Anxiety and Fear-Related Disorders in the ICD-11: Results from a Global Case-controlled Field Study

Clinical Utility of ICD-11 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Requirements for the Classification of Mental, Behavioral or Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Systematic Review

Case-controlled field studies, ecological implementation field studies, and qualitative or mixed methodology studies have been conducted to evaluate the clinical utility of the ICD-11 clinical descriptions and diagnostic requirements (ICD-11 CDDR) for the diagnosis of mental disorders. This systematic review sought to analyze and synthesize the clinical utility indices of these guidelines from the perspectives of mental health professionals (MHPs) and patients from different regions of the world. A systematic search was carried out in five databases Science Direct, Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus. The relevant studies were subjected to explicit eligibility criteria, resulting in 19 included studies. The study characteristics were tabulated, methodological quality was assessed, and findings were summarized using convergent narrative synthesis. The overall findings indicated that the clinical utility of the ICD-11 CDDR was positive for the majority of studies (78.95%) that analyzed a wide range of mental disorders. Analyses at the level of the disorder groups also revealed the same trend. Almost only qualitative or mixed studies have identified negative aspects or obstacles of this diagnostic system. The clinical utility of the ICD-11 CDDR for the diagnosis of mental disorders is supported. Future research could resolve concerns regarding the isolated negative outcomes of ICD-11 CDDR performance. Finally, it is necessary to expand the scope of the training programs for MHPs and policymakers regarding the use of these guidelines in clinical practice.

Sleep deprivation increases the generalization of perceptual and concept-based fear: An fNIRS study

Insufficient sleep can initiate or exacerbate anxiety by triggering excessive fear generalization. In this study, a de novo paradigm was developed and used to examine the neural mechanisms governing the effects of sleep deprivation on processing perceptual and concept-based fear generalizations. A between-subject design was adopted, wherein a control group (who had a typical night's sleep) and a one-night sleep deprivation group completed a fear acquisition task at 9:00 PM on the first day and underwent a generalization test the following morning at 7:00 AM. In the fear acquisition task, navy blue and olive green were used as perceptual cues (P+ and P-, respectively), while animals and furniture items were used as conceptual cues (C+ and C-, respectively). Generalization was tested for four novel generalized categories (C+P+, C+P-, C-P+, and C-P-). Shock expectancy ratings, skin conductance responses, and functional near-infrared spectroscopy were recorded during the fear acquisition and generalization processes. Compared with the group who had a typical night's sleep, the sleep deprived group showed higher shock expectancy ratings (especially for P+ and C-), increased oxygenated hemoglobin in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and increased activation in the triangular inferior frontal gyrus during the generalization test. These findings suggest that sleep deprivation increases the generalization of threat memories, thus providing insights into the overgeneralization characteristics of anxiety and fear-related disorders.

Case-controlled field study of the ICD-11 clinical descriptions and diagnostic requirements for Bodily Distress Disorders

AIMS

Mental disorders characterized by preoccupation with distressing bodily symptoms and associated functional impairment have been a target of major reconceptualization in the ICD-11, in which a single category of Bodily Distress Disorder (BDD) with different levels of severity replaces most of the Somatoform Disorders in ICD-10. This study compared the accuracy of clinicians' diagnosis of disorders of somatic symptoms using either the ICD-11 or ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines in an online study.

METHODS

Clinically active members of the World Health Organization's Global Clinical Practice Network (N = 1065) participating in English, Spanish, or Japanese were randomly assigned to apply ICD-11 or ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines to one of nine pairs of standardized case vignettes. The accuracy of the clinicians' diagnoses as well as their ratings of the guidelines' clinical utility were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, clinicians were more accurate using ICD-11 compared to ICD-10 for every presentation of a vignette characterized primarily by bodily symptoms associated with distress and impairment. Clinicians who made a diagnosis of BDD using ICD-11 were generally correct in applying the severity specifiers for the condition.

LIMITATIONS

This sample may represent some self-selection bias and thus may not generalize to all clinicians. Additionally, diagnostic decisions with live patients may lead to different results.

CONCLUSIONS

The ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for BDD represent an improvement over those for Somatoform Disorders in ICD-10 in regard to clinicians' diagnostic accuracy and perceived clinical utility.

Anxiety and depression in adult cancer patients: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline

•Anxiety and depressive disorders are common in patients with cancer. •A higher prevalence seen in patients with cancer than the general population is often underrecognised. •Psychotherapy, cognitive behavioural therapy and mindfulness-based therapies are effective treatments. •Psychopharmacological treatments have been shown to be effective treatments of anxiety and depressive disorders.

Quantitative Electroencephalography (QEEG) as an Innovative Diagnostic Tool in Mental Disorders

Quantitative electroencephalography (QEEG) is becoming an increasingly common method of diagnosing neurological disorders and, following the recommendations of The American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society (ACNS), it can be used as a complementary method in the diagnosis of epilepsy, vascular diseases, dementia, and encephalopathy. However, few studies are confirming the importance of QEEG in the diagnosis of mental disorders and changes occurring as a result of therapy; hence, there is a need for analyses in this area. The aim of the study is analysis of the usefulness of QEEG in the diagnosis of people with generalized anxiety disorders. Our research takes the form of case studies. The paper presents an in-depth analysis of the QEEG results of five recently studied people with a psychiatric diagnosis: generalized anxiety disorder. The results show specific pattern amplitudes at C3 and C4. In all of the examined patients, two dependencies are repeated: low contribution of the sensorimotor rhythm (SMR) wave amplitudes and high beta2 wave amplitudes, higher or equal to the alpha amplitudes. The QEEG study provides important information about the specificity of brain waves of people with generalized anxiety disorder; therefore, it enables the preliminary and quick diagnosis of dysfunction. It is also possible to monitor changes due to QEEG, occurring as a result of psychotherapy, pharmacological therapy and EEG-biofeedback.

A global field study of the international classification of diseases (ICD-11) mood disorders clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines

BACKGROUND

We report results of an internet-based field study evaluating the diagnostic guidelines for ICD-11 mood disorders. Accuracy of clinicians' diagnostic judgments applying draft ICD-11 as compared to the ICD-10 guidelines to standardized case vignettes was assessed as well as perceived clinical utility.

METHODS

1357 clinician members of the World Health Organization's Global Clinical Practice Network completed the study in English, Spanish, Japanese or Russian. Participants were randomly assigned to apply ICD-11 or ICD-10 guidelines to one of eleven pairs of case vignettes.

RESULTS

Clinicians using the ICD-11 and ICD-10 guidelines achieved similar levels of accuracy in diagnosing mood disorders depicted in vignettes. Those using the ICD-11 were more accurate in identifying depressive episode in recurrent depressive disorder. There were no statistically significant differences detected across classifications in the accuracy of identifying dysthymic or cyclothymic disorder. Circumscribed problems with the proposed ICD-11 guidelines were identified including difficulties differentiating bipolar type I from bipolar type II disorder and applying revised severity ratings to depressive episodes. Clinical utility of ICD-11 bipolar disorders was found to be significantly lower than for ICD-10 equivalent categories.

LIMITATIONS

Standardized case vignettes were manipulated to evaluate specific changes. The degree of accuracy of clinicians' diagnostic judgments may not reflect clinical decision-making with patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Alignment of the ICD-11 with current research appears to have been achieved without sacrificing diagnostic accuracy or clinical utility though specific training may be necessary as ICD-11 is implemented worldwide. Areas in which the ICD-11 guidelines did not perform as intended resulted in further revisions.

Worldwide initiatives aimed to train professionals in the use of the ICD-11

BACKGROUND

The chapter on mental disorders of the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) has been now finalized. Training of mental health professionals in the use of the chapter is taking place worldwide. Information is provided on the ICD-11 training courses taking place recently, including that co-organized by the Naples World Health Organization (WHO) Collaborating Centre on Research and Training in Mental Health and the European Psychiatric Association; those which will be held in the next few months, such as the one co-organized by the World Psychiatric Association and the Global Mental Health Academy, to be held online from 8 to 29 November 2021; and the training course set up by the WHO Collaborating Centre on Mental Health at the Columbia University, in collaboration with the WHO Department of Mental Health and Substance Use, which can be accessed only by the members of the WHO Global Clinical Practice Network.

CONCLUSION

Psychiatrists of all countries of the world are encouraged to become familiar with the ICD-11 chapter on mental disorders, which will be adopted shortly by most countries worldwide.

Engagement of Russian Mental Health Professionals in the Development of WHO's ICD-11

The World Health Organization (WHO) has officially approved the next version of its global diagnostic system, the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Eleventh Revision (ICD-11). Processes to implement the ICD-11 are now underway. Developing the ICD-11 chapter on Mental, Behavioural and Neurodevelopmental Disorders, in line with WHO's core priorities to enhance the clinical utility, reliability, and global applicability of the guidelines, necessitated a large-scale scientifically-rigorous research program. Such a program of global field studies engaged mental health professionals from across the world, with substantial contributions from clinicians in the Russian Federation. This paper systematically highlights the substantive roles played by Russian clinicians in all steps of development of the mental, behavioural, and neurodevelopmental disorder guidelines, including their participation in the following: 1) early formative field studies that informed the organizing principles and overarching structure of the ICD-11; 2) large-scale online studies that used a case-controlled methodology to evaluate the guideline's clinical utility and the accuracy with which the new ICD-11 guidelines could be applied by global clinicians; 3) an online network of mental health professionals who provided direct feedback on the ICD-11 to WHO (also known as the Global Clinical Practice Network, www.globalclinicalpractice.net) with over 16,000 members from 160 countries, and with the Russian Federation being in the top five most represented countries in the network; 4) clinic-based field studies that tested the reliability and clinical utility of the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines; and 5) development and participation in training programs that prepare clinicians in implementing the diagnostic guidelines in clinical settings. In these many ways, Russian clinicians have substantively and directly contributed to efforts to maximize the clinical usefulness, consistency, acceptability, and applicability of the ICD-11's mental, behavioural, and neurodevelopmental disorder guidelines. This substantial engagement of clinicians will conceivably facilitate the adoption and use of the guidelines by clinicians in the Russian Federation and other Russian-speaking countries, as the ICD-11 is implemented over the coming years.