No description available.

Epidemiological data on a wide range of mental disorders from community studies conducted in European countries are presented to determine the availability and consistency of prevalence, disability and treatment findings for the EU. Using a stepwise multimethod approach, 27 eligible studies with quite variable designs and methods including over 150,000 subjects from 16 European countries were identified. Prevalence: On the basis of meta-analytic techniques as well as on reanalyses of selected data sets, it is estimated that about 27% (equals 82.7 million; 95% CI: 78.5–87.1) of the adult EU population, 18–65 of age, is or has been affected by at least one mental disorder in the past 12 months. Taking into account the considerable degree of comorbidity (about one third had more than one disorder), the most frequent disorders are anxiety disorders, depressive, somatoform and substance dependence disorders. When taking into account design, sampling and other methodological differences between studies, little evidence seems to exist for considerable cultural or country variation. Disability and treatment: despite very divergent and fairly crude assessment strategies, the available data consistently demonstrate (a) an association of all mental disorders with a considerable disability burden in terms of number of work days lost (WLD) and (b) generally low utilization and treatment rates. Only 26% of all cases had any consultation with professional health care services, a finding suggesting a considerable degree of unmet need. The paper highlights considerable future research needs for coordinated EU studies across all disorders and age groups. As prevalence estimates could not simply be equated with defined treatment needs, such studies should determine the degree of met and unmet needs for services by taking into account severity, disability and comorbidity. These needs are most pronounced for the new EU member states as well as more generally for adolescent and older populations.

Theoretischer Hintergrund: Die diagnostischen Kriterien der Generalisierten Angststörung (GAS) und ihr Status als eigenständige psychische Störung waren lange umstritten. Inzwischen liegen neuere epidemiologische Daten vor, die ein präziseres Bild dieser Störung und ihrer Besonderheiten ermöglichen. Methode: Es wird ein systematischer Überblick zu Prävalenz, Verlauf und Komorbidität, zur Beeinträchtigung und zum Inanspruchnahmeverhalten sowie zur Spezifität des Kernsymptoms (Sorgen) erstellt. Ergebnisse: GAS ist eine häufige Störung, die im jungen Erwachsenenalter einsetzt, jedoch auch – anders als andere Angststörungen – hohe Inzidenzraten im mittleren Lebensalter aufweist. Der Verlauf ist eher chronisch. Trotz hoher Komorbidität lässt sich die Störung valide abgrenzen. Klinisch relevante Sorgen erweisen sich als störungsspezifisch. Die Beeinträchtigungen sind auch bei GAS-Patienten ohne Komorbidität beträchtlich. Schlussfolgerung: Der Forschungsstand spricht für die Bedeutung und Eigenständigkeit der Diagnose sowie für die stärkere Beachtung offener Forschungsfragen. / Background: The diagnostic criteria for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and its status as an independent mental disorder have been controversial. More recent epidemiological data provide a more precise picture of this disorder and its specific features. Methods: A systematic overview is given in regard to prevalence, course and comorbidity, impairment, and help-seeking behavior as well as to specificity of the core symptom (worries). Results: GAD is a frequent disorder with high incidence rates in middle-age groups, which are not seen in other anxiety disorders. Despite the high comorbidity GAD can be validly distinguished. Clinically relevant worries have been proven as specific for the disorder. The impairments are also considerable for patients without comorbid disorders. Conclusions: Research supports the independent status of GAD and the importance of this diagnosis. Unsolved questions are to be analyzed in future research.

Hintergrund: Die Datenlage zur Substitutionstherapie Opiatabhängiger ist defizitär. Vor diesem markant defizitären Erkenntnishintergrund erscheint es sinnvoll und notwendig, eine versorgungsepidemiologische Studie zur aktuellen Versorgungslage opiatabhängiger Substitutionspatienten durchzuführen, um offene Fragen zu klären. Hierfür haben wir ein mehrstufiges Forschungsprojekt unter dem Akronym COBRA initiiert. COBRA steht für "Cost-Benefit and Risk Appraisal of Substitution Treatments" und signalisiert, dass wir uns in umfassender Weise um eine Evaluation der Risiken, Vor- und Nachteile verschiedener Interventionsstrategien und Modalitäten in der Substitutions- und Versorgungspraxis Opiatabhängiger in Deutschland bemühen. Zielsetzungen des COBRA-Projekts sind: • Die Charakterisierung von bestehenden Einrichtungsformen und -modellen; • Die Charakterisierung von: – Merkmalen opiatabhängiger Patienten in diesen Einrichtungen (Schwere, Dauer/ Stadium, Komorbidität, Delinquenz, Desintegration etc.), – der Diagnostik sowie den Indikations- und Allokationsentscheidungen in der Versorgungsrealität sowie – den eingesetzten Interventionsmethoden (Substitutionsmittel, Therapie komorbider Störungen, psychotherapeutische und soziale Interventionen) • Die Ermittlung von Problemen der Substitutionstherapie bei verschiedenen Risikogruppen (z.B. Hepatitis-C- und HIVPatienten) • Die Beschreibung des Kurzzeitverlaufs und Outcomes hinsichtlich verschiedener klinischer und sozialer Kriterien Methodik: Die Studie teilt sich in einen deskriptiv-klinisch-epidemiologischen und einen analytisch-evaluativen Teil. Der deskriptive Teil soll zunächst darüber Auskunft geben, wie viele und welche Arten von Substitutionseinrichtungen in Deutschland wie viele Opiatabhängige erreichen und behandeln. Auf dieser Grundlage soll dann im evaluativen Teil an möglichst repräsentativen Einrichtungen und Patienten beurteilt werden, wie und mit welchen Methoden welche Arten von Patienten und Problemlagen versorgt werden. Durch Abgleich mit den wissenschaftlichen Bewertungsmaßstäben können daraus Defizite, Probleme und mögliche verbesserte Allokationsstrategien abgeleitet werden. Ergebnisse: Es werden erste Vorstudienbefunde und Ihre Design- Konsequenzen vorgestellt und diskutiert. / In the present paper, we will describe aims, methods, and design along with selected pre-study findings of an epidemiological study in a nationally representative sample of substitution doctors (N = 381) and their patients (n = 2500) in Germany. The project has three major components: (a) Pre-study: We sent mailed questionnaires to a sample of over 1000 substitution doctors to describe qualification and setting characteristics, treatment profiles and attitudes of substitution doctors in Germany. (b) Cross-sectional study: With a two-step epidemiological design (target day assessment of the patients, clinical appraisals by the doctors), our main aims were (1) to determine the number of opiate addicts treated by methadone or buprenorphine or other substitution drugs; (2) to find predictors and correlates for treatment, taking into account doctors, patients, and system variables; and (3) to evaluate cross-sectional differences between groups with regard to clinical presentation (comorbidity), clinical course, acceptance/compliance, critical incidences, and social integration. (c) Furthermore, the study includes a prospective-longitudinal cohort study of a total of 1000 patients sampled from this data base. The cohort will be followed-up over a period of three months to investigate whether buprenorphine patients have a more favorable course and outcome in terms of clinical, psychosocial, pharmaco-economic, and related measures. Selected pre-study findings are summarized, highlightening that current registers include a considerable proportion of doctors and a considerable heterogeneity of setting characteristics in terms of the number of patients, choice of substitution drugs and involvement in hepatitis- C treatment.

Auf der Grundlage der Basisuntersuchung einer epidemiologischen prospektiven Verlaufsstudie (1995–1999) an 3021 Personen im Alter zwischen 14 und 24 Jahren werden epidemiologische Befunde zur Häufigkeit von somatoformen Beschwerden und somatoformen Syndromen/Störungen bei Jugendlichen und jungen Erwachsenen berichtet. Die Jugendlichen und jungen Erwachsenen wurden mit Hilfe des M-CIDI, einem standardisierten Interview zur Erfassung psychischer Symptome, Syndrome und Störungen nach dem DSM-IV, befragt. Die Ergebnisse der ersten Untersuchung zeigen, daß 50% der Jugendlichen einmal in ihrem bisherigen Leben unter einem somatoformen Symptom litten. Junge Frauen berichten häufiger von somatoformen Beschwerden als junge Männer (61 vs. 40%). Die im DSM-IV operationalisierten Kriterien einer somatoformen Störung werden nur von wenigen Jugendlichen und jungen Erwachsenen (2,7%) erfüllt. Die Prävalenz erhöht sich jedoch, wenn man nicht ausschließlich voll ausgeprägte somatoforme Störungen, sondern zusätzlich unterschwellige Syndrome in die Betrachtung einschließt: Hier berichten etwa 11% der Jugendlichen von somatoformen Syndromen. Somatoforme Störungen/Syndrome zeigen sich häufig im Verbund mit anderen psychischen Störungen, wobei die Komorbidität mit dem Alter zunimmt. Wie unsere Analysen ergaben, berichten Jugendliche und junge Erwachsene mit somatoformen Störungen, aber auch solche mit unterschwelligen Syndromen, vermehrt Beeinträchtigungen in verschiedenen sozialen Rollenbereichen und der Arbeitsproduktivität. / As part of a longitudinal study, prevalence findings of somatoform symptoms, syndromes and disorders are presented for a random sample of 3021 respondents aged 14 to 24 years. The response rate was 71%. Assessment was made using the computer- assisted Munich-Composite International Interview (M-CIDI). Findings of the first part of the study revealed that 50% (men: 40%; women: 61%) of the sample once had a somatoform symptom in their life. Threshold somatoform disorders were rare with 2.7%. However, when including subthreshold somatoform syndromes (11%), the lifetime prevalence of any somatoform disorder/syndrome was 13%. Somatoform disorders and syndromes are often comorbid with other mental disorders, and comorbidity rises with age. Further, they are associated with disabilities and impairments in social and work domains.

Introduction: Faravelli et al. [1, 2] present findings on the lifetime, point and 1-year prevalence of mental disorders from their recent Sesto Fiorentino community survey in Italy. The publication of these study findings occurs at a time where some researchers and journal editors seem to have come to the conclusion that there is currently no further need for such cross-sectional studies on the prevalence of mental disorders. In fact, there have been pleas for a pause of such studies [3]. Highlighting several noteworthy features and findings from the survey of Faravelli et al. [1, 2], this editorial will challenge this attitude. The status, past and recent progress in the field of epidemiology of mental disorders will be critically discussed, in an attempt to underline the continued core role of descriptive epidemiological studies for our field and to identify future research needs.

The role of comorbidity as a risk for suicide attempts is investigated in a random sample of 3021 young adults aged 14–24 years. The M-CIDI, a fully standardized and modified version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview, was used for the assessment of various DSM-IV lifetime and 12-month diagnoses as well as suicidal ideation and suicide attempts. Of all suicide attempters, 91% had at least one mental disorder, 79% were comorbid or multimorbid respectively and 45% had four or more diagnoses (only 5% in the total sample reached such high levels of comorbidity). Suicide attempters with more than three diagnoses were 18 times more likely (OR = 18.4) to attempt suicide than subjects with no diagnosis. Regarding specific diagnoses, multivariate comorbidity analyses indicated the highest risk for suicide attempt in those suffering from anxiety disorder (OR = 4.3), particularly posttraumatic stress disorder followed by substance disorder (OR = 2.2) and depressive disorder (OR = 2.1). Comorbidity, especially when anxiety disorders are involved, increases the risk for suicide attempts considerably more than any other individual DSM-IV diagnoses.

Objective: To examine in a nationally representative sample (a) the differential association of specific anxiety and depressive disorders defined according to DSM-IV with pain disorder (PD) and pain symptoms, and (b) whether pain-associated anxiety and depressive disorders and their comorbidity have different implications in terms of impairment, disability, health care utilization, and substance use. Method: A nationally representative community study was conducted in Germany. Symptoms, syndromes and diagnoses of mental disorders, and pain were assessed in N = 4,181 participants aged 18–65 years using the DSM-IV/M-CIDI. Results: Logistic regressions revealed that pain is associated with both specific anxiety and depressive disorders, with increasing significant odds ratios (OR) for medically explained pain symptoms (EPS; OR range: 1.9–2.0), to unexplained pain symptoms (UPS; OR range: 2.4–7.3), to PD (OR range: 3.3–14.8). PD and UPS persistently showed associations after adjusting for comorbid other anxiety and depressive disorders and physical illnesses. All types of pain, particularly PD/UPS, are associated with decreased quality of life, greater impairment in role functioning, disability, health care utilization, and substance use. Depressive disorders, even more so anxiety disorders and their comorbidity account for a substantial proportion of variance in these functional correlates. Conclusions: Pain is strongly associated with specific anxiety and depressive disorders. In light of the individual and societal burden due to pain, and the demonstrated role of comorbid anxiety or/and depression, our results call for further investigation of the underlying mechanisms for this association as well as targeted treatments for these comorbidities.

Evidence from clinical patient populations indicates that affective dysregulation is strongly associated with reality distortion, suggesting that a process of misassignment of emotional salience may underlie this connection. To examine this in more detail without clinical confounds, affective regulation-reality distortion relationships, and their clinical relevance, were examined in a German prospective cohort community study. A cohort of 2524 adolescents and young adults aged 14–24 years at baseline was examined by experienced psychologists. Presence of psychotic experiences and (hypo)manic and depressive symptoms was assessed at 2 time points (3.5 and up to 10 years after baseline) using the Munich-Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Associations were tested between level of affective dysregulation on the one hand and incidence of psychotic experiences, persistence of these experiences, and psychotic Impairment on the other. Most psychotic experiences occurred in a context of affective dysregulation, and bidirectional dose-response was apparent with greater level of both affective dysregulation and psychotic experiences. Persistence of psychotic experiences was progressively more likely with greater level of (hypo)manic symptoms (odds ratio [OR] trend = 1.51, P < .001) and depressive symptoms (OR trend = 1.15, P = .012). Similarly, psychotic experiences of clinical relevance were progressively more likely to occur with greater level of affective dysregulation (depressive symptoms: OR trend = 1.28, P = .002; (hypo)manic symptoms: OR trend = 1.37, P = .036). Correlated genetic liabilities underlying affective and nonaffective psychotic syndromes may be expressed as correlated dimensions in the general population. Also, affective dysregulation may contribute causally to the persistence and clinical relevance of reality distortion, possibly by facilitating a mechanism of aberrant salience attribution.

Objectives: To investigate the relationship between ecstasy use and mental disorders in a representative sample of adolescents and young adults. Method: Data for this investigation were drawn from the Early Developmental Stages of Psychopathology (EDSP) study, an epidemiological-longitudinal study in which 14-24 year-olds were examined prospectively over a period of about 4 years. Results are based on N=2462 participants who completed the whole study period and for whom drug use behavior could be determined. Results: (1) Ecstasy users, compared with non-users, were at significantly increased risk of DSM-IV substance related disorders, including alcohol use disorders (52.6 vs. 15.6%; OR=5.6, 95% CI=3.8-8.1). Further, ecstasy users also had a higher risk of alcohol use disorders, when compared with users of other illicit substances (52.6 vs. 40.3%; OR=1.7, 95% CI=1.1-2.4). (2) Ecstasy users had significantly higher rates for almost all DSM-IV mental disorders examined when compared with non-users (any non-substance use disorder: 68.7 vs. 44.5%; OR=3.1, 95% CI=2.1-4.4) and compared with users of other illicit drugs (any non substance use disorder: 68.7 vs. 55.5%; OR=1.8, 95% CI=1.2-2.6). (3) Ecstasy users also reported significantly higher rates of prescription medicine use, though they did not use more medical services than non-drug users. (4) Analyses of temporal patterns of ecstasy use and disorder onset revealed that the first use of ecstasy was secondary to the onset of DSM-IV mental disorders in the majority of cases. Still, subjects with mental disorders at baseline also showed a significantly increased risk for initiation of ecstasy use during the 4-year follow-up period. Conclusions: Care should be taken in cross sectional studies in interpreting mental disorder signs and symptoms merely as a consequence of ecstasy use, as ecstasy use might be associated with the use of multiple substances, and onset of mental disorder is more likely to precede rather than to follow use of ecstasy and related substances.