Agitated depression: a valid depression subtype?
ABSTRACT The diagnostic validity of agitated depression (AD, a major depressive episode (MDE) with psychomotor agitation) is unclear. It is not classified in DSM-IV and ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorder (ICD-10). Some data support its subtyping. This study aims to test the subtyping of AD.
Consecutive 245 bipolar-II (BP-II) and 189 major depressive disorder (MDD) non-tertiary-care MDE outpatients were interviewed (off psychoactive drugs) with Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders--Clinician Version (SCID-CV), Hypomania Interview Guide (HIGH-C), and Family History Screen. Intra-MDE hypomanic symptoms were systematically assessed. AD was defined as an MDE with psychomotor agitation. Mixed AD was defined as an MDE with four or more hypomanic symptoms (including agitation).
AD was present in 34.7% of patients. AD was mixed in 70.1% of AD patients. AD, vs. non-AD, had significantly (at alpha = 0.05) lower age at onset, more BP-II, females, atypical depressions, bipolar-I (BP-I) and BP-II family history, and was more mixed; racing/crowded thoughts, irritability, more talkativeness, and risky behaviour were significantly more common. Mixed AD, vs. non-AD, had significantly (at alpha = 0.01) lower age at onset, more intra-MDE hypomanic symptoms, BP-II, females, atypical depressions, BP-II family history, and specific hypomanic symptoms (distractibility, racing thoughts, irritable mood, more talkativeness, risky activities). Mixed AD, vs. non-mixed AD, had significantly more intra-MDE hypomanic symptoms (by definition), more recurrences, and more specific hypomanic symptoms (by definition). Non-mixed AD, vs. non-AD, had significantly more intra-MDE hypomanic symptoms and more talkativeness.
AD was common in non-tertiary-care depression outpatients, supporting its diagnostic utility. AD and many bipolar diagnostic validators were associated, supporting its link with the bipolar spectrum. Mixed AD, but not non-mixed AD, had differences vs. non-AD similar to those of AD, suggesting that psychomotor agitation by itself may not be enough to identify AD as a subtype. Findings seem to support the subtyping of mixed AD. This subtyping may have important treatment impact, as antidepressants alone might increase agitation.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To contribute to the definition of external and internal limits of mixed states and study the place of dysphoric symptoms in the psychopathology of mixed states. One hundred and sixty-five inpatients with major mood episodes were diagnosed as presenting with either pure depression, mixed depression (depression plus at least three manic symptoms), full mixed state (full depression and full mania), mixed mania (mania plus at least three depressive symptoms) or pure mania, using an adapted version of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (DSM-IV version). They were evaluated using a 33-item inventory of depressive, manic and mixed affective signs and symptoms. Principal component analysis without rotation yielded three components that together explained 43.6% of the variance. The first component (24.3% of the variance) contrasted typical depressive symptoms with typical euphoric, manic symptoms. The second component, labeled 'dysphoria', (13.8%) had strong positive loadings for irritability, distressing sensitivity to light and noise, impulsivity and inner tension. The third component (5.5%) included symptoms of insomnia. Median scores for the first component significantly decreased from the pure depression group to the pure mania group. For the dysphoria component, scores were highest among patients with full mixed states and decreased towards both patients with pure depression and those with pure mania. Principal component analysis revealed that dysphoria represents an important dimension of mixed states.Bipolar Disorders 01/2008; 9(8):907-12. DOI:10.1111/j.1399-5618.2007.00462.x · 4.89 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: AimsIrritability, psychomotor agitation, and distractibility in a major depressive episode (MDE) should not be counted as manic/hypomanic symptoms of DSM-5-defined mixed features; however, this remains controversial. The practical usefulness of this definition in discriminating bipolar disorder (BP) from major depressive disorder (MDD) in patients with depression was compared with that of Benazzi's mixed depression, which includes these symptoms. Methods The prevalence of both definitions of mixed depression in 217 patients with MDE (57 bipolar II disorder, 35 BP not otherwise specified, and 125 MDD cases), and their operating characteristics regarding BP diagnosis were compared. ResultsThe prevalence of both Benazzi's mixed depression and DSM-5-defined mixed features was significantly higher in patients with BP than it was in patients with MDD, with the latter being quite low (62.0% vs 12.8% [P<0.0001], and 7.6% vs 0% [P<0.0021], respectively). The area under the receiver operating curve for BP diagnosis according to the number of all manic/hypomanic symptoms was numerically larger than that according to the number of manic/hypomanic symptoms excluding the above-mentioned three symptoms (0.798; 95% confidence interval, 0.736-0.859 vs 0.722; 95% confidence interval, 0.654-0.790). The sensitivity/specificity of DSM-5-defined mixed features and Benazzi's mixed depression for BP diagnosis were 5.1%/100% and 55.1%/87.2%, respectively. ConclusionsDSM-5-defined mixed features were too restrictive to discriminate BP from MDD in patients with depression compared with Benazzi's definition. To confirm this finding, studies that include patients with BP-I and using tools to assess manic/hypomanic symptoms during MDE are necessary.Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 06/2014; 69(2). DOI:10.1111/pcn.12213 · 1.62 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Bipolar II disorder is officially recognized as a mental disorder in DSM-IV-TR and defined by the presence of hypomanic episodes alternating with major depression. Despite data supporting clinical complexity and high morbidity and mortality rates, BP-II disorder is often overlooked or misdiagnosed as unipolar major depression or personality disorder. Moreover, many clinicians still regard it as a milder form of manic-depressive illness. These unsolved problems propose to investigate hypomania prevalence rates in resistant and recurrent depressions, at a large national scale, by means of three large surveys (Bipolact Surveys) carried out in both psychiatric and primary care settings. This research is a part of a national project for medical education on bipolar disorders established in September 2004. Screening of hypomania was done by self-assessment with the hypomania checklist HCL-20; hypomania cases were defined by a score greater or equal to 10 on the HCL-20. Inter-group comparisons (BP-II versus unipolar depression) and multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted on all demographic and clinical factors obtained. Data obtained in the “real world” medical practice (in total, 623 physicians and 2396 patients with major depression) revealed a high rate of hypomania around 62% in both recurrent depression samples (primary care and psychiatric settings) and 55% in resistant major depression. Additionally, the inter-group comparative data allowed drawing the BP-II disorder profile by selecting the most significant differences versus unipolars. “Ups and Downs” (cyclothymic traits) represented the most important and common (in all three different logistic models) risk factor of hypomania. In recurrent major depression, “ups and downs” seemed to act independently from another important risk factor, i.e. “family history of bipolarity”. “Mood switching” was the major risk factor for hypomania in patients with resistant depression; further risk factors were “substance abuse”, “young age of onset”, “agitated – mixed – atypical forms of depression”. These factors are meaningful at clinical and phenomenological levels, and can validate the dimensional approach of hypomania and the cut-off score on the HCL-20.Annales Médico-psychologiques revue psychiatrique 02/2009; 167(1):30-37. DOI:10.1016/j.amp.2008.11.016 · 0.15 Impact Factor