Psychometric analysis of the Swedish panic disorder severity scale and its self-report version.

BACKGROUND: Panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia (PDA or PD, respectively), is a major public health problem. After having established a PD diagnosis based on the DSM or the ICD systems, the Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) is the most widely used interview-based instrument for assessing disorder severity. There is also a self-report version of the instrument (PDSS-SR); both exist in a Swedish translation but their psychometric properties remain untested. METHODS: We studied 221 patients with PD/PDA recruited to a randomized controlled preference trial of cognitive-behavioral and brief panic-focused psychodynamic psychotherapy. In addition to PDSS and PDSS-SR the participants completed self-reports including the Clinical Outcome in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure, Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Sheehan Disability Scale, Bodily Sensations Questionnaire and the Mobility Inventory for Agoraphobia. RESULTS: PDSS and PDSS-SR possessed excellent psychometric properties (internal consistency, test-retest reliability) and convergent validity. A single factor structure for both versions was not confirmed. In terms of clinical utility, the PDSS had very high inter-rater reliability and correspondence with PD assessed via structured diagnostic interview. Both versions were sensitive to the effects of PD-focused treatment, although subjects scored systematically lower on the self-report version. CONCLUSIONS: The study confirmed the reliability and validity of the Swedish versions of PDSS and PDSS-SR. Both versions were highly sensitive to the effects of two PD-focused treatments and can be used both in clinical and research settings. However, further investigation of the factor structures of both the PDSS and PDSS-SR is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01606592.

Low stability of diagnostic classifications of anxiety disorders over time: A six-year follow-up of the NESDA study.

BACKGROUND: Stability of diagnosis was listed as an important predictive validator for maintaining separate diagnostic classifications in DSM-5. The aim of this study is to examine the longitudinal stability of anxiety disorder diagnoses, and the difference in stability between subjects with a chronic versus a non-chronic course. METHODS: Longitudinal data of 447 subjects with a current pure anxiety disorder diagnosis at baseline from the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety were used. At baseline, 2-, 4-, and 6-year follow-up mental disorders were assessed and numbers (and percentages) of transitions from one anxiety disorder diagnosis to another were determined for each anxiety disorder diagnosis separately and for subjects with a chronic (i.e. one or more anxiety disorder at every follow-up assessment) and a non-chronic course. RESULTS: Transition percentages were high in all anxiety disorder diagnoses, ranging from 21.1% for social anxiety disorder to 46.3% for panic disorder with agoraphobia at six years of follow-up. Transition numbers were higher in the chronic than in the non-chronic course group (p=0.01). LIMITATIONS: Due to the 2 year sample frequency, the number of subjects with a chronic course may have been overestimated as intermittent recovery periods may have been missed. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that anxiety disorder diagnoses are not stable over time. The validity of the different anxiety disorder categories is not supported by these longitudinal patterns, which may be interpreted as support for a more pronounced dimensional approach to the classification of anxiety disorders.

CLINICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE REVISED DSM-5 DEFINITION OF AGORAPHOBIA IN TREATMENT-SEEKING ANXIOUS YOUTH.

BACKGROUND: In DSM-5, the agoraphobia core symptom criterion has been revised to require fear about multiple situations from across at least two distinct domains in which escape might be difficult or panic-like symptoms might develop. The present study examined patterns and correlates of the recent change in a sample of anxious youth with symptom presentations consistent with the DSM-IV agoraphobia definition and/or specific phobia (SP) to consider how the recent diagnostic change impacts the prevalence and composition of agoraphobia in children and adolescents. METHOD: Analyses (N = 151) evaluated impairment and correlates of agoraphobic youth who no longer meet the DSM-5 agoraphobia criteria relative to agoraphobic youth who do meet the new DSM-5 criteria. Secondary analyses compared agoraphobic youth not meeting DSM-5 criteria to SP youth. RESULTS: One-quarter of youth with symptom presentations consistent with the DSM-IV agoraphobia definition no longer met criteria for DSM-5 agoraphobia, but showed comparable severity and impairment across most domains to youth who do meet criteria for DSM-5 agoraphobia. Further, these youth showed higher levels of anxiety sensitivity and internalizing psychopathology relative to youth with SP. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of impaired youth with considerable agoraphobic symptom presentations have been left without a specified anxiety diagnosis by the DSM-5, which may affect their ability to receive and/or get coverage for services and their representation in treatment evaluations. Future DSM iterations may do well to include a "circumscribed" agoraphobia specifier that would characterize presentations of fear or anxiety about multiple situations, but that do not span across at least two distinct situational domains.

Is post-event processing a social anxiety specific or transdiagnostic cognitive process in the anxiety spectrum?

BACKGROUND: Research on post-event processing (PEP), where individuals conduct a post-mortem evaluation of a social situation, has focused primarily on its relationship with social anxiety. AIMS: The current study examined: 1) levels of PEP for a standardized event in different anxiety disorders; 2) the relationship between peak anxiety levels during this event and subsequent PEP; and 3) the relationship between PEP and disorder-specific symptom severity. METHOD: Participants with primary DSM-IV diagnoses of social anxiety disorder (SAD), obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), panic disorder with/without agoraphobia (PD/A), or generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) completed diagnosis specific symptom measures before attending group cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) specific to their diagnosis. Participants rated their peak anxiety level during the first group therapy session, and one week later rated PEP in the context of CBT. RESULTS: The results indicated that all anxiety disorder groups showed heightened and equivalent PEP ratings. Peak state anxiety during the first CBT session predicted subsequent level of PEP, irrespective of diagnostic group. PEP ratings were found to be associated with disorder-specific symptom severity in SAD, GAD, and PD/A, but not in OCD. CONCLUSIONS: PEP may be a transdiagnostic process with relevance to a broad range of anxiety disorders, not just SAD.

Panic disorder and agoraphobia: an overview and commentary on DSM-5 changes.

The recently published DSM-5 contains a number of changes pertinent to panic disorder and agoraphobia. These changes include separation of panic disorder and agoraphobia into separate diagnoses, the addition of criteria and guidelines for distinguishing agoraphobia from specific phobia, the addition of a 6-month duration requirement for agoraphobia, the addition of panic attacks as a specifier to any DSM-5 diagnosis, changes to descriptors of panic attack types, as well as various changes to the descriptive text. It is crucial that clinicians and researchers working with individuals presenting with panic attacks and panic-like symptoms understand these changes. The purpose of the current paper is to provide a summary of the main changes, to critique the changes in the context of available empirical evidence, and to highlight clinical implications and potential impact on mental health service utilization. Several of the changes have the potential to improve access to evidence-based treatment; yet, although certain changes appear justified in that they were based on converging evidence from different empirical sources, other changes appear questionable, at least based on the information presented in the DSM-5 text and related publications. Ongoing research of DSM-5 panic disorder and agoraphobia as well as application of the new diagnostic criteria in clinical contexts is needed to further inform the strengths and limitations of DSM-5 conceptualizations of panic disorder and agoraphobia.

Late-onset agoraphobia: general population incidence and evidence for a clinical subtype.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the general population incidence of late-life agoraphobia and to define its clinical characteristics and risk factors. METHOD: A total of 1,968 persons ≥65 years old were randomly recruited from the electoral rolls of the district of Montpellier, France. Prevalent and incident agoraphobia diagnosed with a standardized psychiatric examination and validated by a clinical panel were assessed at baseline and over a 4-year follow-up. RESULTS: The 1-month baseline prevalence of agoraphobia was estimated to be 10.4%. Among persons with agoraphobia, 10.9% reported having their first episode at age 65 or above. During the 4-year follow-up, 11.2% of participants without agoraphobia at baseline had a first episode, resulting in an incidence rate of 32 per 1,000 person-years. These 132 incident late-onset cases were associated with higher incidence rates of anxiety disorders and suicidal ideation. Of the incident cases, only two were characterized by past or concurrent panic attacks, a rate that was not significantly different from that of the noncase group. The principal baseline risk factors for incident cases, derived from a multivariate model incorporating all significant risk factors, were younger age at onset (odds ratio=0.94, 95% CI=0.90-0.99), poorer visuospatial memory performance (odds ratio=1.60, 95% CI=1.02-2.49), severe depression (odds ratio=2.62, 95% CI=1.34-5.10), and trait anxiety (odds ratio=1.73, 95% CI=1.03-2.90). No significant association was found with cardiac pathologies. CONCLUSIONS: Agoraphobia has a high prevalence in the elderly, and unlike cases in younger populations, late-onset cases are not more common in women and are not associated with panic attacks, suggesting a late-life subtype. Severe depression, trait anxiety, and poor visuospatial memory are the principal risk factors for late-onset agoraphobia.

Re-examining the differential familial liability of agoraphobia and panic disorder.

BACKGROUND: Controversy surrounds the question of whether agoraphobia (AG) exists as an independent diagnostic entity apart from panic. In favor of this position, AG without panic disorder (PD) in parents was found being unrelated to offsprings' risk for AG or PD, albeit it may enhance the familial transmission of PD (Nocon et al., Depress Anxiety 2008;25:422-434). However, a recent behavioral genetic analysis (Mosing et al., Depress Anxiety 2009;26:1004-1011) found an increased risk for both PD and AG in siblings of those with AG without PD, casting doubt on whether AG exists independently of PD. Convincing evidence for either position notably requires considering also other anxiety disorders to establish the position of AG relative to the panic/anxiety spectrum. METHODS: Familial transmission of panic attacks (PAs), PD, and AG was examined in a 10-year prospective-longitudinal community study of 3,021 adolescents and young adults including completed direct and indirect information on parental psychopathology. Standardized diagnostic assessments using the Munich-Composite International Diagnostic Interview allowed generating exclusive diagnostic groups independent from diagnostic hierarchy rules. RESULTS: Parental PD without AG was associated with an increased risk for PA and PD+AG, but not for PD without AG or AG without PD in offspring. Parental AG without PD was unrelated to the offsprings' risk for PA, exclusive PD or AG, or PD+AG. Findings were largely unaffected by adjustment for other offspring or parental anxiety disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide further evidence for the independence of AG apart from the PD spectrum.

An examination of the structure of posttraumatic stress disorder in relation to the anxiety and depressive disorders.

The nature and structure of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been the subject of much interest in recent times. This research has been represented by two streams, the first representing a substantive body of work which focuses specifically on the factor structure of PTSD and the second exploring PTSD's relationship with other mood and anxiety disorders. The present study attempted to bring these two streams together by examining structural models of PTSD and their relationship with dimensions underlying other mood and anxiety disorders. PTSD, anxiety and mood disorder data from 989 injury survivors interviewed 3-months following their injury were analyzed using a series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) to identify the optimal structural model. CFA analyses indicated that the best fitting model included PTSD's re-experiencing (B1-5), active avoidance (C1-2), and hypervigilance and startle (D4-5) loading onto a Fear factor (represented by panic disorder, agoraphobia and social phobia) and the PTSD dysphoria symptoms (numbing symptoms C3-7 and hyperarousal symptoms D1-3) loading onto an Anxious Misery/Distress factor (represented by depression, generalized anxiety disorder and obsessive compulsive disorder). The findings have implications for informing potential revisions to the structure of the diagnosis of PTSD and the diagnostic algorithm to be applied, with the aim of enhancing diagnostic specificity.

[Rethink the panic disorder]. / Repenser le trouble panique.

INTRODUCTION: We propose some reflexions on the validity of the conceptualization of panic disorder, its nosographical place, and its clinical homogeneity, through the study of the frequency of some of its psychiatric comorbidities. BACKGROUND: To define a panic attack, DSM IV requires a number of symptoms which vary from four to 13. However, some patients suffer from panic attacks with less than four symptoms (paucisymptomatic attacks) and which fill the other criteria of panic disorder. These patients would have a biological vulnerability, familial antecedents, and a treatment response which are similar to those that fill the criteria of the panic attack according to the DSM. Some authors differentiate the panic disorder in several sub-groups, such as the panic disorder with cardiorespiratory symptoms, or vestibular symptoms, or cognitive symptoms. This division of the panic disorder in several sub-groups would have an interest in the knowledge of the etiopathogeny, the attacks' frequency, the disorder severity and the treatment response. Panic disorder with prevalent somatic expression includes crises without cognitive symptoms. This sub-type can be common in the medical context, especially in cardiology, but it is often ignored, at the price of loss of socio-professional adaptability, and a medical overconsumption. DISCUSSION AND ARGUMENTS: The relationship between panic disorder and agoraphobia appears to be the subject of controversies. According to the behavioral theory, phobic disorder is the primum movens of the sequence of appearance of the disorders. American psychiatry considers agoraphobia as a secondary response to the panic disorder, and pleads for a central role of panic attacks as an etiopathogenic factor in the development of agoraphobia. The distinction between panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder can be difficult. This is due to the existence of paucisymptomatic panic attacks. Their paroxystic nature is difficult to distinguish from the fluctuations of the generalized anxiety disorder. This frequent comorbidity could be also due to the community of certain symptoms of each disorder. These observations increase the validity of the anxiety generalized disorder as an autonomous morbid entity, rather than corresponding to a residual syndrome of the panic disorder, and could be an argument of an implicit return to the Freudian concept of the anxiety neurosis. The frequent comorbidity of panic disorder and personality disorders suggests the existence of a link. The pathological personality can be a factor of vulnerability in the panic disorder, as it can be a consequence of the panic disorder through the personality changing related on the evolution of the disorder and its complications. The relationship between panic disorder and depression has been interpreted in various ways, with mainly three assumptions: the unit position, which considers anxiety and depression as concerning a common diathesis; the dualistic position, which suggests that anxiety and depression are heterogeneous diagnostic categories and the anxio-depressive position that considers anxiety and depression combined as a syndrome differing from the pure anxiety and pure depression. The genetic studies, as well as the family studies, clearly show that the two entities are undissociated. Likewise, the therapeutic action of serotoninergic antidepressants in the two types of disorders reinforces the idea of a common biological vulnerability between anxiety and depression. Several studies have shown a significant association between panic disorder and suicide. However, the suicidal conducts are multiple and proceed by complex interactions between factors of features and states. Accordingly, panic disorder can be considered as a factor of state associated with the suicidal risk.

Agoraphobia: a review of the diagnostic classificatory position and criteria.

The status of agoraphobia (AG) as an independent diagnostic category is reviewed and preliminary options and recommendations for the fifth edition of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-V) are presented. The review concentrates on epidemiology, psychopathology, neurobiology, vulnerability and risk factors, clinical course and outcome, and correlates and consequences of AG since 1990. Differences and similarities across conventions and criteria of DSM and ICD-10 are considered. Three core questions are addressed. First, what is the evidence for AG as a diagnosis independent of panic disorder? Second, should AG be conceptualized as a subordinate form of panic disorder (PD) as currently stipulated in DSM-IV-TR? Third, is there evidence for modifying or changing the current diagnostic criteria? We come to the conclusion that AG should be conceptualized as an independent disorder with more specific criteria rather than a subordinate, residual form of PD as currently stipulated in DSM-IV-TR. Among other issues, this conclusion was based on psychometric evaluations of the construct, epidemiological investigations which show that AG can exist independently of panic disorder, and the impact of agoraphobic avoidance upon clinical course and outcome. However, evidence from basic and clinic validation studies remains incomplete and partly contradictory. The apparent advantages of a more straightforward, simpler classification without implicit hierarchies and insufficiently supported differential diagnostic considerations, plus the option for improved further research, led to favoring the separate diagnostic criteria for AG as a diagnosis independent of panic disorder.

Generalized anxiety disorder within the course of major depressive disorder: examining the utility of the DSM-IV hierarchy rule.

BACKGROUND: The current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) specifies that generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) should not be diagnosed if it occurs exclusively during an episode of a major depressive disorder (MDD) or another mood disorder. This hierarchy rule was intended to promote diagnostic parsimony, but may result in the loss of important clinical information. The goal of this study was to compare individuals with MDD, comorbid MDD and GAD, and GAD within the course of MDD at intake and 12-month follow-up on self-report measures, clinician ratings, and rates of comorbidity. METHODS: Participants were divided into three diagnostic groups: MDD without GAD (n=124), comorbid MDD and GAD (n=59), and GAD within the course of MDD (n=166). All the participants completed a semi-structured clinical interview and self-report measures assessing psychopathology, temperament, and functional impairment. A subset of the total sample completed a follow-up assessment of 12 months postintake. RESULTS: Individuals with comorbid MDD and GAD and GAD within the course of MDD reported more psychopathology, negative affect, and functional impairment at intake than individuals with MDD only. The presence of GAD at intake, however, did not differentially predict symptom severity, functional impairment, or the presence of comorbidity at 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Cross-sectional findings indicate that individuals with GAD within the course of MDD experience levels of psychopathology, functional impairment, and comorbidity similar to those found in individuals with comorbid GAD and MDD. Preliminary longitudinal findings, however, suggest that the presence of GAD in patients with MDD does not have prognostic significance.

A taxometric investigation of agoraphobia in a clinical and a community sample.

The nosological status of agoraphobia is controversial. Agoraphobia may be a distinct diagnostic entity or a marker of avoidance severity. The current study examines the latent structure of agoraphobia through the use of taxometric analysis. The latent structure of agoraphobia was examined in two independent samples, one comprising outpatients presenting for treatment for panic disorder (PD) with or without agoraphobia (n=365), and the other comprising community volunteers to a national mental health survey who experienced fear or avoidance of at least one prototypic agoraphobic situation (n=640). Two taxometric procedures were carried out - maximum eigenvalue (MAXEIG) and mean above minus below a cut (MAMBAC) - using indicators derived from questionnaire measures of, and structured diagnostic interviews for, agoraphobia. Results show consistent evidence of dimensional latent structure in both samples. It is concluded that scores on measures of agoraphobia best represent an agoraphobic severity dimension.

Evidence-based guidelines for interpretation of the Panic Disorder Severity Scale.

BACKGROUND: The Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) is promising to be a standard global rating scale for panic disorder. In order for a clinical scale to be useful, we need a guideline for interpreting its scores and their changes, and for defining clinical change points such as response and remission. METHODS: We used individual patient data from two large randomized controlled trials of panic disorder (total n=568). Study participants were administered the PDSS and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI)--Severity and --Improvement. We applied equipercentile linking technique to draw correspondences between PDSS and CGI-Severity, numeric changes in PDSS and CGI-Improvement, and percent changes in PDSS and CGI-Improvement. RESULTS: The interpretation of the PDSS total score differed according to the presence or absence of agoraphobia. When the patients were not agoraphobic, score ranges 0-1 corresponded with "Normal," 2-5 with "Borderline," 6-9 with "Slightly ill," 10-13 with "Moderately ill," and 14 and above with "Markedly ill." When the patients were agoraphobic, score ranges 3-7 meant "Borderline ill," 8-10 "Slightly ill," 11-15 "Moderately ill," and 16 and above "Markedly ill." The relationship between PDSS change and CGI-Improvement was more linear when measured as percentile change than as numeric changes, and was indistinguishable for those with or without agoraphobia. The decrease by 75-100% was considered "Very much improved," that by 40-74% "Much improved," and that by 10-39% "Minimally improved." CONCLUSION: We propose that "remission" of panic disorder be defined by PDSS scores of five or less and its "response" by 40% or greater reduction.

Sixteen-item Anxiety Sensitivity Index: confirmatory factor analytic evidence, internal consistency, and construct validity in a young adult sample from the Netherlands.

The present investigation examined the factor structure, internal consistency, and construct validity of the 16-item Anxiety Sensitivity Index (ASI; Reiss Peterson, Gursky, & McNally 1986) in a young adult sample (n = 420) from the Netherlands. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to comparatively evaluate two-factor, three-factor, and four-factor models of the anxiety sensitivity construct. Support was found for a hierarchical structure of anxiety sensitivity, with one global higher-order factor and four lower-order factors. Internal consistency for the global and lower-order factors of the 16-item ASI was adequate. Convergent and discriminant associations between the 16-item ASI and general mood and panic-specific variables were consistent with anxiety sensitivity theory. In addition, incremental validity of the anxiety sensitivity construct was established, relative to negative affectivity, for unexpected panic attacks and agoraphobic avoidance.

Panic disorder subtypes: further clinical differences.

Panic disorder (PD) is a heterogeneous phenomenon with respect to symptom profile. Most studies agree that a group of patients with prominent respiratory symptoms emerged as a distinct PD subtype. In this study we compared a range of clinical features associated with PD and agoraphobia in patients with respiratory (RS) and nonrespiratory (NRS) subtypes of PD. The participants were 124 patients with PD (79 women and 45 men), with or without agoraphobia, diagnosed by DSM-IV criteria. Following the observer-rated Panic Disorder Severity Scale assessment, subjects completed self-report measures, including the Anxiety Sensitivity Index (ASI), Panic-Agoraphobia Scale; the Beck Anxiety Inventory; and the Panic-Agoraphobic Spectrum Scale (PAS-SR). Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) showed significant group differences [Pillai's trace = 0.95, F (5, 118)(=)2.48, P = .036]. Patients in RS group had higher mean total scores on the ASI (F = 5.00, df = 1, P = .027) and PAS-SR (F = 11.23, df = 1, P = .001) than patients in NRS group. Also, patients with RS attained higher scores than patients with NRS on four domains of PAS-SR (panic-like symptoms, agoraphobia, separation sensitivity, and reassurance seeking). A descriptive discriminant analysis of the data correctly identified 69.4% of the patient group in general and 86.1% of RS group (Wilks's lambda = 0.87, df = 8, P = .048). The significant discriminating factors of the RS and NRS groups were domains of panic-like symptoms, agoraphobia, separation sensitivity, and reassurance seeking. Our findings suggest that anxiety sensitivity and panic-agoraphobic spectrum symptoms might be particularly relevant to understanding subtypes of PD.

The panic-agoraphobic spectrum: development, description, and clinical significance.

The results of the authors' research efforts to date support the idea that the panic-agoraphobic spectrum is a robust and culturally transferable construct with important clinical implications for patients with mood and anxiety disorders. In particular, their findings suggest the need for alternate treatment strategies to treat mood patients with comorbid panic features [50,52]. They maintain that the spectrum approach could add to the knowledge of course and outcome of mood and anxiety disorders and inform treatment decisions. The spectrum concept has other potential implications. For the purposes of neurobiologic research, reliable identification of phenotypes that map [Figure 3: see text] onto specific brain processes in crucial. The definition of the diathesis phenotype is also important if we are to elucidate the cause and pathophysiology of mental disorders at a molecular level. A panic-agoraphobic spectrum assessment incorporate temperamental features and trait-like manifestations into a comprehensive symptom assessment to provide a detailed picture of the clinical features of PD. Such an approach holds some promise for progress in studies of neurobiologic basis of panic and may be useful in further efforts to overcome the nagging problem of the ambiguous boundaries of DSM diagnostic categories [53].

Panic probes and the identification of panic: a historical and cross-cultural perspective.

This article reviews the historical development of the category of panic disorder in the United States, particularly the shifting perspectives on both what causes panic and how the presence of panic should be determined. The notion that panic attacks of a panic-disorder type must be "out of the blue" and "unexpected," except in the case of triggering by a particular place (i.e., agoraphobia), is critiqued. The authors illustrate that a meaningful epidemiological determination of panic rates in other cultural groups must be preceded by a detailed ethnography that ascertains the catastrophic cognitions, core symptoms, and typical cues of panic attacks in that particular context.