Clinical Flashcards
Anorexia nervosa
An eating disorder characterised by persistent low body weight. There are three main criteria that must be met for a diagnosis to be given.
Anorexia nervosa - criterion A
Restriction of energy intake resulting in body weight being significantly below what would be expected based on the patients age and height (BMI under 17.5)
Anorexia nervosa - criterion B
An intense fear of gaining weight or participating in persistent behaviour that will interrupt the gaining of weight even though current body weight is very low. E.g. excessive exercise or purge-binge
Anorexia nervosa - criterion C
Distortion of body image where the body weight is hugely overestimated and the patient is unable to accept the severity of the low body weight. There is an emphasis on body weight in the patients view of themselves leading to poor body image.
Anorexia nervosa - features (onset)
Usually diagnosed in teenage years (13-18), often coinciding with stressors such as starting university or leaving home
Anorexia nervosa - features (prevalence)
1:10 Male to female ratio, 3.6% prevalence in females, 0.1% in males, high prevalence in high income countries
Anorexia nervosa - features (prognosis)
High mortality rate, six times as many deaths as expected for females, staying longer during the first hospitalisation predicted better outcomes
Anorexia nervosa - physical symptoms
Affects the whole body. Symptom include: thinning hair, low blood pressure, weak muscles, osteoporosis, kidney stones, intestinal problems, periods stopping and bruising easily.
Anorexia nervosa - subtypes - restrictive
Weight loss shown through dieting, excessive exercise or fasting in significant periods within the last three months
Anorexia nervosa - subtypes - binge eating/purging
Recurrent bouts of binge eating behaviours alternating with purging, such as self induced vomiting or laxatives, shown within the last three months
Anorexia nervosa - reliability of diagnosis
Strength - Sysko et al (2012)
Weakness - Thomas et al (2015)
Sysko et al (2012)
Measured test-retest reliability with patients being interviewed by telephone using the DSM-5 criteria, three to seven days later the interview was repeated using a different assessor. The extent of agreement was described as excellent
Thomas et al (2015)
Pointed out that many studies go beyond the DSM-5 criteria, for instance using the BMI cut off of 17.5, therefore reliability may be lower in real life.
Anorexia nervosa - validity of diagnosis
Weakness - Smith et al (2017)
Smith et al (2017)
Looked at the validity of four severity specifiers. In 109 adults diagnosed with anorexia nervosa, a higher BMI (indicating low severity) was linked to greater eating disorder psychopathology, the opposite of the expected outcome.
Co- morbidity
Anorexia nervosa is associated with comorbidity, where two or more medical conditions are simultaneously present in the patient
Classification system definition
A checklist of signs and symptoms which helps a clinician to reach a diagnosis of a specific disorder, often through a process of elimination
DSM-5 (Diagnostic and statistical manual)
Describes the symptoms, features and risk factors of over 300 mental and behavioural disorders
DSM-5 - section one
Offers guidance about using the new system
DSM-5 - section two
Details the disorders and is categorised according to our current understanding of the underlying causes and similarities between the symptoms, it is used to provide a diagnosis.
DSM-5 - section three
Includes suggestions for new disorders, which currently require further investigation. It also includes information on the effect of culture on the presentation of symptoms and how they are presented
Diagnosing using the DSM-5
Clinicians would gather information about an individual through observation and interviews (structured and unstructured).
Process of elimination, with a best-fit system
DSM-5 - inter-rater reliability
Two clinicians interview the same individual, strong reliability if they both reach the same diagnosis
DSM-5 - test-retest reliability
The diagnosis is repeated by the same clinician after a time period, strong reliability if the same diagnosis is reached
Descriptive validity
Individuals diagnosed with the same disorder show similar symptoms, a high DV if the symptoms are only accurate for that disorder.
Aetiological validity
Individuals with the same disorder have similar causes for their behaviour
Concurrent validity
Using more than one method or technique to diagnose
4D model of diagnosis
Used to help determine when a mental issue is considered a mental disorder, giving treatment implications. It involves deviance, dysfunction, distress and danger
4D model of diagnosis - deviance
Deviant behaviours are those that are unusual or undesirable, therefore an understanding of the social norms and context are required to evaluate it. The failure to conform to social norms may lead to negative attention so is a good indicator of psychological abnormality.
4D model of diagnosis - dysfunction
Symptoms which distract, confuse or interfere with a persons ability to carry out their usual roles and responsibilities (such as working or socialising). The WHODAS II is one of the main questionnaires used to measure dysfunction.
4D model of diagnosis - distress
Symptoms that cause emotional pain or anxiety, as well as physical symptoms such as always feeling tired. However distress can be normal in some scenarios so context is important before a diagnosis can be given. The Kessier psychological distress scale (a ten item questionnaire) is used to help determine the length and intensity of the distress.
4D model of diagnosis - danger
Careless, hostile or hazardous behaviour that jeopardises the safety of the individual or others.
4D model of diagnosis - strengths
High validity - the model is neither over or under inclusive, when all four Ds are used in the diagnosis. If only one was used (such as deviance an erratic person may be diagnosed yet somebody with depression may not be)
Objective measurements e.g the Kessier psychological scale are used, increasing reliability
4D model of diagnosis - weaknesses
Can be subjective - deviance is subjective as it is dependent on statistical and cultural norms, decreasing validity
Inconsistencies in the expression of the Ds - inconsistencies in how distress is displayed and is caused between people, clinicians need to know the context
Language may result in labelling - using danger as a criterion may lead to negative labelling and ultimately self-fulfilling prophecy.
DSM-5 - strengths
Good levels of agreement - Regier et al (2013)
High validity - Kim-Cohen et al (2005)
DSM-5 - weaknesses
Diagnosis says nothing about the causes of the disorder, the result of a diagnosis is simply a label that says nothing useful (such as how to treat it based on its causes)
Falling standards - Cooper et al (2014)
Regier et al (2013)
Reported that three disorders had kappa values from 0.6-0.79 (very good) and seven more had values from 0.4-0.59 (good). This is important as the criterion for these disorders have changed over time, shows that the DSM-5 is reliable due to high levels of agreement
Kim-Cohen et al (2005)
Demonstrated the concurrent validity of (CD) through interviewing children and mothers, observing the children’s behaviour and questionnaires from teachers. Specific risk factors showed aetiological validity and predictive validity was also shown as five year olds with CD were more likely to show behavioural difficulties at age seven. Shows high validity in some orders in the DSM.
Cooper et al (2014)
Showed that what counts as acceptable agreement has decreased over time. The DSM-5 taskforce classified levels as low as 0.2-0.4 as acceptable, therefore it may be less reliable than previous DSM editions, with some diagnoses being made in error or being missed
Schizophrenia
A psychotic disorder characterised by positive symptoms such as delusions, hallucinations and disorganised thinking. The DSM requires at least two of the four main symptoms for a diagnosis to be made and one month of active symptoms, with six months of disturbance to everyday functioning
Schizophrenia - four key symptoms
Though insertion
Hallucinations
Delusions
Disorganised thinking
Schizophrenia - thought insertion
When a person believes that their thoughts do not belong to them and have been planted by an external source, they experience a blurring of the boundaries between themselves and others believing it to be permeable.
Schizophrenia - hallucinations
Involuntary, vivid and clear perceptual experiences that occur in the absence of any external stimuli. They can be visual, olfactory, somatosensory or auditory (which are most common, with people hearing voices that are not their own inner voice).
Schizophrenia - delusions
Fixed beliefs that are not amenable to change even in the light of conflicting evidence. They may be related to everyday life (thinking the police are watching you) or be more bizarre (thinking an alien is trying to remove your brain).
Schizophrenia - disorganised thinking
Is inferred from a person’s speech, which may be characterised by derailment (having a series of unrelated ideas) or tangentiality (going off on a completely different topic). The person may switch from one topic to another or jumble seemingly unrelated ideas, word salad refers to apparently random and incoherent stringing together of words and neologism to the blending of words together to create new words. Mixing up words can be common so it is only symptomatic if it leads to dysfunctional communication.
Schizophrenia - features
Lifetime prevalence 0.3-0.7% (varies with ethnicity and nationality)
Onset - males (early to mid 20s), females (late 20s)
Prognosis - males poorer than females (a minority recover completely but positive symptoms tend to reduce over time with the negative symptoms remaining.)
Diagnosis of schizophrenia - reliability
Regier et al (2013) reported a kappa score of 0.46 (good) using the DSM-5 while Sartorius et al (1995) used the ICD-10 to quote a score of 0.86. Only 3.8% of clinicians said that they lacked confidence in their diagnoses using the ICD-10. However it is not easy to diagnose as many symptoms are shared e.g. hallucinations with drug withdrawal
Diagnosis of schizophrenia - validity
It can be difficult to diagnose if the client is from a different cultural background to the clinician. For example, Rastafarians often use neologisms that are a play on English words, however a clinician that was unaware of this may think that they showed disorganised thinking , reducing the accuracy of diagnosis.
Anorexia nervosa - biological explanations
Specific genes - EPHX2, ITPR3, DAT1, 5-HTR2A
Twin studies - Holland et al (1984)
Grice et al (2002)
Studied 192 families, where one family member had received an AN diagnosis and another had been diagnosed with an eating disorder. No significance until they looked at the sub-group of 37 families with two members diagnosed with restrictive AN.
Gorwood et al (2003)
Heritability of AN is 70%
Strober et al (2000)
Anorexia nervosa is rare in first-degree relatives of those that have never had an eating disorder, but is 11.3 times more likely in those that did.
EPHX2
Codes for the enzyme epoxide hydrolase, a mutation may lead to a change in the active site of the enzyme, disrupting the metabolism of cholesterol. People with anorexia likely to have high cholesterol (maybe less impulse to eat)
ITPR3
Codes for a taste receptor (sweet and bitter). Mutation may lead to faulty receptor, people with AN may have less motivation to eat because it tastes weird.
DAT1
Codes for a dopamine transporter protein (re-uptake channel), a mutation may lead unusually levels of dopamine desensitising the reward pathway and leading to down regulation. Less motivation to eat
5HTR2A
Codes for a serotonin receptor, a mutation may lead to less motivation to eat
Scott-Van Zeeland (2014)
EPHX2 gene was faulty in people with anorexia compared controls (1200 compared to 1900). However no cause and effect
Anorexia nervosa - biological explanations - weaknesses
Polygenic - not solely down to the influence of a single gene, AN is a complex disorder three different criterion
New science and technology (isolating genes), reductionist approach and needs to be developed
Holland et al (1984)
30 female pairs (16Mz, 14Dz), four male pairs and one set of male triplets, selected as one member was diagnosed with AN. High concordance (55%) for Mz female twins compared to 7% for Dz twins. Significant
Equal environment assumption decreases validity
Anorexia nervosa - cognitive explanation
Distorted body schemas
Irrational beliefs
Impaired global and enhanced local processing
Anorexia nervosa - cognitive explanation - distorted body schemas
Gadsby (2017). Our body schema is our mental image of what our body’s own shape and size, people with AN have a distorted one seeing themselves as bigger than they actually are
Anorexia nervosa - cognitive explanations - irrational beliefs
Steinglass (2007) suggests that people with AN have the dominant core belief of fearing gaining weight or becoming fat, for some this is so extreme that it is delusional. This can make them resistant to treatment
Anorexia nervosa - cognitive explanations - enhanced local and impaired global processing
Enhanced local processing - have an eye for detail, readily perceiving and focusing on tiny flaws
Impaired global processing - the ability to integrate details into a meaningful overall pattern, people with AN find it difficult to see the bigger picture and are unable to perceive their overall body shape accurately
Anorexia nervosa - cognitive explanations - strengths
Guardia et al (2012)
Sachdev et al (2008)
Sachdev et al (2008)
Tested brain activity levels using fMRI, finding a difference between activity levels in AN patients when looking at images of their own bodies.
Anorexia nervosa - cognitive explanations - weaknesses
Long et al (2016) - explanation lacks validity as it does not explain the causes of AN
Cornelissen et al (2013) - challenges the role of body image distortion
Long et al (2016)
No difference between recovered AN patients and non-AN control participants on the ROCFT, a measure of global and local processing. Concluded that weak central coherence could be due to starvation in AN rather than causing it, explaining why it may disappear after recovery.
Cornelissen et al (2013)
Compared AN and control participants on a morphing task, adjusting a computerised image of themselves until it matched their own estimate of body size. No significant difference between AN participants and controls.
Anorexia nervosa - cognitive treatment
CBTE - enhanced cognitive behavioural therapy
CBTE
Used to tackle behaviours associated with distorted behaviours towards food and eating
Usually 20 sessions with four defined stages (Murphy et al 2010)
Fairburn (2008) adjusted CBT to CBTE as a therapy for all eating disorders on an outpatient basis
CBTE - stage 1
Introduces a weekly weigh in (they cannot weigh anywhere else) and regular eating (by creating an eating plan, giving a daily routine).
Usually takes four weeks with two sessions a week
CBTE - stage 2
Reviewing progress over two sessions
Barriers identified and planning for stage 3
CBTE - stage 3
The main stage of treatment that will take approximately 8 sessions
Identify the ways that the clients self-evaluation is dependent on body weight and shape, learning how to focus on other parts of life
Dietary rules (current) are identified and the therapist helps the client to break them
CBTE - stage 4
Aims to maintain progress and prevent relapse
Weekly weigh ins continue at home and working together in a plan for the next twenty weeks, before a follow up session
The client continues with strategies such as rule breaking and avoiding body checking.
Anorexia nervosa - cognitive treatment - strengths
Fairburn et al (2015)
Cooper et al (2016)