Case-series Evaluating a Transdiagnostic Cognitive-behavioral Treatment For Co-occurring Anxiety Disorders.

Background. Patients with anxiety disorder diagnoses commonly have more than one anxiety diagnosis. While cognitive-behavioral interventions have proven efficacy in treating single anxiety disorder diagnoses, there has been little investigation of their efficacy in treating cooccurring anxiety disorders. Aims. To evaluate the efficacy of a transdiagnostic cognitive-behavioral intervention for treating co-occurring anxiety disorders. Methods. An A-B single case study design (N = 6) was used to evaluate the efficacy of a 12 to 13 session modular transdiagnostic cognitive-behavioral intervention for treating co-occurring anxiety disorders across patients with at least two of the following diagnoses: GAD, Social Phobia, Panic Disorder and/or OCD. Results. Five of the six participants completed treatment. At post-treatment assessment the five treatment completers achieved diagnostic and symptomatic change with three participants being diagnosis free. All participants who completed treatment no longer met criteria for any DSM-IV-TR Axis-I diagnosis at the three-month follow-up assessment, and demonstrated reliable and clinically-significant improvements in symptoms. Across the participants, statistically significant improvements from pre- to post-intervention were found on measures of anxiety, depression and general well-being, and all improvements were maintained at three-month follow-up. Conclusions. Results suggest that transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral interventions can be of benefit to patients with co-occurring anxiety disorders.

Affective Instability, Childhood Trauma and Major Affective Disorders

BACKGROUND: Affective instability (AI), childhood trauma, and mental illness are linked, but evidence in affective disorders is limited, despite both AI and childhood trauma being associated with poorer outcomes. Aims were to compare AI levels in bipolar disorder I (BPI) and II (BPII), and major depressive disorder recurrent (MDDR), and to examine the association of AI and childhood trauma within each diagnostic group. METHODS: AI, measured using the Affective Lability Scale (ALS), was compared between people with DSM-IV BPI (n=923), BPII (n=363) and MDDR (n=207) accounting for confounders and current mood. Regression modelling was used to examine the association between AI and childhood traumas in each diagnostic group. RESULTS: ALS scores in descending order were BPII, BPI, MDDR, and differences between groups were significant (p<0.05). Within the BPI group any childhood abuse (p=0.021), childhood physical abuse (p=0.003) and the death of a close friend in childhood (p=0.002) were significantly associated with higher ALS score but no association was found between childhood trauma and AI in BPII and MDDR. LIMITATIONS: The ALS is a self-report scale and is subject to retrospective recall bias. CONCLUSIONS: AI is an important dimension in bipolar disorder independent of current mood state. There is a strong link between childhood traumatic events and AI levels in BPI and this may be one way in which exposure and disorder are linked. Clinical interventions targeting AI in people who have suffered significant childhood trauma could potentially change the clinical course of bipolar disorder.