Article

Hypnotic Recall: A Positive Criterion in the Differential Diagnosis Between Epileptic and Pseudoepileptic Seizures

Instituut voor Epilepsiebestrijding, Meer en Bosch-De Cruquiushoeve, Heemstede, The Netherlands.
Epilepsia (Impact Factor: 4.58). 05/1999; 40(4):485-91. DOI: 10.1111/j.1528-1157.1999.tb00745.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Because the diagnosis of pseudoepileptic seizures (PESs) is mostly made by excluding epilepsy, availability of a positive criterion for PESs is of great importance. This study was aimed at the validation of a diagnostic technique that intends to provide in such a positive criterion.
In 17 patients with epileptic seizures (ESs) and 20 patients with PESs, a hypnotic procedure was performed by an investigator blind to other data to recover amnesia for the ictus. If recall was obtained, the experimental diagnosis PES was given; if not, ES was diagnosed. The experimental diagnoses were compared with the clinical, EEG-confirmed diagnoses. Hypnotizability was measured to determine the relation between the outcome of the test and hypnotizability of the patients.
Recall for the ictus was obtained in 17 patients. Each of these had a clinical diagnosis of PES. Seventeen patients with "no recall" had a clinical diagnosis of ES, and three patients had PESs. This result yields a specificity of 100% and a sensitivity of 85% for the recall technique. Hypnotizability was significantly higher in patients with PESs than in patients with ESs. In some "low hypnotizables," recall was obtained, and in some "high hypnotizables," no recall was obtained.
A positive recall test indicates PES. A sub-group of patients with PESs is characterized by a high level of hypnotizability. Hypnotizability is not crucial for outcome of the recall test. High hypnotic abilities are especially found in disorders in which it is supposed that "dissociation" is involved. It can be speculated that PES may be one of the dissociative phenomena.

Full-text

Available from: Philip Spinhoven, Dec 30, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
58 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The concept of Dissociation was originally conceived as having a psychological and a somatic component. Nevertheless, recent versions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) have isolated both elements. In the DSM the psychological manifestation of dissociation is diagnosed as a Dissociative Disorder and the somatic domain is diagnosed as a Somatoform Disorder. However, recent empirical and clinical evidence have been highlighting and corroborating a high degree of comorbidity between such disorders and a constant interplay between somatic and psychological dissociation. In the following case study, the clinical constellation of the patient nicely illustrates that her dissociative defenses began as a Conversion Disorder and how, after a mishandling of the case by a clinician, her dissociation symptoms were instantly transformed in a typical Dissociative Amnesia Disorder. Cases like this convincingly illustrate how the dissociative defenses not only subsume the mental but also extend to the bodily domain.
    Revista Interamericana de psicologia/Interamerican Journal of Psychology 01/2004; 38(1).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: Despite the fact that the assumption of a relationship between conversion disorder and childhood traumatization has a long history, there is little empirical evidence to support this premise. The present study examined this relation and investigated whether hypnotic susceptibility mediates the relation between trauma and conversion symptoms, as suggested by Janet's autohypnosis theory of conversion disorder. Method: A total of 54 patients with conversion disorder and 50 matched comparison patients with an affective disorder were administered the Structured Trauma Interview as well as measures of cognitive (Dissociative Experiences Scale) and somatoform (20-item Somatoform Dissociation Questionnaire) dissociative experiences. Results: Patients with conversion disorder reported a higher incidence of physical/sexual abuse, a larger number of different types of physical abuse, sexual abuse of longer duration, and incestuous experiences more often than comparison patients. In addition, within the group of patients with conversion disorder, parental dysfunction by the mother-not the father-was associated with higher scores on the Dissociative Experiences Scale and the Somatoform Dissociation Questionnaire. Physical abuse was associated with a larger number of conversion symptoms (Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders). Hypnotic susceptibility proved to partially mediate the relation between physical abuse and conversion symptoms. Conclusions: The present results provide evidence of a relationship between childhood traumatization and conversion disorder.
    American Journal of Psychiatry 11/2002; 159(11). DOI:10.1176/appi.ajp.159.11.1908 · 13.56 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We present recommendations for revision of the diagnostic criteria for the Dissociative Disorders (DDs) for DSM-5. The periodic revision of the DSM provides an opportunity to revisit the assumptions underlying specific diagnoses and the empirical support, or lack of it, for the defining diagnostic criteria. This paper reviews clinical, phenomenological, epidemiological, cultural, and neurobiological data related to the DDs in order to generate an up-to-date, evidence-based set of DD diagnoses and diagnostic criteria for DSM-5. First, we review the definitions of dissociation and the differences between the definitions of dissociation and conceptualization of DDs in the DSM-IV-TR and the ICD-10, respectively. Also, we review more general conceptual issues in defining dissociation and dissociative disorders. Based on this review, we propose a revised definition of dissociation for DSM-5 and discuss the implications of this definition for understanding dissociative symptoms and disorders. We make the following recommendations for DSM-5: 1. Depersonalization Disorder (DPD) should include derealization symptoms as well. 2. Dissociative Fugue should become a subtype of Dissociative Amnesia (DA). 3. The diagnostic criteria for DID should be changed to emphasize the disruptive nature of the dissociation and amnesia for everyday as well as traumatic events. The experience of possession should be included in the definition of identity disruption. 4. Dissociative Trance Disorder should be included in the Unspecified Dissociative Disorder (UDD) category. There is a growing body of evidence linking the dissociative disorders to a trauma history, and to specific neural mechanisms.
    Depression and Anxiety 03/2013; 28(12):E17-45. DOI:10.1002/da.20923 · 4.29 Impact Factor