Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  664 / 812 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 664 / 812 Next Page
Page Background

S660

24th European Congress of Psychiatry / European Psychiatry 33S (2016) S349–S805

Introduction

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive

and fatal neurodegenerative disorder that affects motor neurons in

the cerebral cortex, brainstem and spinal cord. The progressive loss

of motor function creates profound changes on patient’s lives and

their caregivers.

Objective

Assessment of eventual existence of psychopathology

in ALS patients and their caregivers.

Methods

Literature review using the terms: ALS, Amyotrophic

Lateral Sclerosis, psychopathology, psychiatric disorder; depres-

sion; anxiety, caregivers.

Results

Moderate depressive or anxious symptoms are often

observed. The results are not consistent, some studies showing

that major depression is less common that in general population,

others that is mildly increased. Some studies show that depres-

sive symptoms are related to poorer QoL and with faster disease

progression, others suggests no correlations. Coping strategies,

cognitive appraisal and social support are important factors to

psychological adaptation to ALS. After the diagnosis, high lev-

els of anxiety can be observed. Psychopathological features are

observed at this time, and generally depression does not increase as

death approaches. Beyond loss of physical functions, it seems that

patients’ neurobehavioral symptoms, such as aggressiveness, dis-

inhibition and impulsivity, cognitive impairment, and also lack of

social support have a negative effect on caregivers’ mental health.

Concordance between patient and caregiver distress was found.

Conclusions

It is important to assess potential psychological dis-

tress in ALS patients and their caregivers, given that cope with

disease can affect its course. Caregivers’ needs should be addressed,

to benefit their well-being and consequently patients’ QoL. There

are few studies about psychopharmacotherapy and/or psychother-

apy in these patients.

Disclosure of interest

The authors have not supplied their decla-

ration of competing interest.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.01.1957

EV973

Paraphrenia: Evolution of the concept

C. Freitas

1 ,

, A .R

. Figueiredo

2 , T. A

breu

1 , S. Q

ueirós

1

1

Centro Hospitalar do Tâmega e Sousa, Departamento de Psiquiatria

e Saude Mental, Penafiel, Portugal

2

Centro Hospitalar de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Departamento

de Psiquiatria e Saúde Mental, Vila Real, Portugal

Corresponding author.

Paraphrenia was identified as a psychopathological entity charac-

terized by chronic delirium, described next to schizophrenia, but

with rich and fanciful elaborations, without social and cognitive

impairment associated. Despite having been extensively described,

paraphrenia fell into disuse. With this work, the authors intend to

carry out a literature review on the concept of paraphrenia, since

its first report to the extinction from the current practice of psy-

chiatry. The term paraphrenia (para “near” phrenia “pathological

mental state”) was first noted by Kahlbaum in 1863, who identified

dementia and subdivided it into three types: “neofrenia”, “para-

phrenia hebetica” and “senilis paraphrenia”). Magnan andManager

suggested the concept of “chronic hallucinatory psychosis” in 1963,

while Kraepelin started jobs with similar characteristics, defin-

ing the concept of paraphrenia. Kraepelin distinguished dementia

praecox from the later onset dementia, despite considering them

closer to one another than any of them to paranoia. Paraphrenia

would be characterized by less formal disturbances of thought and

greater preservation of affection. In 1911, with “schizophrenia”

expression, Bleuler broke with Kraepelin concept, as Mayer, who

reviewed Kraepelin patients, concluding that more than half had

progressed to a diagnosis of schizophrenia. At this time, paraphre-

nia was virtually abolished from the practice of psychiatry. Despite

the observations made over the years, the concept of paraphrenia

have revealed that the description proposal does not correspond

to an isolated and distinct psychiatric condition, several times, in

clinical practice we have encountered with patients presenting

diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia but with the evolution of the

disease showing no significant deterioration in several areas.

Disclosure of interest

The authors have not supplied their decla-

ration of competing interest.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.01.1958

EV974

Folie à deux

: Shared or “infected”

madness? About a case report

M.Á. Soriano

1 ,

, C . G

arcia

2

1

Universitary Hospital, Mental Health service, Málaga, Spain

2

Valle del Guadalhorce Mental Health Center, Universitary Hospital,

Málaga, Spain

Corresponding author.

The shared madness or

Folie à deux

was described in France in the

nineteenth century by Charles Lasage and Pierre Falret, as a con-

dition where a person (the primary) builds a delusional system,

sharing it with another (the secondary), who must be very close

to the first affected, becoming delirious with the same subject.

Several theories attempt to explain the phenomenon that chal-

lenges theories of personality structures, rooted in relational and/or

environmental features of psychosis. Theoretically, there are many

attempts to classify this psychotic experience: in some manuals

they distinguish various types of partners: the simultaneous psy-

chosis, where the two people start to became delirious at once;

imposed psychosis, in which the disorder arises first with one, then

going on to “healthy” individual and symptomatology disappears

after being separated; and communicated psychosis, where the first

transmitted the psychotic experience to the second, and he or she

develops his or her own delusion not interrupted even while sepa-

rated. Other classifications about sharedmadness not only between

two people, but three, and four, even a whole family show us how

complicated the delirium systems can become. In our paper, we

will discuss the different theories explaining this rare psychiatric

condition based on a case about two brothers of 35 and 37, who live

together with the rest of the family, and also come together to the

same mental health center, although with different psychiatrists.

Disclosure of interest

The authors have not supplied their decla-

ration of competing interest.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.01.1959

EV975

Which type of management is most

suited for patients with a diagnosis of

false self personality (FSP) within a

psychodynamically-oriented

institutional day hospital? A study

G. Giorgio

, F. Marmo

Fondazione Villa Camaldoli, Psychodynamic Day Hospital Integrated

Psychodynamic Psychiatric Department, Naples, Italy

Corresponding author.

Introduction

Our work team have already found that our Insti-

tutional Psychiatric Open Light Treatment (IPOLT) model allows

the patient affected by severe mental illness (SMI) to more eas-

ily express her/his personal coping skills rather than behaving

passively thanks to the “real free spaces” separating a structured

intervention from another. Our work consisted in evaluating how

patients with FSP respond to IPOLT.

Objectives

This paper describes observations of psychotic

patients operating from the position of FSP in order to evaluate

how they respond to IPOLT compared with other patients accord-

ing to three standards (day hospital attendance, psychotic episodes

and hospital admissions).