Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: Complicated Grief (CG) is under consideration as a new diagnosis in DSM5. We sought to add empirical support to the current dialogue by examining the commonly used Inventory of Complicated Grief (ICG) scale completed by 782 bereaved individuals. METHODS: We employed IRT analyses, factor analyses, and sensitivity and specificity analyses utilizing our full sample (n = 782), and also compared confirmed CG cases (n = 288) to noncases (n = 377). Confirmed CG cases were defined as individuals bereaved at least 6 months who were seeking care for CG, had an ICG >/= 30, and received a structured clinical interview for CG by a certified clinician confirming CG as their primary illness. Noncases were bereaved individuals who did not present with CG as a primary complaint (including those with depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorders, and controls) and had an ICG<25. RESULTS: IRT analyses provided guidance about the most informative individual items and their association with CG severity. Factor analyses demonstrated a single factor solution when the full sample was considered, but within CG cases, six symptom clusters emerged: (1) yearning and preoccupation with the deceased, (2) anger and bitterness, (3) shock and disbelief, (4) estrangement from others, (5) hallucinations of the deceased, and (6) behavior change, including avoidance and proximity seeking. The presence of at least one symptom from three different symptom clusters optimized sensitivity (94.8%) and specificity (98.1%). CONCLUSIONS: These data, derived from a diverse and predominantly clinical help seeking population, add an important perspective to existing suggestions for DSM5 criteria for CG.

Bereavement is a severe stressor that typically incites painful and debilitating symptoms of acute grief that commonly progresses to restoration of a satisfactory, if changed, life. Normally, grief does not need clinical intervention. However, sometimes acute grief can gain a foothold and become a chronic debilitating condition called complicated grief. Moreover, the stress caused by bereavement, like other stressors, can increase the likelihood of onset or worsening of other physical or mental disorders. Hence, some bereaved people need to be diagnosed and treated. A clinician evaluating a bereaved person is at risk for both over-and under-diagnosis, either pathologizing a normal condition or neglecting to treat an impairing disorder. The authors of DSM IV focused primarily on the problem of over-diagnosis, and omitted complicated grief because of insufficient evidence. We revisit bereavement considerations in light of new research findings. This article focuses primarily on a discussion of possible inclusion of a new diagnosis and dimensional assessment of complicated grief. We also discuss modifications in the bereavement V code and refinement of bereavement exclusions in major depression and other disorders.

Despite its acute efficacy for the treatment of panic disorder, benzodiazepines (BZs) are associated with a withdrawal syndrome that closely mimics anxiety sensations, leading to difficulty with treatment discontinuation and often disorder relapse. An exposure-based cognitive-behavioral treatment for BZ discontinuation, Panic Control Treatment for BZ Discontinuation (CBT) targets the fear of these sensations and has demonstrated efficacy in preventing disorder relapse and facilitating successful BZ discontinuation among patients with panic disorder. In this randomized controlled trial, CBT was compared to taper alone and a taper plus a relaxation condition to control for the effect of therapist contact and support among 47 patients with panic disorder seeking taper from BZs. Based on the primary outcome of successful discontinuation of BZ use, results indicate that adjunctive CBT provided additive benefits above both taper alone and taper plus relaxation, with consistently medium and large effect sizes over time that reached significance at the six month follow-up evaluation. The efficacy of CBT relative to either of the other taper conditions reflected very large and significant effect sizes at that time. These findings suggest that CBT provides specific efficacy for the successful discontinuation from BZs, even when controlling for therapist contact and relaxation training.

OBJECTIVE: This is the first trial examining duloxetine for generalized social anxiety disorder (GSAD) and the effect of increased dose for those without early remission. METHODS: Individuals (n=39) with GSAD received 6 weeks of open-label duloxetine 60 mg/day; those with a Liebowitz Social Anxiety Disorder Scale (LSAS) score >30 at week 6 were randomized in double-blind fashion to an additional 18 weeks of continued duloxetine 60 mg/day or to duloxetine 120 mg/day. RESULTS: Duloxetine was associated with a significant LSAS reduction at week 6 (91.3 [17.7] to 69.8 [28.5], paired t [df]=5.2 [38], P<.0001), and randomized participants overall continued to improve at week 24 (74.6 [23.9] to 60.3 [29.7]; paired t [df]=3.3 [27], P=.0026). Though the increased dose strategy was associated with a moderate effect size (Cohen's d=.57), there was no significant difference at week 24 endpoint in LSAS reduction (20.5 [26.0] versus 7.3 [17.2], t [df]=1.6 [26], P=.13) nor remission (33% versus 8%) for duloxetine with dose increased to 120 mg/day compared to duloxetine continued at 60 mg/day. Overall, 44% (17/39) discontinued prior to week 24. CONCLUSIONS: Though with limited power, these data provide preliminary support for the efficacy of duloxetine for GSAD, and suggest continued improvement but limited remission overall at 24 weeks for individuals remaining symptomatic at week 6. These observations warrant further controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-arm, parallel-group study was carried out to determine the effectiveness and safety of the novel anticonvulsant levetiracetam for the treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder (GSAD). METHOD: After a 1-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period, 217 adult outpatients meeting DSM-IV criteria for social anxiety disorder, generalized type, were randomly assigned (1:1) to 12 weeks of double-blind treatment with either levetiracetam (n = 111) or placebo (n = 106). Participants were required to have scores of >or= 60 on the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) and a total score of or= 30% reduction in LSAS score) were similar with 41.3% (levetiracetam) and 46.6% (placebo). No significant between-group differences were found on secondary outcome measures, which included changes in Sheehan Disability Scale, Clinical Global Impression of Change, and HDRS scores. CONCLUSIONS: Although well-tolerated, levetiracetam failed to separate from placebo in this trial for the treatment of moderate to severe GSAD.