Click on the article title to read more.

Click on the article title to read more.

Background: The treatment of binge eating disorder (BED) is still the object of debate. In the present study, the effectiveness of antidepressant drugs (fluoxetine – FLX – 60 mg/day, fluvoxamine – FLV –300 mg/day), cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) and combined treatments (CBT + FLX, CBT + FLV) has been evaluated in a randomized, clinical trial. Results at the end of the active treatment (in the 24th week) and 1-year follow-up outcomes have been evaluated. Methods: One hundred eight (44 M, 64 F) BED patients were randomly assigned to either CBT, FLX (60 mg/day), FLV (300 mg/day), CBT + FLX or CBT + FLV, for 24 weeks. At the beginning (T0), at the end (T1) of treatment and after 1 year (T2), body mass index (BMI) and eating attitude and behaviours (by EDE 12.0D) were assessed. Results: At T1, BMI and EDE scores were significantly reduced in CBT, CBT + FLX and CBT + FLV, but not in the FLX and FLV treatment groups. In the CBT + FLV group, a greater (p < 0.05) reduction of EDE total scores was observed, when compared to CBT + FLX or CBT treatment groups. At T2, BMI was significantly higher than at T1, but still significantly lower than at T0 in the CBT, CBT + FLX and CBT + FLV groups, while EDE scores remained unchanged from T1 in all treatment groups. Conclusions: CBT was more effective than FLX or FLV in the treatment of BED. The addition of FLX to CBT does not seem to provide any clear advantage, while the addition of FLV could enhance the effects of CBT on eating behaviours. Modifications of eating behaviours are maintained at the 1-year follow-up, although the lost weight was partly regained.

Background: The term ‘mental retardation’ (MR) is outdated and has changed to ‘intellectual disability’ (ID). Unfortunately, this decision did not follow a nosology approach. The aim of this overview is twofold: (1) to provide a conceptual background and framing on the ID/MR field to other psychiatrists, and (2) to provide a nosology-based perspective to the debate on the name and concept of MR/ID. Method: This conceptual paper is based on a literature review and on an iterative process of debate within the WPA Section ‘Psychiatry of Mental Retardation’. Results: ID may be regarded not as a disease or as a disability but as a syndrome grouping (metasyndrome) similar to the construct of dementia. It includes a heterogeneous group of clinical conditions, ranging from genetic to nutritional, infectious, metabolic or neurotoxic conditions. The ID metasyndrome is characterized by a deficit in cognitive functioning prior to the acquisition of skills through learning. The intensity of the deficit is such to interfere in a significant way with individual normal functioning as expressed in limitations in activities and restriction in participation (disabilities). Conclusions: The name ‘developmental cognitive impairment’ is here suggested to coexist with ID for naming the metasyndrome previously called MR following a polysemic-polynomious approach.

Purpose: – The debate as to whether intellectual disability (ID) should be conceptualized as a health condition or as a disability has intensified as the revision of World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is being finalized. Defining ID as a health condition is central to retaining it in ICD, with significant implications for health policy and access to health services. The purpose of this paper is to include some reflections on the consensus document produced by the first WHO Working Group on the Classification of MR (WHO WG-MR) and on the process that was followed to realize it. The consensus report was the basis for the development of official recommendations sent to the WHO Advisory Group for ICD-11. Design/methodology/approach: – A mixed qualitative approach was followed in a series of meetings leading to the final consensus report submitted to the WHO Advisory group. These recommendations combined prior expert knowledge with available evidence; a nominal approach was followed throughout with face-to-face conferences. Findings: – The WG recommended a synonym set (“synset”) ontological approach to the conceptualisation of this health condition underlying a clinical rationale for its diagnosis. It proposed replacing MR with Intellectual Developmental Disorders (IDD) in ICD-11, defined as “a group of developmental conditions characterized by a significant impairment of cognitive functions, which are associated with limitations of learning, adaptive behaviour and skills”. The WG further advised that IDD be included under the parent category of neurodevelopmental disorders, that current distinctions (mild, moderate, severe and profound) be continued as severity qualifiers, and that problem behaviours removed from its core classification structure and instead described as associated features. Originality/value: – Within the ID/IDD synset two different names combine distinct aspects under a single construct that describes its clinical as well as social, educational and policy utilities. The single construct incorporates IDD as a clinical meta-syndrome, and ID as its functioning and disability counterpart. IDD and ID are not synonymous or mirror concepts as they have different scientific, social and policy applications. New diagnostic criteria for IDD should be based on a developmental approach, which accounts for the complex causal factors known to impact the acquisition of specific cognitive abilities and adaptive behaviours. The paper focuses on a new clinical framework for the diagnosis of IDD that also includes and complements the existing social, educational and policy components inherent in ID.