PubMed · 15773063
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
F Oyebode. 2005. Cognitive processing in schizophrenia.. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.186.3.262
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The objective of this study was to determine insight in patients with Huntington's disease (HD) by contrasting patients' ability to rate their own behavior with their ability to rate a person other than themselves. HD patients and carers completed the Dysexecutive Questionnaire (DEX), rating themselves and each other at two time points. The temporal stability of these ratings was initially examined using these two time points since there is no published test-retest reliability of the DEX with this population to date. This was followed by a comparison of patients' self-ratings and carer's independent ratings of patients by performing correlations with patients' disease variables, and an exploratory factor analysis was conducted on both sets of ratings. The DEX showed good test-retest reliability, with patients consistently and persistently underestimating the degree of their dysexecutive behavior, but not that of their carers. Patients' self-ratings and carers' ratings of patients both showed that dysexecutive behavior in HD can be fractionated into three underlying components (Cognition, Self-regulation, Insight), and the relative ranking of these factors was similar for both data sets. HD patients consistently underestimated the extent of only their own dysexecutive behaviors relative to carers' ratings by 26%, but were similar in ascribing ranks to the components of dysexecutive behavior.
Due to aging of the population and a possible rise in retirement age, the cognitive capacity of older people is gaining great importance. As evidenced by the increase in early retirement due to psychosomatic disease, many employees are not capable of working at a higher age. Decreasing cognitive abilities have usually been studied in subjects over 65 years based on the heterogeneous construct of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). This study investigates the prevalence of cognitive impairments in the age group from 50 to 59 years and their reflections in subjective vocational achievement and social medical evaluation. Having been assigned to inpatient rehabilitation due to decreasing work performance, these patients could be considered a risk group for developing MCI. A battery of standardized cognitive tests was conducted with patients at a psychosomatic hospital (Termine Test, CVLT, Block Design, TAP, and Tower of Hanoi). The MCI was defined by performance below the average age norm in at least two of five functional areas. Depression was assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory. Cognitive impairment was observed in 24% of participants. These patients also described vocational difficulties. Cognitive impairments of older employees could possibly be compensated for by specific training programs in order to maintain or rebuild their work capacity.
OBJECTIVES: To quantify and compare potential benefits (subjective reports of sleep variables) and risks (adverse events and morning-after psychomotor impairment) of short term treatment with sedative hypnotics in older people with insomnia. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, the Cochrane clinical trials database, PubMed, and PsychLit, 1966 to 2003; bibliographies of published reviews and meta-analyses; manufacturers of newer sedative hypnotics (zaleplon, zolpidem, zopiclone) regarding unpublished studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of any pharmacological treatment for insomnia for at least five consecutive nights in people aged 60 or over with insomnia and otherwise free of psychiatric or psychological disorders. RESULTS: 24 studies (involving 2417 participants) with extractable data met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Sleep quality improved (effect size 0.14, P < 0.05), total sleep time increased (mean 25.2 minutes, P < 0.001), and the number of night time awakenings decreased (0.63, P < 0.001) with sedative use compared with placebo. Adverse events were more common with sedatives than with placebo: adverse cognitive events were 4.78 times more common (95% confidence interval 1.47 to 15.47, P < 0.01); adverse psychomotor events were 2.61 times more common (1.12 to 6.09, P > 0.05), and reports of daytime fatigue were 3.82 times more common (1.88 to 7.80, P < 0.001) in people using any sedative compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in sleep with sedative use are statistically significant, but the magnitude of effect is small. The increased risk of adverse events is statistically significant and potentially clinically relevant in older people at risk of falls and cognitive impairment. In people over 60, the benefits of these drugs may not justify the increased risk, particularly if the patient has additional risk factors for cognitive or psychomotor adverse events.