METHODS: Data from the Italian Ministry of Health (admissions for depression), the Pharmacy Service of a Local Health Unit (antidepressant prescribing) and from the Epidemiological System of the Veneto region (suicide rates) were collected from 2000 to 2005 for the Veneto region.

RESULTS: Suicide rates did not show any marked increase but were stable in males and females. Antidepressant prescribing increased exponentially over the period examined, whilst admissions for depression markedly decreased. The trend for an exponential increase in antidepressant prescribing in the Veneto region is shared with other countries and locales.

CONCLUSIONS: It is possible that the increase in antidepressant prescribing might be associated with earlier treatment of depression, thus decreasing the likelihood of aggravation of depression.

METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients who received an open-label, flexible-dose, 12- week course of adjunctive aripiprazole was conducted in 27 military veterans meeting DSM-IV criteria for PTSD and comorbid major depression. Concomitant psychiatric medications continued unchanged, except for other antipsychotics which were discontinued prior to initiating aripiprazole. The primary outcome variable was a change from baseline in the PTSD checklist-military version (PCL-M) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II).

RESULTS: PTSD severity (Total PCL scores) decreased from 56.11 at baseline to 46.85 at 12-weeks (p < 0.0001 from Wilcoxon signed rank test) and the depression severity decreased from 30.44 at baseline to 20.67 at 12-weeks (p < 0.0001 from Wilcoxon signed rank test). Thirty seven percent (10/27) were considered responders, as defined by a decrease in total PCL scores of at least 20 percent and 19% (5/27) were considered as responders as defined by a decrease in total BDI score of at least 50%.

CONCLUSIONS: The addition of aripiprazole contributed to a reduction in both PTSD and depression symptomatology in a population that has traditionally demonstrated poor pharmacological response. Further investigations, including double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, are essential to confirm and further demonstrate the benefit of aripiprazole augmentation in the treatment of military related PTSD.

Materials and Methods: The study was carried out in a non-governmental, psychiatric hospital and participants consisted of patients available for assessment ten years following their initial diagnosis. Outcome was assessed on clinical and social parameters. Clinical measures of outcome included psychopathology, hospitalization, and suicidality. Social parameters included quality of life functioning, employability, interpersonal functioning, and the ability to live independently.

Results: In our sample, mean positive symptoms’ score were reduced by more than 65% between baseline and endpoint. The percentage of reduction in scores of negative symptoms is much less than reduction in positive symptoms. It was observed that only 23-25% patients showed social recovery on two or three different parameters. Additionally, fewer negative symptoms, lower depression scores, and low levels of aggression at baseline predicted good outcome. A higher level of positive symptoms at baseline also predicted recovery. The two social variables that predicted later outcomes were initially high levels of work performance and the ability to live independently at baseline.

Conclusions: Clinical information is not sufficient to make an accurate prediction of outcome status; rather, outcome depends upon multiple factors (including social parameters). A major implication of this research is the argument for moving toward a comprehensive assessment of outcome and to plan management accordingly. Bringing social outcome measures to the forefront and into the communities will allow for a more patient-centric approach. It also opens newer vistas for addressing the complex interaction of clinical and social parameters.

METHOD: Participants were 61 patients out of 200 consecutive hospitalized first-episode patients with schizophrenia diagnosed according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders who were much improved on the Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement (CGI-I) scale at the endpoint of a 10-year follow-up. Clinical assessment tools included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale for Schizophrenia, CGI-I, Global Assessment of Functioning, and suicidality.

RESULTS: Many of the patients, although clinically improved, experienced emerging suicidality during the 10-year follow-up period. All of the patients reported significant suicidality (ie, suicide attempts, suicidal crises, or suicidal ideation) at the end of the study, whereas only 83% had reported previous significant suicidality at baseline. No sociodemographic and clinical variables at baseline were predictive of suicidal status at the end of the 10-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION: Schizophrenia is a complex neurobehavioral disorder that appears to be closely associated with suicidal behavior. Adequate assessment and management of suicidality needs to be a continual process, even in patients who respond well to treatment.

METHODS: 102 children and adolescents in outpatient psychotherapy and their parents filled out the SCARED and Youth Self Report/Child Behaviour Checklist (YSR/CBCL).

RESULTS: The German SCARED showed good internal consistency for both parent and self-report version, and proved to be convergently and discriminantly valid when compared with YSR/CBCL scales. Cross-informant agreement was moderate with children reporting both a larger number as well as higher severity of anxiety symptoms than their parents.

CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the German SCARED is a valid and reliable anxiety scale and may be used in a clinical setting.

METHODS: 496 patients were enrolled at 75 psychiatric practices across Canada. The Olanzapine cohort (n = 287) included patients who had olanzapine added to their medication regimen or the dose of olanzapine increased. The Other cohort (n = 209) had a medication other than olanzapine added or the dose adjusted. Changes from baseline in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Beck Anxiety Inventory and SF-12 Health Survey were compared at one month using ANCOVA. Categorical variables at one month for health resource utilization, employment status, abuse/dependency, and the number of suicide attempts were compared using Fisher's Exact test. Patients were followed for one year and a subgroup was evaluated.

RESULTS: At one month, patients in the Olanzapine cohort recorded a mean reduction in the YMRS of 11.5, significantly greater than the mean reduction in the Other cohort of 9.7 (ANCOVA P = 0.002). The Olanzapine cohort was significantly improved compared to the Other cohort on the scales for depression and anxiety and did not experience the deterioration in physical functioning seen in the Other cohort. No significant differences were detected in health-related quality-of-life measures, employment status, drug abuse/dependency, number of suicide attempts, mental functioning, emergency room visits or inpatient psychiatric hospitalizations. In a subgroup treated for 12 months with a single second generation antipsychotic, improvements in illness severity measures were maintained with no evidence of significant differences among the antipsychotics.

CONCLUSIONS: Patients with bipolar disorder requiring treatment intervention for exacerbation of mania in the community setting responded to olanzapine at one month. In a subset analysis, second generation antipsychotic treatment continued to be beneficial in reducing bipolar symptoms at one year.

RECENT FINDINGS: For various reasons, patients assessed as 'recovered' remain excluded from mainstream society. We are of the opinion that present outcome measures do not capture real-life situations. We propose that the concept of recovery be carefully defined and the gold standard of outcome should incorporate social and clinical parameters. We attempt to redefine recovery. Patients who have shown clinical improvement do not necessarily do well in everyday situations even though there is obvious clinical improvement. Therefore, it has been repeatedly argued that a consensus of recovery should be determined and that routine clinical practice should then adapt to the agreed criteria.

SUMMARY: We argue that the outcome measures should be multidimensional and consist of at least two parameters: clinical remission and social outcome.

Methods: The cohort for this study was drawn from a 10-year follow-up of first episode schizophrenia. Patients having completed 10 years of consistent treatment after first hospitalisation were assessed on psychopathological and recovery criteria. Clinical as well as social parameters of recovery were evaluated. Descriptive statistics with 95% confidence intervals are provided.

Results: Of 200 patients recruited at the beginning of this study, 122 patients (61%) were present in the city of Mumbai at the end of 10-year follow-up study period. Among 122 available patients, 101 patients (50.5%) were included in the assessment at the end of 10-year follow-up study period, 6 patients (3.0%) were excluded from the study due to changed diagnosis, and 15 patients (7.5%) were excluded due to admission into long-term care facilities. This indicates that 107 out of 122 available patients (87.7%) were living in the community with their families. Out of 101 (50.5%) patients assessed at the end of 10 years, 61 patients (30.5%) showed improved recovery on the Clinical Global Impression Scale, 40 patients (20%) revealed no improvement in the recovery, 43 patients (72.9%) were able to live independently, and 24 patients (40%) were able to find employment.

Conclusions: With 10 years of treatment, the recovery rate among schizophrenia patients in Mumbai was 30.5%. Among the patients, 87.7% of patients lived in the community, 72.9% of patients lived independently, and 40% of patients obtained employment. However, 60% of patients were unable to return to work, which highlights the need for continued monitoring and support to prevent the deterioration of health in these patients. It is likely that socioecological factors have played a role in this outcome.