Examination of factor structure of the inventory of complicated grief (ICG) in a sample of bereaved military family members with persistent and elevated grief.

Knowledge about the effect of a US service member's death on surviving family members is limited. In order to identify their grief-related health care needs, a first step is to identify the characteristics of persistent and elevated grief in a military family sample. The present study identified military family members (n = 232) bereaved more than six months who endorsed an elevated level of grief. A confirmatory factor analysis and test of measurement invariance of factor structure were used to compare the factor structure of their Inventory of Complicated Grief (ICG) responses to that of a bereaved non-military-related clinical research sample with similar grief levels. Results confirmed an equivalent five-factor structure of the ICG in both the military family sample and the clinical research sample. The similarity in factor structure was present despite differences in demographic characteristics and bereavement experiences between samples. Thus, the ICG reliably measures persistent and elevated grief in military family samples and provides grief symptom profiles that facilitates better understanding of their grief-related needs.

The bereavement exclusion and DSM-5.

BACKGROUND: Pre-DSM-III (where DSM is Diagnostic and Statistical Manual), a series of studies demonstrated that major depressive syndromes were common after bereavement and that these syndromes often were transient, not requiring treatment. Largely on the basis of these studies, a decision was made to exclude the diagnosis of a major depressive episode (MDE) if symptoms could be "better accounted for by bereavement than by MDE" unless symptoms were severe and very impairing. Thus, since the publication of DSM-III in 1980, the official position of American Psychiatry has been that recent bereavement may be an exclusion criterion for the diagnosis of an MDE. This review article attempts to answer the question, "Does the best available research favor continuing the 'bereavement exclusion' (BE) in DSM-5?" We have previously discussed the proposal by the DSM-5 Mood Disorders Work Group to remove the BE from DSM-5. METHODS: Prior reviews have evaluated the validity of the BE based on studies published through 2006. The current review adds research studies published since 2006 and critically examines arguments for and against retaining the BE in DSM-5. RESULTS: The preponderance of data suggests that bereavement-related depression is not different from MDE that presents in any other context; it is equally genetically influenced, most likely to occur in individuals with past personal and family histories of MDE, has similar personality characteristics and patterns of comorbidity, is as likely to be chronic and/or recurrent, and responds to antidepressant medications. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the BE should not be retained in DSM-5.

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.

Ecological study of sleep disruption in PTSD: a pilot study.

Laboratory-based sleep studies have yielded inconsistent results regarding the presence and nature of objective sleep anomalies in posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This pilot study aimed at assessing sleep in adult crime victims with PTSD by using in-home polysomnography. Compared to healthy archival subjects, PTSD subjects showed longer sleep latency, reduced total sleep time, and increased duration of nocturnal awakening. Quantitative electroencephalography (EEG) measures of delta and beta activity also differed in PTSD and healthy subjects. These preliminary findings suggest that ambulatory methods can capture objective signs of sleep disruption, and corroborate subjective complaints of disrupted sleep in PTSD.

Symptomatic severity of PRIME-MD diagnosed episodes of panic and generalized anxiety disorder in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Panic disorder (PD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) are often unrecognized by primary care physicians (PCPs). The Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD) has been used as a case-finding instrument for depression. Yet, little is known on its usefulness as a case-finding tool for anxiety disorders within the context of a clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To examine the: (1) completion rate of the PRIME-MD by patients approached to enroll in a treatment study for PD and GAD; (2) distribution of anxiety diagnoses generated; (3) severity of PD and GAD episodes thus identified; and (4) level of PCPs' agreement with these diagnoses. DESIGN: Cross-sectional interview. PATIENTS: Individuals aged 18 to 64 who presented for care at 4 primary care practices. MEASUREMENTS: The PRIME-MD, Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (SIGH-A), and the Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS). RESULTS: Of the 6,700 patients who completed the PRIME-MD Patient Questionnaire (PQ), 2,926 (44%) screened positive for an anxiety disorder, and 1,216 (42%) met preliminary study eligibility and consented to the PRIME-MD Anxiety Module. Of these, 619 (51%) had either GAD (308), PD (94), or both (217) disorders. Later, 329 completed a telephone interview. Of these, 59% with GAD and 68% with PD reported moderate or greater levels of anxiety symptoms on the SIGH-A and PDSS, respectively, and PCPs agreed with the PRIME-MD diagnosis for 98% of these patients. CONCLUSIONS: The PRIME-MD can efficiently screen patients for PD and GAD. Although patients thus identified endorse a wide range of anxiety symptoms, PCPs often agree with the diagnosis.

A brief sleep scale for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index Addendum for PTSD.

Sleep disturbances reflect a core dysfunction underlying Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Specifically, disruptive nocturnal behaviors (DNB) may represent PTSD-specific sleep disturbances. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index Addendum for PTSD (PSQI-A) is self-report instrument designed to assess the frequency of seven DNB. The goal of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the PSQI-A to characterize DNB in a group of participants with and without PTSD. Results indicate that the PSQI-A has satisfactory internal consistency and good convergent validity with two standard PTSD measures even when excluding their sleep-related items. A global PSQI score of 4 yielded a sensitivity of 94%, a specificity of 82%, and a positive predictive value of 93% for discriminating participants with PTSD from those without PTSD. The PSQI-A is a valid instrument for PTSD applicable to both clinical and research settings.