What is the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia?

Introduction

The Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (SADS) is a collection of psychiatric diagnostic criteria and symptom rating scales originally published in 1978.

It is organised as a semi-structured diagnostic interview. The structured aspect is that every interview asks screening questions about the same set of disorders regardless of the presenting problem; and positive screens get explored with a consistent set of symptoms. These features increase the sensitivity of the interview and the inter-rater reliability (or reproducibility) of the resulting diagnoses. The SADS also allows more flexibility than fully structured interviews: Interviewers can use their own words and rephrase questions, and some clinical judgment is used to score responses.

There are three versions of the schedule:

  • The regular SADS;
  • The lifetime version (SADS-L); and
  • A version for measuring the change in symptomology (SADS-C).

Although largely replaced by more structured interviews that follow diagnostic criteria such as DSM-IV and DSM-5, and specific mood rating scales, versions of the SADS are still used in some research papers today.

Diagnoses Covered

The diagnoses covered by the interview include schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorders and a limited number of other fairly common diagnoses.

Relationship with the Research Diagnostic Criteria

The SADS was developed by the same group of researchers as the Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC). While the RDC is a list of diagnostic criteria for psychiatric disorders, the SADS interview allows diagnoses based on RDC criteria to be made, and also rates subject’s symptoms and level of functioning.

K-SADS

The K-SADS (or Kiddie-SADS) is a version of the SADS adapted for school-aged children of 6–18 years. There are various different versions of the K-SADS, each varying slightly in terms of disorders and specific symptoms covered, as well as the scale range used. All of the variations are still semi-structured interviews, giving the interviewer more flexibility about how to phrase and probe items, while still covering a consistent set of disorders.

The K-SADS-E (Epidemiological version) was developed for epidemiological research. It focused on current issues and episodes only. Most of the items used a four point rating scale.

The K-SADS-PL (Present and Lifetime version) is administered by interviewing the parent(s), the child, and integrating them into a summary rating that includes parent report, child report, and clinical observations during the interview. The interview covers both present issues (i.e., the reason the family is seeking an evaluation) as well as past episodes of the disorders. Most items use a three point rating scale for severity (not present, subthreshold, and threshold – which combines both moderate and severe presentations). It has been used with preschool as well as school-aged children. A 2009 working draft removed all reference to the DSM-III-R criteria (which were replaced with the publication of the DSM-IV in 1994) and made some other modifications. A DSM-5 version is being prepared and validated.

The WASH-U K-SADS (Washington University version) added items to the depression and mania modules and used a six point severity rating for severity.

What is the Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders?

Introduction

The Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders (CCMD; Chinese: 中国精神疾病分类方案与诊断标准), published by the Chinese Society of Psychiatry (CSP), is a clinical guide used in China for the diagnosis of mental disorders.

It is currently on a third version, the CCMD-3, written in Chinese and English. It is intentionally similar in structure and categorisation to the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and DSM, the two most well-known diagnostic manuals, though it includes some variations on their main diagnoses and around 40 culturally related diagnoses.

Brief History

The first published Chinese psychiatric classificatory scheme appeared in 1979. A revised classification system, the CCMD-1, was made available in 1981 and further modified in 1984 (CCMD-2-R). The CCMD-3 was published in 2001.

Many Chinese psychiatrists believed the CCMD had special advantages over other manuals, such as simplicity, stability, the inclusion of culture-distinctive categories, and the exclusion of certain Western diagnostic categories. The Chinese translation of the ICD-10 was seen as linguistically complicated, containing very long sentences and awkward terms and syntax (Lee, 2001).

Diagnostic Categories

The diagnosis of depression is included in the CCMD, with many similar criteria to the ICD or DSM, with the core having been translated as ‘low spirits’. However, Neurasthenia is a more central diagnosis. Although also found in the ICD, its diagnosis takes a particular form in China, called ‘shenjing shuairuo’, which emphasizes somatic (bodily) complaints as well as fatigue or depressed feelings. Neurasthenia is a less stigmatising diagnosis than depression in China, being conceptually distinct from psychiatric labels, and is said to fit well with a tendency to express emotional issues in somatic terms. The concept of neurasthenia as a nervous system disorder is also said to fit well with the traditional Chinese epistemology of disease causation on the basis of disharmony of vital organs and imbalance of qi.

The diagnosis of schizophrenia is included in the CCMD. It is applied quite readily and broadly in Chinese psychiatry.

Some of the wordings of the diagnosis are different, for example rather than borderline personality disorder as in the DSM, or emotionally unstable personality disorder (borderline type) as in the ICD, the CCMD has impulsive personality disorder.

Diagnoses that are more specific to Chinese or Asian culture, though they may also be outlined in the ICD (or DSM glossary section), includes:

  • Koro or Genital retraction syndrome: excessive fear of the genitals (and also breasts in women) shrinking or drawing back into the body.
  • Zou huo ru mo (走火入魔) or qigong deviation (氣功偏差): perception of uncontrolled flow of qi in the body.
  • Mental disorders due to superstition or witchcraft.
  • Travelling psychosis.

The CCMD-3 lists several “disorders of sexual preference” including ego-dystonic homosexuality, but does not recognise paedophilia.

Koro

Koro or Genital retraction syndrome is a culture-specific syndrome from Southeast Asia in which the patient has an overpowering belief that the genitalia (or nipples in females) are shrinking and will shortly disappear. In China, it is known as shuk yang, shook yong, and suo yang (simplified Chinese: 缩阳; traditional Chinese: 縮陽). This has been associated with cultures placing a heavy emphasis on balance, or on fertility and reproduction.

Zou Huo Ru Mo

Zou huo ru mo (走火入魔) or “qigong deviation” (氣功偏差) is a mental condition characterised by the perception that there is uncontrolled flow of qi in the body. Other complaints include localised pains, headache, insomnia, and uncontrolled spontaneous movements.

Book: A Straight Talking Introduction to Psychiatric Diagnosis

Book Title:

A Straight Talking Introduction to Psychiatric Diagnosis.

Author(s): Lucy Johnstone.

Year: 2014.

Edition: First (1st).

Publisher: PCCS Books.

Type(s): Paperback and Kindle.

Synopsis:

Do you still need your psychiatric diagnosis? This book will help you to decide. A revolution is underway in mental health. If the authors of the diagnostic manuals are admitting that psychiatric diagnoses are not supported by evidence, then no one should be forced to accept them. If many mental health workers are openly questioning diagnosis and saying we need a different and better system, then service users and carers should be allowed to do so too. This book is about choice. It is about giving people the information to make up their own minds, and exploring alternatives for those who wish to do so.

Book: Drop the Disorder! Challenging the Culture of Psychiatric Diagnosis

Book Title:

Drop the Disorder! Challenging the Culture of Psychiatric Diagnosis.

Author(s): Jo Watson.

Year: 2019.

Edition: First (1st).

Publisher: PCCS Books.

Type(s): Paperback and Kindle.

Synopsis:

In October 2016 Jo Watson hosted the very first A Disorder for Everyone!’ event in Birmingham, with psychologist Dr Lucy Johnstone, to explore (and explode) the culture of psychiatric diagnosis in mental health. To provide a space to continue the debate after the event, Jo also set up the now hugely popular and active Facebook group Drop the Disorder!’.; Since then, they have delivered events in towns and cities across the UK, bringing together activists, survivors and professionals to debate psychiatric diagnosis. How and why does psychiatric diagnosis hold such power? What harm it can do? What are the alternatives to diagnosis, and how it can be positively challenged?; This book takes the themes, energy and passions of the AD4E events – bringing together many of the event speakers with others who have stories to tell and messages to share in the struggle to challenge diagnosis.; This is an essential book for everyone of us who looks beyond the labels.

Book: A Straight Talking Introduction to Psychiatric Diagnosis

Book Title:

A Straight Talking Introduction to Psychiatric Diagnosis (Straight Talking Introductions).

Author(s): Lucy Johnstone.

Year: 2014.

Edition: First (1st).

Publisher: PCCS Books.

Type(s): Paperback and Kindle.

Synopsis:

Do you still need your psychiatric diagnosis? This book will help you to decide. A revolution is underway in mental health. If the authors of the diagnostic manuals are admitting that psychiatric diagnoses are not supported by evidence, then no one should be forced to accept them. If many mental health workers are openly questioning diagnosis and saying we need a different and better system, then service users and carers should be allowed to do so too. This book is about choice. It is about giving people the information to make up their own minds, and exploring alternatives for those who wish to do so.

Would a Clinical Staging Tool be useful in Clinical Practice to Predict Disease Course in Anxiety Disorders?

Research Paper Title

A clinical staging approach to improving diagnostics in anxiety disorders: Is it the way to go?

Background

Clinical staging is a paradigm in which stages of disease progression are identified; these, in turn, have prognostic value.

A staging model that enables the prediction of long-term course in anxiety disorders is currently unavailable but much needed as course trajectories are highly heterogenic.

This study therefore tailored a heuristic staging model to anxiety disorders and assessed its validity.

Methods

A clinical staging model was tailored to anxiety disorders, distinguishing nine stages of disease progression varying from subclinical stages (0, 1A, 1B) to clinical stages (2A-4B).

At-risk subjects and subjects with anxiety disorders (n = 2352) from the longitudinal Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety were assigned to these nine stages.

The model’s validity was assessed by comparing baseline (construct validity) and 2-year, 4-year and 6-year follow-up (predictive validity) differences in anxiety severity measures across stages.

Differences in depression severity and disability were assessed as secondary outcome measures.

Results

Results showed that the anxiety disorder staging model has construct and predictive validity.

At baseline, differences in anxiety severity, social avoidance behaviours, agoraphobic avoidance behaviours, worrying, depressive symptoms and levels of disability existed across all stages (all p-values < 0.001).

Over time, these differences between stages remained present until the 6-year follow-up.

Differences across stages followed a linear trend in all analyses: higher stages were characterised by the worst outcomes.

Regarding the stages, subjects with psychiatric comorbidity (stages 2B, 3B, 4B) showed a deteriorated course compared with those without comorbidity (stages 2A, 3A, 4A).

Conclusions

A clinical staging tool would be useful in clinical practice to predict disease course in anxiety disorders.

Reference

Bokma, W.A., Batelaan, N.M., Hoogendoorn, A.W., Penninx, B.W. & van Balkom, A.J. (2019) A clinical staging approach to improving diagnostics in anxiety disorders: Is it the way to go? The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry. doi: 10.1177/0004867419887804. [Epub ahead of print].