European Psychiatry - Volume 33 - March 2016

456 / 812

S452 24th European Congress of Psychiatry / European Psychiatry 33S (2016) S349–S805
EV324
Personality Behavior Inventory (PBI):
An introduction, factors,
psychometric properties, comparison
with MMPI and PAI
L. Rollè ∗, D.G. Lyrakos , E. Gerino , A.M. Caldarera , P. Brustia
1 University of Torino, Psychology, Torino, Italy
2 Filistos Psychosocial Testing and Consulting, Psychology, Athens,
Greece
∗ Corresponding author.
The Personality Behavior Inventory (PBI) is a multidimensional
tool for evaluating psychopathology, physical problems, behavioral
characteristics and typical features of a personality. It is the shortest
in the field with 197 questions and language level of. The language
level of the third grade of elementary school. That is for the Greek
as well as the English version. The PBI provides clinical diagnoses,
screening, and treatment planning for psychopathology, it also cov-
ers all the constructs most relevant to a broad-based assessment
of mental disorders. The validity of the PBI is established on the
basis of results from data from three samples; a normative census-
matched sample from 1478 community based adults who were
matched on the basis of race, gender, and age; a sample consist-
ing of 1472 psychiatric and psychological patients (inpatients and
outpatients), a sample from 982 forensic participants, who have
been accused and convicted for a variety of crimes and finally a
sample of 121 correctional and public safety employees. Accord-
ing to the reliability scores, the PBI scales reflect a greater level
of internal consistency. At the present study, we will present the
characteristics of the PBI, its usages on the clinical, occupational
and forensic setting as a description of its psychometric properties
and its advantages over the other MMPI-II and PAI.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV325
Olfactory reference syndrome
C. Sanahuja ∗, A. Espinosa
1 Hospital Universitario de Fuenlabrada, Mental Health, Fuenlabrada,
Spain
2 Instituto Psiquiatrico Jose Germain, Mental health, Leganés, Spain
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction The term “olfactory reference syndrome” (ORS),
introduced by Pryse-Phillips in 1971, is a persistent false belief and
preoccupation with body odor accompanied by significant distress
and functional impairment. Nowadays, it is not a distinct syndrome
and it is currently classified as a delusional or obsessive-compulsive
disorder.
Objectives and aims Review the history of ORSs classification and
discuss why it should be considered as a separate diagnostic in the
current health care classification systems.
Methods Description of a clinical case of a 36-year-old man and
review the published articles on ORS by using PubMed database
with the keywords: “olfactory reference syndrome”, “chronic
olfactory paranoid syndrome”, “hallucinations of smell”, “chronic
olfactory paranoid syndrome”, “delusions of bromosis” and “taijin
kyofusho”.
Results The published literature on ORS spans more than a cen-
tury and provides consistent descriptions of its clinical features
but nowadays is not explicitly mentioned in current classification
systems as Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
(DSM) or International Statistical Classification of Diseases and
Related Health Problems (ICD). ORS is overlap with different diag-
nostics such as delusional disorder, body dysmorphic disorder,
obsessive-compulsive disorder, and hypochondriasis.
Conclusions Right now, it is not clear how the ORSs should best be
classified so we consider interesting to include it as a separate diag-
nosis in our set classifications, sincewe understand that an adjusted
diagnosis is important in order to help patients and therapists to
work on a treatment and to establish a more accurate prognosis.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV326
Psychotic and affective disorders
diagnosis stability in a Portuguese
psychiatry inpatient unit – A
retrospective evaluation
M. Santos ∗, D. Mota , J. Perestrelo , N. Trovão , N. Couto , S. André ,
A. Venâncio , L. Monteiro , G. Lapa
CHVNG/E, Psychiatry, Gaia, Portugal
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction Psychiatric diagnosis is based on clinical manifesta-
tions; those are the consequences of patient’s inner state, their life
situation, the evolution of the disease but also the response to our
clinical actions. To this day, there are few objective clinical data to
help establish a diagnosis, therefore, psychiatry diagnosis is mainly
based on diagnostic criteria like DSM and ICD-10. The DSM frames
entities by their diagnostic stability, however there are several
causes for variability categorized by Spritzer et al. (1987): sub-
ject variance (changing in patients), occasions variance (different
episodes), information variance (new information) and observation
variance (different interpretations).
Objectives Themain objective is to determine the long termdiag-
nosis stability of patients with psychotic or affective disorders
among readmitted patients at our Psychiatric Unit.
Aims To understand to what extent do our patients diagnosis
evolve and in what way.
Methods Retrospective analysis of the diagnosis of patients with
affective or psychotic disorders who have readmissions to our unit.
We have a study sample of 210 patients that meet our criteria in a
30-month frame.
Results Although data are still being analyzed, we are now aware
that our Inpatient Unit has a high rate of readmission of patients
with these diagnoses. It is clear that for many of these patients,
diagnosis must be seen as a guidance rather than a label.
Conclusions Knowing our own data can make us aware that a
transversal look at patients can be insufficient and only time can
determine a closed diagnosis.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV327
Cycloid psychosis: From Kleist until
our days
A. Sousa ∗, C. Solana , J. Gomes , P. Barata , R. Serrano ,
M. Lages liveira hainho
1 Lisboa, Portugal
2 Centro Hospitalar Psiquiátrico de Lisboa, Psychiatry, Lisbon,
Portugal
3 Centro Hospitalar Barreiro-Montijo, E.P.E, Psychiatry, Barreiro,
Portugal
4 Hospital Prof. Doutor Fernando Fonseca, Psychiatry, Amadora,
Portugal
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction After Emil Kraepelin’s division of psychoses into a
group of dementia praecox andmanic-depressive insanity, the clas-
sification of psychoses with atypical symptoms, which could not