A comparison of clinical features and adult outcome in adolescents with three types of psychotic disorders: schizophrenic (SPh), schizoaffective (SA) and bipolar with psychotic features (BPP). Subjects (n = 41) were finally diagnosed (DSM-IV criteria) with SPh (n = 17), SA (n = 11) or BPP (n = 13). Clinical evaluation took place at onset and at a 3-year follow-up in all 41, and at least after 5 years in 36 patients. Symptoms were rated on the basis of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), integrating items from the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children-Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL). The Children Global Assessment Scale (C-GAS) and the Global Assessment Scale (GAF) were used to evaluate global functioning. Significant differences in clinical features were found in the three diagnostic groups as regards several parameters, some present on one and not on other rating scales, underscoring the insufficiency of a single scale for accurate analysis of the features of a psychotic disorder. At onset, a comparison using the simple presence/absence of symptoms showed scant differences among groups, while differences emerged if symptom severity was included in the comparison. Functioning at 3- and 5-year follow-ups showed a significantly better outcome in the BPP group and more substantial deterioration, with similar evolution, in the SPh and SA groups. The integration of several rating scales differentiated between diagnostic groups more effectively. The similar adult functioning outcome in the SPh and SA groups showed how difficult it is to clearly separate these two disorders.

Early-onset psychoses: comparison of clinical features and adult outcome in 3 diagnostic groups

ZUDDAS, ALESSANDRO;
2009

Abstract

A comparison of clinical features and adult outcome in adolescents with three types of psychotic disorders: schizophrenic (SPh), schizoaffective (SA) and bipolar with psychotic features (BPP). Subjects (n = 41) were finally diagnosed (DSM-IV criteria) with SPh (n = 17), SA (n = 11) or BPP (n = 13). Clinical evaluation took place at onset and at a 3-year follow-up in all 41, and at least after 5 years in 36 patients. Symptoms were rated on the basis of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), integrating items from the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children-Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL). The Children Global Assessment Scale (C-GAS) and the Global Assessment Scale (GAF) were used to evaluate global functioning. Significant differences in clinical features were found in the three diagnostic groups as regards several parameters, some present on one and not on other rating scales, underscoring the insufficiency of a single scale for accurate analysis of the features of a psychotic disorder. At onset, a comparison using the simple presence/absence of symptoms showed scant differences among groups, while differences emerged if symptom severity was included in the comparison. Functioning at 3- and 5-year follow-ups showed a significantly better outcome in the BPP group and more substantial deterioration, with similar evolution, in the SPh and SA groups. The integration of several rating scales differentiated between diagnostic groups more effectively. The similar adult functioning outcome in the SPh and SA groups showed how difficult it is to clearly separate these two disorders.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
2009 CPDS Ledda .pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: versione editoriale
Dimensione 264.56 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
264.56 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11584/19830
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 5
  • Scopus 20
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 19
social impact