Continuum of depressive and manic mixed states in patients with bipolar disorder: quantitative measurement and clinical features.

Bipolar mixed states combine depressive and manic features, presenting diagnostic and treatment challenges and reflecting a severe form of the illness. DSM-IV criteria for a mixed state require combined depressive and manic syndromes, but a range of mixed states has been described clinically. A unified definition of mixed states would be valuable in understanding their diagnosis, mechanism and treatment implications. We investigated the manner in which depressive and manic features combine to produce a continuum of mixed states. In 88 subjects with bipolar disorder (DSM-IV), we evaluated symptoms and clinical characteristics, and compared depression-based, mania-based, and other published definitions of mixed states. We developed an index of the extent to which symptoms were mixed (Mixed State Index, MSI) and characterized its relationship to clinical state. Predominately manic and depressive mixed states using criteria from recent literature, as well as Kraepelinian mixed states, had similar symptoms and MSI scores. Anxiety correlated significantly with depression scores in manic subjects and with mania scores in depressed subjects. Discriminant function analysis associated mixed states with symptoms of hyperactivity and negative cognitions, but not subjective depressive or elevated mood. High MSI scores were associated with severe course of illness. For depressive or manic episodes, characteristics of mixed states emerged with two symptoms of the opposite polarity. This was a cross-sectional study. Mixed states appear to be a continuum. An index of the degree to which depressive and manic symptoms combine appears useful in identifying and characterizing mixed states. We propose a depressive or manic episode with three or more symptoms of the opposite polarity as a parsimonious definition of a mixed state.

THE MEASUREMENT OF HUMANISTIC AND DEHUMANISTIC BEHAVIORS IN HOSPITAL NURSING ENVIRONMENTS

The purpose of this investigation was to develop a reliable scale to measure the social environment of hospital nursing units according to the degree of humanistic and dehumanistic behaviors as perceived by nursing staff in hospitals. The study was based on a conceptual model proposed by Jan Howard, a sociologist. After reviewing the literature relevant to personalization of care, analyzing interviews with patients in various settings, and studying biological, psychological, and sociological frames of reference, Howard proposed the following necessary conditions for humanized health care. They were the dimensions of Irreplaceability, Holistic Selves, Freedom of Action, Status Equality, Shared Decision Making and Responsibility, Empathy, and Positive Affect.^ It was proposed that a scale composed of behaviors which reflected Howard's dimensions be developed within the framework of the social environment of nursing care units in hospitals. Nursing units were chosen because hospitals are traditionally organized around nursing care units and because patients spend the majority of their time in hospitals interacting with various levels of nursing personnel.^ Approximately 180 behaviors describing both patient and nursing staff behaviors which occur on nursing units were developed. Behaviors which were believed to be humanistic as well as dehumanistic were included. The items were classified under the dimensions of Howard's model by a purposively selected sample of 42 nurses representing a broad range of education, experience, and clinical areas. Those items with a high degree of agreement, at least 50%, were placed in the questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of 169 items including six items from the Marlowe Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Short Form).^ The questionnaire, the Social Environment Scale, was distributed to the entire 7 to 3 shift nursing staff (603) of four hospitals including a public county specialty hospital, a public county general and acute hospital, a large university affiliated hospital with all services, and a small general community hospital. Staff were asked to report on a Likert type scale how often the listed behaviors occurred on their units. Three hundred and sixteen respondents (52% of the population) participated in the study.^ An item analysis was done in which each item was examined in relationship to its correlation to its own dimension total and to the totals of the other dimensions. As a result of this analysis, three dimensions, Positive Affect, Irreplaceability, and Freedom of Action were deleted from the scale. The final scale consisted of 70 items with 26 in Shared Decision Making and Responsibility, 25 in Holistic Selves, 12 in Status Equality, and seven in Empathy. The alpha coefficient was over .800 for all scales except Empathy which was .597.^ An analysis of variance by hospital was performed on the means of each dimension of the scale. There was a statistically significant difference between hospitals with a trend for the public hospitals to score lower on the scale than the university or community hospitals. That the scale scores should be lower in crowded, understaffed public hospitals was not unexpected and reflected that the scale had some discriminating ability. These differences were still observed after adjusting for the effect of Social Desirability.^ In summary, there is preliminary evidence based on this exploratory investigation that a reliable scale based on at least four dimensions from Howard's model could be developed to measure the concept of humanistic health care in hospital settings. ^