-Blind, Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Nightmares are relatively common in patients experiencing psychosis but rarely assessed or treated. Nightmares may maintain persecutory delusions by portraying fears in sensory-rich detail. We tested the potential benefits of imagery-focused cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for nightmares on nightmare severity and persecutory delusions. METHOD: This assessor-blind parallel-group pilot trial randomized 24 participants with nightmares and persecutory delusions to receive CBT for nightmares delivered over 4 weeks in addition to treatment as usual (TAU) or TAU alone. Assessments were at 0, 4 (end of treatment), and 8 weeks (follow-up). Feasibility outcomes assessed therapy uptake, techniques used, satisfaction, and attrition. The primary efficacy outcome assessed nightmare severity at week 4. Analyses were intention to treat, estimating treatment effect with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: All participants offered CBT completed therapy (mean [SD], 4.8 [0.6] sessions) with high satisfaction, and 20 (83%) participants completed all assessments. Compared with TAU, CBT led to large improvements in nightmares (adjusted mean difference = -7.0; 95% CI, -12.6 to -1.3; d = -1.1) and insomnia (6.3; 95% CI, 2.6 to 10.0; d = 1.4) at week 4. Gains were maintained at follow-up. Suicidal ideation was not exacerbated by CBT but remained stable to follow-up, compared with TAU, which reduced at follow-up (6.8; 95% CI, 0.3 to 3.3; d = 0.7). CBT led to reductions in paranoia (-20.8; 95% CI, -43.2 to 1.7; d = -0.6), although CIs were wide. Three serious adverse events were deemed unrelated to participation (CBT = 2, TAU = 1). CONCLUSIONS: CBT for nightmares is feasible and may be efficacious for treating nightmares and comorbid insomnia for patients with persecutory delusions. It shows promise on paranoia but potentially not on suicidal ideation.

Stabilising sleep for patients admitted at acute crisis to a psychiatric hospital (OWLS): an assessor-blind pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: When patients are admitted onto psychiatric wards, sleep problems are highly prevalent. We carried out the first trial testing a psychological sleep treatment at acute admission (Oxford Ward sLeep Solution, OWLS). METHODS: This assessor-blind parallel-group pilot trial randomised patients to receive sleep treatment at acute crisis [STAC, plus standard care (SC)], or SC alone (1 : 1). STAC included cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) for insomnia, sleep monitoring and light/dark exposure for circadian entrainment, delivered over 2 weeks. Assessments took place at 0, 2, 4 and 12 weeks. Feasibility outcomes assessed recruitment, retention of participants and uptake of the therapy. Primary efficacy outcomes were the Insomnia Severity Index and Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale at week 2. Analyses were intention-to-treat, estimating treatment effect with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Between October 2015 and July 2016, 40 participants were recruited (from 43 assessed eligible). All participants offered STAC completed treatment (mean sessions received = 8.6, s.d. = 1.5). All participants completed the primary end point. Compared with SC, STAC led to large effect size (ES) reductions in insomnia at week 2 (adjusted mean difference -4.6, 95% CI -7.7 to -1.4, ES -0.9), a small improvement in psychological wellbeing (adjusted mean difference 3.7, 95% CI -2.8 to 10.1, ES 0.3) and patients were discharged 8.5 days earlier. One patient in the STAC group had an adverse event, unrelated to participation. CONCLUSIONS: In this challenging environment for research, the trial was feasible. Therapy uptake was high. STAC may be a highly effective treatment for sleep disturbance on wards with potential wider benefits on wellbeing and admission length.

Nightmares in the general population: identifying potential causal factors.

BACKGROUND: Nightmares are inherently distressing, prevent restorative sleep, and are associated with a number of psychiatric problems, but have rarely been the subject of empirical study. Negative affect, linked to stressful events, is generally considered the key trigger of nightmares; hence nightmares have most often been considered in the context of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, many individuals with heightened negative affect do not have nightmares. The objective of this study was to identify mechanistically plausible factors, beyond negative affect, that may explain why individuals experience nightmares. METHOD: 846 participants from the UK general population completed an online survey about nightmare occurrence and severity (pre-occupation, distress, and impairment), negative affect, worry, depersonalisation, hallucinatory experiences, paranoia, alcohol use, sleep duration, physical activity levels, PTSD symptoms, and stressful life events. Associations of nightmares with the putative predictive factors were tested controlling for levels of negative affect. Analyses were also repeated controlling for levels of PTSD and the recent occurrence of stressful life events. RESULTS: Nightmare occurrence, adjusting for negative affect, was associated with higher levels of worry, depersonalisation, hallucinatory experiences, paranoia, and sleep duration (odds ratios 1.25-1.45). Nightmare severity, controlling for negative affect, was associated with higher levels of worry, depersonalisation, hallucinatory experiences, and paranoia (R 2s: 0.33-0.39). Alcohol use and physical activity levels were not associated with nightmares. DISCUSSION: The study identifies a number of potential predictors of the occurrence and severity of nightmares. Causal roles require testing in future longitudinal, experimental, and treatment studies.