Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (36) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (36)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Journal article (36) (remove)
Language
- English (36) (remove)
Keywords
- anxiety (6)
- depression (4)
- fear conditioning (3)
- human behaviour (3)
- Alzheimer’s disease (2)
- biodiversity (2)
- fear generalization (2)
- fear-potentiated startle (2)
- physiology (2)
- psychiatry (2)
Institute
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie (33)
- Institut für Psychologie (13)
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie (8)
- Deutsches Zentrum für Herzinsuffizienz (DZHI) (4)
- Institut für Klinische Epidemiologie und Biometrie (4)
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I (3)
- Institut für Hygiene und Mikrobiologie (2)
- Institut für Klinische Neurobiologie (2)
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie (ab 2004) (2)
- Theodor-Boveri-Institut für Biowissenschaften (2)
Sonstige beteiligte Institutionen
EU-Project number / Contract (GA) number
- 696802 (1)
Background
The need to optimize exposure treatments for anxiety disorders may be addressed by temporally intensified exposure sessions. Effects on symptom reduction and public health benefits should be examined across different anxiety disorders with comorbid conditions.
Methods
This multicenter randomized controlled trial compared two variants of prediction error-based exposure therapy (PeEx) in various anxiety disorders (both 12 sessions + 2 booster sessions, 100 min/session): temporally intensified exposure (PeEx-I) with exposure sessions condensed to 2 weeks (n = 358) and standard nonintensified exposure (PeEx-S) with weekly exposure sessions (n = 368). Primary outcomes were anxiety symptoms (pre, post, and 6-months follow-up). Secondary outcomes were global severity (across sessions), quality of life, disability days, and comorbid depression.
Results
Both treatments resulted in substantial improvements at post (PeEx-I: d\(_{within}\) = 1.50, PeEx-S: d\(_{within}\) = 1.78) and follow-up (PeEx-I: d\(_{within}\) = 2.34; PeEx-S: d\(_{within}\) = 2.03). Both groups showed formally equivalent symptom reduction at post and follow-up. However, time until response during treatment was 32% shorter in PeEx-I (median = 68 days) than PeEx-S (108 days; TR\(_{PeEx-I}\)-I = 0.68). Interestingly, drop-out rates were lower during intensified exposure. PeEx-I was also superior in reducing disability days and improving quality of life at follow-up without increasing relapse.
Conclusions
Both treatment variants focusing on the transdiagnostic exposure-based violation of threat beliefs were effective in reducing symptom severity and disability in severe anxiety disorders. Temporally intensified exposure resulted in faster treatment response with substantial public health benefits and lower drop-out during the exposure phase, without higher relapse. Clinicians can expect better or at least comparable outcomes when delivering exposure in a temporally intensified manner.
Major depressive disorder and the anxiety disorders are highly prevalent, disabling and moderately heritable. Depression and anxiety are also highly comorbid and have a strong genetic correlation (r(g) approximate to 1). Cognitive behavioural therapy is a leading evidence-based treatment but has variable outcomes. Currently, there are no strong predictors of outcome. Therapygenetics research aims to identify genetic predictors of prognosis following therapy. We performed genome-wide association meta-analyses of symptoms following cognitive behavioural therapy in adults with anxiety disorders (n = 972), adults with major depressive disorder (n = 832) and children with anxiety disorders (n = 920; meta-analysis n = 2724). We (h(SNP)(2)) and polygenic scoring was used to examine genetic associations between therapy outcomes and psychopathology, personality and estimated the variance in therapy outcomes that could be explained by common genetic variants learning. No single nucleotide polymorphisms were strongly associated with treatment outcomes. No significant estimate of h(SNP)(2) could be obtained, suggesting the heritability of therapy outcome is smaller than our analysis was powered to detect. Polygenic scoring failed to detect genetic overlap between therapy outcome and psychopathology, personality or learning. This study is the largest therapygenetics study to date. Results are consistent with previous, similarly powered genome-wide association studies of complex traits.
Rats intracerebroventricularily (icv) treated with streptozotocin (STZ), shown to generate an insulin resistant brain state, were used as an animal model for the sporadic form of Alzheimer's disease (sAD). Previously, we showed in an in vivo study that 3 months after STZ icv treatment hippocampal adult neurogenesis (AN) is impaired. In the present study, we examined the effects of STZ on isolated adult hippocampal neural stem cells (NSCs) using an in vitro approach. We revealed that 2.5 mM STZ inhibits the proliferation of NSCs as indicated by reduced number and size of neurospheres as well as by less BrdU-immunoreactive NSCs. Double immunofluorescence stainings of NSCs already being triggered to start with their differentiation showed that STZ primarily impairs the generation of new neurons, but not of astrocytes. For revealing mechanisms possibly involved in mediating STZ effects we analyzed expression levels of insulin/glucose system-related molecules such as the glucose transporter (GLUT) 1 and 3, the insulin receptor (IR) and the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) 1 receptor. Applying quantitative Real time-PCR (qRT-PCR) and immunofluorescence stainings we showed that STZ exerts its strongest effects on GLUT3 expression, as GLUT3 mRNA levels were found to be reduced in NSCs, and less GLUT3-immunoreactive NSCs as well as differentiating cells were detected after STZ treatment. These findings suggest that cultured NSCs are a good model for developing new strategies to treat nerve cell loss in AD and other degenerative disorders.
A variety of factors contribute to the degree to which a person feels lonely and socially isolated. These factors may be particularly relevant in contexts requiring social distancing, e.g., during the COVID-19 pandemic or in states of immunodeficiency. We present the Loneliness and Isolation during Social Distancing (LISD) Scale. Extending existing measures, the LISD scale measures both state and trait aspects of loneliness and isolation, including indicators of social connectedness and support. In addition, it reliably predicts individual differences in anxiety and depression. Data were collected online from two independent samples in a social distancing context (the COVID-19 pandemic). Factorial validation was based on exploratory factor analysis (EFA; Sample 1, N = 244) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA; Sample 2, N = 304). Multiple regression analyses were used to assess how the LISD scale predicts state anxiety and depression. The LISD scale showed satisfactory fit in both samples. Its two state factors indicate being lonely and isolated as well as connected and supported, while its three trait factors reflect general loneliness and isolation, sociability and sense of belonging, and social closeness and support. Our results imply strong predictive power of the LISD scale for state anxiety and depression, explaining 33 and 51% of variance, respectively. Anxiety and depression scores were particularly predicted by low dispositional sociability and sense of belonging and by currently being more lonely and isolated. In turn, being lonely and isolated was related to being less connected and supported (state) as well as having lower social closeness and support in general (trait). We provide a novel scale which distinguishes between acute and general dimensions of loneliness and social isolation while also predicting mental health. The LISD scale could be a valuable and economic addition to the assessment of mental health factors impacted by social distancing.
Background
Performance anxiety is the most frequently reported anxiety disorder among professional musicians. Typical symptoms are - on a physical level - the consequences of an increase in sympathetic tone with cardiac stress, such as acceleration of heartbeat, increase in blood pressure, increased respiratory rate and tremor up to nausea or flush reactions. These symptoms can cause emotional distress, a reduced musical and artistical performance up to an impaired functioning. While anxiety disorders are preferably treated using cognitive-behavioral therapy with exposure, this approach is rather difficult for treating music performance anxiety since the presence of a public or professional jury is required and not easily available. The use of virtual reality (VR) could therefore display an alternative. So far, no therapy studies on music performance anxiety applying virtual reality exposure therapy have investigated the therapy outcome including cardiovascular changes as outcome parameters.
Methods
This mono-center, prospective, randomized and controlled clinical trial has a pre-post design with a follow-up period of 6 months. 46 professional and semi-professional musicians will be recruited and allocated randomly to an VR exposure group or a control group receiving progressive muscle relaxation training. Both groups will be treated over 4 single sessions. Music performance anxiety will be diagnosed based on a clinical interview using ICD-10 and DSM-5 criteria for specific phobia or social anxiety. A behavioral assessment test is conducted three times (pre, post, follow-up) in VR through an audition in a concert hall. Primary outcomes are the changes in music performance anxiety measured by the German Bühnenangstfragebogen and the cardiovascular reactivity reflected by heart rate variability (HRV). Secondary outcomes are changes in blood pressure, stress parameters such as cortisol in the blood and saliva, neuropeptides, and DNA-methylation.
Discussion
The trial investigates the effect of VR exposure in musicians with performance anxiety compared to a relaxation technique on anxiety symptoms and corresponding cardiovascular parameters. We expect a reduction of anxiety but also a consecutive improvement of HRV with cardiovascular protective effects.
Trial registration
This study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov. (ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT05735860)
Physical and mental well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic is typically assessed via surveys, which might make it difficult to conduct longitudinal studies and might lead to data suffering from recall bias. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) driven smartphone apps can help alleviate such issues, allowing for in situ recordings. Implementing such an app is not trivial, necessitates strict regulatory and legal requirements, and requires short development cycles to appropriately react to abrupt changes in the pandemic. Based on an existing app framework, we developed Corona Health, an app that serves as a platform for deploying questionnaire-based studies in combination with recordings of mobile sensors. In this paper, we present the technical details of Corona Health and provide first insights into the collected data. Through collaborative efforts from experts from public health, medicine, psychology, and computer science, we released Corona Health publicly on Google Play and the Apple App Store (in July 2020) in eight languages and attracted 7290 installations so far. Currently, five studies related to physical and mental well-being are deployed and 17,241 questionnaires have been filled out. Corona Health proves to be a viable tool for conducting research related to the COVID-19 pandemic and can serve as a blueprint for future EMA-based studies. The data we collected will substantially improve our knowledge on mental and physical health states, traits and trajectories as well as its risk and protective factors over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic and its diverse prevention measures.
Social buffering, a phenomenon where social presence can reduce anxiety and fear-related autonomic responses, has been studied in numerous laboratory settings. The results suggest that the familiarity of the interaction partner influences social buffering while also providing some evidence for gender effects. In the laboratory, however, it is difficult to mimic the complexity of real-life social interactions. Consequently, the social modulation of anxiety and related autonomic responses in everyday life remains poorly understood. We used smartphone-based Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) combined with wearable electrocardiogram sensors to investigate how everyday-life social interactions affect state anxiety and related cardiac changes in women and men. On five consecutive days, 96 healthy young participants (53% women) answered up to six EMA surveys per day, indicating characteristics of their most recent social interaction and the respective interaction partner(s). In women, our results showed lower heart rate in the presence of a male interaction partner. Men showed the same effect with female interaction partners. Moreover, only women showed decreased heart rate and increased heart rate variability with increasing interaction partner familiarity. These findings specify the conditions under which social interactions reduce anxiety-related responses in women and men.
Psychosocial factors affect mental health and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in a complex manner, yet gender differences in these interactions remain poorly understood. We investigated whether psychosocial factors such as social support and personal and work-related concerns impact mental health and HRQL differentially in women and men during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Between June and October 2020, the first part of a COVID-19-specific program was conducted within the “Characteristics and Course of Heart Failure Stages A-B and Determinants of Progression (STAAB)” cohort study, a representative age- and gender-stratified sample of the general population of Würzburg, Germany. Using psychometric networks, we first established the complex relations between personal social support, personal and work-related concerns, and their interactions with anxiety, depression, and HRQL. Second, we tested for gender differences by comparing expected influence, edge weight differences, and stability of the networks. The network comparison revealed a significant difference in the overall network structure. The male (N = 1370) but not the female network (N = 1520) showed a positive link between work-related concern and anxiety. In both networks, anxiety was the most central variable. These findings provide further evidence that the complex interplay of psychosocial factors with mental health and HRQL decisively depends on gender. Our results are relevant for the development of gender-specific interventions to increase resilience in times of pandemic crisis.
Long-term sequelae in hospitalized Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients may result in limited quality of life. The current study aimed to determine health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after COVID-19 hospitalization in non-intensive care unit (ICU) and ICU patients. This is a single-center study at the University Hospital of Wuerzburg, Germany. Patients eligible were hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 2020 and December 2020. Patients were interviewed 3 and 12 months after hospital discharge. Questionnaires included the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L), patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), the generalized anxiety disorder 7 scale (GAD-7), FACIT fatigue scale, perceived stress scale (PSS-10) and posttraumatic symptom scale 10 (PTSS-10). 85 patients were included in the study. The EQ5D-5L-Index significantly differed between non-ICU (0.78 ± 0.33 and 0.84 ± 0.23) and ICU (0.71 ± 0.27; 0.74 ± 0.2) patients after 3- and 12-months. Of non-ICU 87% and 80% of ICU survivors lived at home without support after 12 months. One-third of ICU and half of the non-ICU patients returned to work. A higher percentage of ICU patients was limited in their activities of daily living compared to non-ICU patients. Depression and fatigue were present in one fifth of the ICU patients. Stress levels remained high with only 24% of non-ICU and 3% of ICU patients (p = 0.0186) having low perceived stress. Posttraumatic symptoms were present in 5% of non-ICU and 10% of ICU patients. HRQoL is limited in COVID-19 ICU patients 3- and 12-months post COVID-19 hospitalization, with significantly less improvement at 12-months compared to non-ICU patients. Mental disorders were common highlighting the complexity of post-COVID-19 symptoms as well as the necessity to educate patients and primary care providers about monitoring mental well-being post COVID-19.
Anxious depression represents a subtype of major depressive disorder and is associated with increased suicidality, severity, chronicity and lower treatment response. Only a few studies have investigated the differences between anxious depressed (aMDD) and non-anxious depressed (naMDD) patients regarding treatment dosage, serum-concentration and drug-specific treatment response. In our naturalistic and prospective study, we investigated whether the effectiveness of therapy including antidepressants (SSRI, SNRI, NaSSA, tricyclics and combinations) in aMDD patients differs significantly from that in naMDD patients. In a sample of 346 patients, we calculated the anxiety somatization factor (ASF) and defined treatment response as a reduction (≥50%) in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS)-21 score after 7 weeks of pharmacological treatment. We did not observe an association between therapy response and the baseline ASF-scores, or differences in therapy outcomes between aMDD and naMDD patients. However, non-responders had higher ASF-scores, and at week 7 aMDD patients displayed a worse therapy outcome than naMDD patients. In subgroup analyses for different antidepressant drugs, venlafaxine-treated aMDD patients showed a significantly worse outcome at week 7. Future prospective, randomized-controlled studies should address the question of a worse therapy outcome in aMDD patients for different psychopharmaceuticals individually.