Outcomes and prognosis of adjustment disorder in adults: A systematic review.

Adjustment disorder (AD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed mental health disorders and is generally conceptualized to be mild and short-lived. Despite the frequent use of AD in clinical settings, little is known about the prognosis of this condition. Our goal was to systematically review research on a range of AD outcomes in order to provide a broad characterization of AD prognosis. We conducted searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO. We included 31 cohort or randomized controlled trials with a total of 1,385,358 participants. Many patients maintained an AD diagnosis or were diagnosed with another mental health disorder months to years after initial diagnosis. Patients with AD tended to show symptom improvement at higher rates and to utilize less treatment than did patients with other disorders. AD-diagnosed groups experienced subsequent development of numerous physical conditions, such as infection, cancers, Parkinson's disease, and cardiovascular events, at higher rates than did control groups. Results were mixed regarding suicidality and occupational impairment. We rated most studies as having a moderate risk of bias. Based on limited findings, AD appears to progress as a milder disorder than do other disorders, but it not uncommonly transitions to more severe mental health states and may predict the development of future health issues, both mental and physical. Future prospective research that conforms to prognosis study guidelines is needed to better understand the course of this common disorder.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of predictors of adjustment disorders in adults.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of adjustment disorder is common in clinical practice, yet there is lack of research on the etiology and epidemiology of adjustment disorders. The goal of this systematic review was to evaluate predictors of adjustment disorders in adults. METHODS: We conducted systematic searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO. We included 70 studies that examined thirteen theoretically-derived and predefined predictors of adjustment disorders with a total of 3,449,374 participants. RESULTS: We found that female gender, younger age, unemployed status, stress, physical illness and injury, low social support, and a history of mental health disorders predicted adjustment disorders. Most of these predictors differentiated individuals with adjustment disorders from individuals with no mental health disorders. Participants with adjustment disorders were more likely to have experienced accidents than were those with posttraumatic stress disorder but were less likely to have experienced assaults and abuse, neglect, and maltreatment. More research is needed to identify factors that differentiate adjustment disorders from other mental health disorders. LIMITATIONS: Because very few studies adjusted for confounders (e.g., demographic variables, mental health histories, and a variety of stressors), it was not possible to identify independent associations between predictors and adjustment disorders. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a number of factors that predicted adjustment disorders compared to no mental health diagnosis. The majority of studies were rated as moderate or high in risk of bias, suggesting that more rigorous research is needed to confirm the relationships we detected.

A systematic analysis and prioritization of suicide prevention research gaps.

OBJECTIVE: This study identified and prioritized research gaps for suicide prevention in the Department of Defense to inform future research investments. METHODS: The 2019 VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Patients at Risk for Suicide was the primary source document for research gaps, supplemented by an updated literature search. Institutional stakeholders rated the identified research gaps and ranked the gap categories. We used Q factor analysis to derive a list of the prioritized research gaps and category rankings. RESULTS: Thirty-five research gaps were identified and prioritized. The highest rated research gap topic was lethal means safety interventions and their effectiveness in increasing safety behaviors and/or reducing suicide-related outcomes. Research on the effectiveness of crisis response planning and several other non-pharmacological interventions (e.g., implementation of cognitive-behavioral therapy, technology-based behavioral interventions, and applications of dialectical behavior therapy to non-Borderline patients) were also rated highly by stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: This work generated a list of priorities for future suicide research as evaluated by Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs stakeholders. Our findings can help guide the efforts of suicide researchers and inform decisions about future research funding for suicide prevention.