Genome-Wide Study Yields Markers of Lithium Response

January 28, 2016 • Science Update

An international consortium of scientists has identified a stretch of chromosome that is associated with responsiveness to the mood-stabilizing medication lithium among patients with bipolar disorder. While the finding won’t have an immediate clinical application, it is a groundbreaking demonstration of the potential for identifying genetic information that can be used to inform personalized treatment decisions, even in genetically complex disorders. The genes identified are also an avenue for understanding the biology of the lithium response.

People with bipolar disorder experience marked, often extreme shifts in mood and energy. The disorder affects an estimated 2.6 percent of Americans. The mood swings can severely disrupt a person’s ability to function normally; as many as 15 percent of those affected die by suicide. Lithium is a mood stabilizing medication that is a mainstay of treatment. For some patients, it is very effective, virtually eliminating the symptoms. However, about a third of patients respond incompletely, and another third not at all.

NIMH scientist Francis J. McMahon, M.D., and Thomas G. Schulze, M.D., a former NIMH fellow now at the Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Germany, led a collaboration involving 22 sites participating in the International Consortium on Lithium Genetics to conduct a genome-wide association study (GWAS) in 2563 patients with bipolar disorder. Like all psychiatric disorders, bipolar disorder is genetically complex; it is likely that many genes, with small effects individually, influence the risk of developing it. In addition, risk genes interact with environmental factors to cause the disorder, making the search for risk genes that much more difficult. These challenges mean that large numbers of patients are necessary to enable scientists to detect associations between gene regions and biological effects.

Scientists in this study scanned genomes of participating patients, testing whether any of 6 million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), pinpoint variations in DNA across the genome, were associated with a person’s response to lithium. Four SNPs in a single location on chromosome 21 met criteria for association. The region identified contains two genes for long, non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs). In addition to RNA’s role as an intermediary in the translation of genes into proteins, it is now known to have a broader variety of biologic roles, including regulating such functions as gene expression and other cell processes. The identification of these lncRNAs offers scientists targets with which to explore how these molecules shape how someone responds to lithium.

While the patient population in this study was larger than any previous focused on the genetics of the lithium response, like other GWAS studies, this one depended on patients’ recall of their treatment experience. In an effort to test these results in a way that would avoid the uncertainties of recall, the scientific team also looked for these SNPs in a separate, smaller group of (89) patients who were being treated with lithium and assessed prospectively, or as their treatment continued. The SNPs were indeed associated with poorer lithium response, adding confidence to the original finding.

The need for “biomarkers” of lithium response—and for treatment effectiveness over the range of psychiatric disorders—is great. For genetic information to be useful in the clinic for guiding treatment choices for individuals, it may be necessary to have information on a large number of genes in addition to other types of information on individuals. The identification of genetic markers is one facet of the effort to move health care towards precision medicine , an approach in which disease treatment and prevention takes into account individual variability in genes, environment, and lifestyle. The results reported here will require replication, but this study suggests that ongoing research can provide information on genes that will be of use in health care, even for disorders in which the genetics are complex, and the effects of individual genes subtle.

Posted in News & updates | Leave a comment

A Intro to Mindfulness VideO

Posted in Mental Health & Mindful Videos | Leave a comment

Mindful Meditation 15 min video

Posted in Mental Health & Mindful Videos | Leave a comment

What to do in a CRISIS

What To Do In A Crisis

The first objective in a mental health crisis is to make sure everyone is safe – you, your family, others in the community and the person in distress. This is best accomplished by making sure the person in crisis is seen by a mental health professional, who can assess his or her condition and the potential for harm to self or others.

IF YOU OR OTHERS ARE IN IMMINENT DANGER, CALL 911 IMMEDIATELY.

If your instincts tell you a situation is dangerous, it probably is and you should call 911 immediately.  If there is no immediate threat of danger, it is still important to make sure the person is seen by a mental health professional.  Several options exist to help a loved one in crisis or approaching crisis get the appropriate help and care:

Call the person’s doctor, psychiatrist, clinic, therapist or other professional who may already be working with him or her.  This is the preferred option when you are concerned about someone and there is time to formulate a response plan,  and you do not believe he or she is an immediate threat to self or others.  Even when there is not time to set up an appointment, a doctor can help by ordering immediate medication changes or bypassing the hospital emergency departments for direct admission to an inpatient unit.  This option works best when there is a signed release for you to speak with health professionals, or some form of guardianship.  But even without informed consent, you can still alert professionals to your concerns.

Make a first appointment with a private practitioner, clinic, or other outpatient provider.  If the situation is not urgent, you may still be able to pursue an outpatient option by making an intake appointment with a local community-based provider. This could be a way to help someone in the early stages of an impending crisis without involving more intrusive emergency or crisis services.  An RtoR Resource Specialist can help you identify Family-Endorsed mental health professionals and programs in your area that might be available to help.  For more information, Contact a Resource Specialist.

211-Logo-300x225

Call the 2-1-1 Information Line.
2-1-1 is a three digit phone number that connects callers to information about critical health and human services available in their communities. This call-in service is available in 47 states, including the four states in the RtoR service area (CT, MA, NJ, NY). In some states, like Connecticut, 2-1-1 provides additional services, such as mobile crisis intervention for children and adolescents in mental health crisis and centralized intake for homeless individuals and families seeking emergency shelter and housing. Regional and state 2-1-1 organizations may provide additional direct services, such as mobile crisis response for children and youth. For more information on this service in the state of Connecticut go here: 2-1-1

Call a hospital to hold an inpatient bed.  If you believe your loved one requires inpatient treatment and he or she is willing to be voluntarily admitted, it may be possible to reserve a bed in a local psychiatric hospital or unit of your choice.  In this scenario you will probably need a treating doctor or clinician to make a referral and you may have to provide your own transportation to the hospital.   If privately insured, it is a good idea to call the insurance carrier ahead of time for a list of inpatient services and providers covered by your plan.  Many private psychiatric hospitals have direct admission policies for voluntary patients, which make it possible to bypass hospital emergency departments.
Patient preference is a big factor in whether or not people follow through with treatment, so it is always worthwhile to try for voluntary admission whenever possible.  Direct admission is often quicker, more respectful and humane, less stressful for patient and family, and potentially much less traumatizing than admission through a hospital emergency department.   Open beds at the best inpatient facilities are often limited, so you may have to call a few days prior to admission to reserve a space.  An RtoR Resource Specialist can help you identify Family-Endorsed inpatient options in your area.  For more information,Contact a Resource Specialist.

ERTransport the person to a hospital Emergency Department. Hospital EDs are a main point of entry to inpatient mental health care.  EDs have the means to safely stabilize patients in acute crisis prior to transfer to inpatient care.  But wait times can be very long (in some cases days) and the busy ED environment can be unsettling to many patients in crisis.  For this reason, you might consider trying outpatient treatment or direct admission to a psychiatric unit first, if either is an option.

Call the local crisis service. For those cases when a person resists or refuses treatment, but is not an immediate threat to self or others, your community’s local crisis service may be able to help. These services offer a form of intensive, short-term counseling for the purpose of stabilizing or preventing a crisis or potentially dangerous mental health condition, episode or behavior. Many communities have a “Crisis Team” staffed by professionals trained to respond to crises and perform screening, triage, assessment, and counselling to stabilize or prevent a crisis situation. Sometimes these services are provided by phone or in a health care setting, but many towns and cities have mobile teams that to go outbound into the community, private homes and places of business. Crisis teams often work together with police and EMS, and can often arrange for a person’s transfer to an Emergency Department or inpatient unit, with or without his or her consent, depending on the situation.

Print

Call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline (1-800-273-TALK).  Although identified as a suicide prevention service, the Lifeline is actually a good resource for all types of mental health crises.  The national line routes callers to the closest center in their network.  The centers can provide information on a variety of mental health resources in the area, not just those related to suicide prevention.  The National Lifeline is a good option to call in a crisis when local crisis services are unavailable.

Call 911. In a true mental health emergency or crisis, if you believe that you, the person in question, or anyone else is threatened, call 911 immediately.  Once 911 has been called and police or other responders arrive on the scene, you do not control the situation.  You can encourage officers to view the situation as a mental health crisis, not a crime, and respectfully express your views on the outcome you desire, but you should not interfere with responders in the performance of their duties.

treatment advocacy center logo

If You Call 911*

The Treatment Advocacy Center,  a national nonprofit dedicated to eliminating barriers to the treatment of severe mental illness, has developed guidelines for calling 911 in a mental health emergency.  You can read more about what to do in a mental health crisis on the Center’s Respond In A Crisis page.

ASK who in the department is trained to deal with people who are having a mental health crisis. For example: “I am calling about an emergency involving mental illness. Do you have someone assigned to handle mental health emergencies?”

MAKE IT CLEAR it clear that you are calling about someone having a psychiatric crisis. For example: “My daughter has bipolar disorder, she is not taking her medication and she is manic.”

DESCRIBE the behavior you are seeing that most closely matches the laws in your state that are used to hospitalize someone for emergency psychiatric care or to initiate civil commitment proceedings. For example, don’t say, “My son is a danger to self.”  Say, “My son says he is going to blow his brains out and I know he has a gun in his car trunk.”  Or, “My daughter is setting fire to wastebaskets all over the house.”

EXPLAIN why you cannot handle the situation yourself. For example: “I am frightened he will hurt me,” or “She is throwing things at the walls and I cannot get her into a car.”

BE VERY CLEAR that you are seeking involuntary psychiatric hospitalization and NOT arrest.

TIPS for Using Crisis Services

  • iStock_000012318802SmallSeek voluntary participation in treatment
  • Write a crisis intervention plan
  • Enlist supporters
  • Call ahead to reserve a bed
  • Be prepared
  • Take action early
  • Ask for CIT-trained responders
  • Stay calm

Seek voluntary participation in treatment.  If possible, encourage the person in crisis to seek voluntary treatment, as this helps preserve self-respect and dignity, preserves family ties, and leads to better recovery outcomes.

Write a crisis intervention plan before an actual crisis occurs.  The plan should describe the steps to take and people to contact in a mental health crisis, stored in a binder with the following information:

  • Current diagnosis and diagnostic history.
  • History of hospitalizations and other treatments.
  • List of current medications and dosages, with past medication history, if possible.
  • Copies of all service plans, assessments, and evaluations, including school IEPs and 504 plans.
  • Names and contact information for all mental health professionals and agencies working with the person.
  • Insurance information and copy of the insurance card.
  • The plan might also contain a description of specific warning signs or triggers for the person, preferred treatment strategies and choices, coping mechanisms and strategies for managing behaviors, and a list of people and organizations the person and family can turn to for support in a crisis.

Obtaining signed releases of information in advance of a crisis, authorizing you to speak with health professional, will greatly facilitate this process.  Parents of children with serious and persistent mental health issues might even prepare a crisis kit containing the binder, crisis plan, change of clothing, pajamas, basic hygiene supplies, and a favorite stuffed animal.

Enlist Supporters.  Another proactive measure is to identify and recruit extended family members, friends or neighbors who can help out in a crisis before the need arises.  Family supporters can reinforce messaging to the person in crisis, help make sure everyone is safe and other family members are looked after,  and provide respite for primary caregivers.  A blog post of 12/8/14, When Parents Reach Their Limits: Recruiting Parent Supporters…   covers this topic in greater detail.

Call ahead to reserve a bed at a psychiatric hospital.  This can prevent long wait times in uncomfortable emergency departments and help ensure that your loved one is admitted to the inpatient setting of choice.  This is also a good time to call the insurance company regarding care and covered services.   An RtoR Resource Specialist can help you identify Family-Endorsed inpatient options in your area.  For more help, Contact a Resource Specialist.

Be prepared with information about the person’s diagnosis, the reasons for your concerns, medications and recent treatment history, risky or unusual behaviors, triggers, and any calming or soothing strategies that may work for him or her.

Take action early.  If you need assistance from local crisis, place the call as early in the week and as early in the day as possible.  Many crisis teams have limited resources and are available only during normal business hours.  The first three calls of the morning can tie up a single mobile outreach team for the rest of the day.  If you see signs on Thursday morning that a loved in headed for a crisis, you might want to call then rather than wait until the crisis arrives on Friday afternoon, when a mobile team will be unable to visit until Monday morning.

Ask for CIT-trained responders.  Emergency responders, such as police and EMS personnel, are often dispatched with mobile crisis interventions teams.  Although the clinicians on these teams are highly skilled with specialized training in psychiatric crisis response, the emergency responders often are not.  You can often improve the response and avoid escalation of the crisis by requesting emergency responders who have been trained and certified in CIT (Crisis Intervention Team training).

leap institute treeStay calm.  A person in a state of crisis might not be able to think or communicate clearly.  You can help prevent an escalation of the crisis by empathizing with the person’s feelings and staying calm while you wait for responders to arrive.  NAMI of Minnesota recommends using the LEAP (Listen-Empathize-Agree-Listen), which was developed for mental health professionals, responders and family members to respond to people in psychiatric crisis.  NAMI Minnesota also offers this list of De-escalation Techniques that may be helpful in a crisis…

Tips for De-escalating a Crisis

  • Keep your voice calm
  • Avoid overreacting
  • Listen to the person
  • Don’t argue or try to reason with the person
  • Express support and concern
  • Avoid continuous eye contact
  • Ask how you can help
  • Keep stimulation level low
  • Move slowly
  • Offer options instead of trying to take control
  • Avoid touching the person unless you ask permission
  • Be patient
  • Gently announce actions before initiating them
  • Give the person space
Posted in Coping mechanisms | Leave a comment

Embracing the SPIRIT of reducing suicide

September 21, 2015 • Science Update

NIMH, the NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research, and the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) have announced a significant collaboration on a new 4-year, $6.8 million study called Suicide Prevention for at-Risk Individuals in Transition or “SPIRIT.” The study will address a critical gap in evidence-based suicide prevention and focus on the high-risk individuals who are transitioning from jail to community. The study is NIMH’s largest major investment in suicide prevention in the justice system.

Jennifer E. Johnson, Ph.D ., C. S. Mott Endowed Professor of Public Health, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, andLauren M. Weinstock,  Ph.D., Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Human Behavior (Research) at Brown University and Clinical Psychologist at Butler Hospital are co-principal investigators on the study.

With nearly 12 million admissions per year and short stays, US jails serve as a catchment area for at-risk individuals at a time of high life stress and high suicide risk, providing an important opportunity for suicide prevention intervention. In fact, about 10 percent of all those who die by suicide are estimated to have had some type of recent criminal legal stressor (often an arrest and jail detention). Recent data from justice settings show high rates of suicide during jail detention (46 deaths per 100,000 people). Studies of post-release detainees find even higher rates (almost 3 times higher) of suicide deaths in the year following release. This study uses the jail setting as an opportunity to prevent suicide among high-risk individuals as they return to the community.

SPIRIT will use trained community mental health center providers to test a practical approach to reducing suicide by comparing it to standard care. SPIRIT researchers plan to enroll 800 detainees as they leave two different community jails: Genesee County Jail in Flint, Michigan and Rhode Island Department of Corrections in Cranston, Rhode Island. Participants will randomly be assigned to either standard care or the Safety Planning Intervention with telephone follow-up. Researchers will track improvements in suicidal behavior, and psychiatric and substance abuse outcomes as well as service use and re-arrest rates for both types of care. Findings from the research comparing the two types of care will help correctional setting and behavioral health program directors identify more effective programs for suicide prevention.

Grant number: U01 MH106660-01A1

Posted in News & updates | Leave a comment

Five Major Mental Disorders Share Genetic Roots

March 1, 2013 • Science Update

Five major mental disorders share some of the same genetic risk factors, the largest genome-wide study of its kind has found. Evidence for such genetic overlap had previously been limited to pairs of disorders.

National Institutes of Health-funded researchers discovered that people with disorders traditionally thought to be distinct – autism, ADHD, bipolar disorder, major depression and schizophrenia – were more likely to have suspect genetic variation at the same four chromosomal sites. These included risk versions of two genes that regulate the flow of calcium into cells.

Jordan Smoller, M.D.

Source: Jordan Smoller, M.D., Massachusetts General Hospital

“These results will help us move toward diagnostic classification informed by disease cause,” said Jordan Smoller, M.D. , of Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, a coordinator of the study, which was supported by NIH’s National Institute of Mental Health. “Although statistically significant, each of these genetic associations individually can account for only a small amount of risk for mental illness, making them insufficient for predictive or diagnostic usefulness by themselves.”

Smoller, Kenneth Kendler, M.D., , Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond; Nicholas Craddock, PhD. , Cardiff University, England;Stephan Ripke, M.D. , Massachusetts General, Patrick Sullivan, M.D. , University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and colleagues in the Cross-Disorder Group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, report on their findings February 28, 2013 in The Lancet.

Prior to the study, researchers had turned up evidence of shared genetic risk factors for pairs of disorders, such as schizophenia and bipolar disorder, autism and schizophrenia and depression and bipolar disorder. Such evidence of overlap at the genetic level has blurred the boundaries of traditional diagnostic categories and given rise to research domain criteria, or RDoC, an NIMH initiative to develop new ways of classifying psychopathology for research based on neuroscience and genetics as well as observed behavior.

To learn more, the consortium researchers analyzed the five key disorders as if they were the same illness. They screened for evidence of illness-associated genetic variation across the genomes of 33,332 patients with all five disorders and 27,888 controls, drawing on samples from previous consortium mega-analyses.

For the first time, specific variations significantly associated with all five disorders were among several suspect genomic sites that turned up. These included variation in two genes that code for the cellular machinery for regulating the flow of calcium into neurons. Variation in one of these, called CACNA1C, which had previously been implicated in susceptibility to bipolar disorder, schizophrenia and major depression, is known to impact brain circuitry involved in emotion, thinking, attention and memory – functions disrupted in mental illnesses. Variation in another calcium channel gene, called CACNB2, was also linked to the disorders.

Alterations in calcium-channel signaling could represent a fundamental mechanism contributing to a broad vulnerability to psychopathology, suggest the researchers.

They also discovered illness-linked variation for all five disorders in certain regions of chromosomes 3 and 10. Each of these sites spans several genes, and the specific causal factors within them remain elusive. However, one region, called 3p21, which produced the strongest signal of illness association, harbors suspect variations identified in previous genome-wide studies of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.

References

Cross-Disorder Group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium. Identification of risk loci with shared effects on five major psychiatric disorders: a genome-wide analysis. The Lancet, February 28, 2013

Grant # U01  MH085520  01 

Posted in News & updates | Leave a comment

Symptoms Outdo Diagnoses in Predicting Bipolar Disorder in At-Risk Youth February 26, 2016 • Science Update

Three types of symptoms emerged as powerful predictors of whether a youth with one parent with bipolar disorder will go on to develop the disorder, according to a study of 391 at-risk youth. The findings offer a much more specific roadmap than previously available for assessing risk of bipolar disorder early in at-risk youth, and one that is based on symptoms, not traditional psychiatric diagnoses. The symptoms identified—related to anxiety/depression, affective lability (unstable mood, including irritability), and low-level manic symptoms—also provide insight into what may be a high-risk syndrome or “prodrome” preceding the onset of bipolar spectrum disorder.

People with bipolar disorder experience marked, often extreme shifts in mood and energy. The disorder affects an estimated 2.6 percent of Americans. Someone with bipolar disorder experiences periods of depression alternating with periods of mania, a state marked by high energy, overconfidence, and frantic activity. The mood swings can severely disrupt a person’s ability to function normally; as many as 15 percent of those affected die by suicide. Despite this, there are often years-long delays before an accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment. Research has suggested that a bipolar prodrome might precede the emergence of bipolar disorder by several years; the hope is that identifying the features of the prodrome could help guide an understanding of how the disorder emerges, and enable earlier detection and more timely and effective treatment.

Scientists participating in the NIMH-funded Pittsburgh Bipolar Offspring Study (BIOS) recruited children of parents with bipolar disorder and a similar group of 248 youth with no family history of the condition. The BIOS team, at the University of Pittsburgh, followed both groups for an average of eight years, collecting information on symptoms of psychiatric disorders, including depression, anxiety, and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. While previous research had found that most people diagnosed with bipolar disorder recalled having symptoms of psychiatric disorders earlier, in order to determine accurately how preexisting symptoms affect risk for later development of a disorder, it’s necessary to study populations prospectively, or over time, starting years before a disorder emerges. This study looked at a relatively large at-risk population; by the end of the study 44 of the participant youth were diagnosed with bipolar disorder.

Previously, the study had reported  on categorical predictors of bipolar disorder—the presence or absence of a collection of symptoms on which a diagnosis is based—such as depression and subthreshold manic episodes. Among their findings was that, taking into account only results based on following youth over time, and not recall of past symptoms, only a previous episode of “subthreshold mania or hypomania”—defined on the basis of symptoms, functioning, and duration—predicted later development of bipolar disorder.

This more recently reported phase of the study, led by Danella M. Hafeman, M.D., Ph.D., and Boris Birmaher, M.D., took a different approach. This study looked at symptoms in different dimensions of function, without reference to umbrella diagnostic categories, and how these symptoms predicted bipolar spectrum disorder.

Levels of several different dimensional symptoms were higher in the high-risk youth when they were first evaluated, including those related to anxiety/depression, inattention/disinhibition, externalizing (disruptive and impulsive behavior), affective lability (unstable mood, including irritability), and low-level manic symptoms (not necessarily part of an episode). Symptom levels in three areas emerged as the strongest predictors of later bipolar disorder: anxiety/depression at baseline (as participants entered the study); affective lability, both at baseline and shortly before a bipolar diagnosis; and low-level manic symptoms shortly before diagnosis. Earlier age at which at which a parent was diagnosed with a mood disorder also increased risk. Youth with all four of those risk factors had a 49 percent chance of developing bipolar, vs. a 2 percent chance for those without them.

At the same time, it’s important to note that over half of those with all four of the most powerful risk factors did not develop bipolar disorder by the end of the study.

The risk factors identified in this study predicted the onset of bipolar disorder whether or not a young person also had a preexisting categorical diagnosis other than bipolar disorder. In fact, the report points out, once the dimensional risk factors were accounted for, disorders no longer predicted future bipolar disorder.

These findings offer an approach to assessing risk on the basis of symptoms without respect to diagnoses. These insights can inform clinical diagnosis, but also provides clues for researchers on the facets of the prodrome. Research suggests that changes are occurring in the brain well before psychiatric disorders like bipolar disorder and schizophrenia emerge with obvious symptoms. Information on this prodromal period can not only make early treatment possible, but could help scientists understand the origin of the brain changes with the aim of eventually being able to interrupt the process and prevent disease.

“This study is the first large effort to document the relevant prodromal factors for bipolar disorder in the context of an unfolding process across time,” said Shelli Avenevoli, Ph.D., acting NIMH deputy director. “It demonstrates the potential of combining dimensional symptoms and family risk to enhance risk prediction and for investigating the nature of the prodrome.”

Lead author Danella Hafeman, M.D., Ph.D., said, “The results of this study begin to define an ultra-high risk population, similar to the work that has been done in psychosis. The identification of such a population is important to clinical practice, identifying patients who might require increased surveillance, as well as future research to evaluate strategies for early intervention.”

Reference

Hafeman DM, Merranko J, Axelson D, Goldstein BI, Goldstein T, Monk K, Hickey MB, Sakolsky D, Diler R, Ivengar S, Brent D, Kupfer D, Birmaher B. Toward the Definition of a Bipolar Prodrome: Dimensional Predictors of Bipolar Spectrum Disorders in At-Risk Youths.  Am J Psychiatry. 2016 Feb 19:appiajp201515040414. [Epub ahead of print]

Grant: MH060952

Posted in News & updates | Leave a comment

What I’m grateful for work sheet

I’m grateful for my family because

 

_________________________________________________________________

 

_______________________________________________________________.

_________________________________________________________________

 

 

________________________________________________________________.

Something good that happened this week

 

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________.

I am grateful for my friendship with

 

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

 

________________________________________________________.

I am grateful for who I am because

 

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________.

Something silly that I am grateful for

 

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________.

Something else that I am grateful for

 

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

 

________________________________________________________________.

Posted in Work Sheet'S | Leave a comment

OCD Exposure Hierarchy Packet work sheet

Research supports exposure and response prevention therapy as the leading form of psychotherapy for OCD. As a part of this treatment, your clients will be gradually exposed to their triggers, which results in their anxieties, obsessions, and compulsions diminishing.

This OCD worksheet packet includes a blank exposure hierarchy template, and an exposure therapy homework form. The homework form provides a professional way for you to record your client’s weekly exposure homework, and it gives your clients a nice place to keep track of their progress.

OCD Treatment Overview
Overview of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
Diagnostic Criteria of OCD
How Does OCD Work?
Exposure and Response Prevention Therapy
Psychoeducation
OCD Exposure Hierarchy
Exposure and Response Prevention
Handling Mental Compulsions
Other OCD Resources
References

OCD Treatment Overview “I’m so OCD!”

Obsessive-compulsive disorder may be the most popular disorder to say you have, without actually having. In common parlance, “OCD” is used to refer to someone who likes things a particular way, or who seems overly concerned with cleanliness.

In the world of mental health, obsessive-compulsive disorder refers to something more serious. OCD can be scary or frustrating, and by definition, it is time-consuming or impairing.

Overview of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

OCD includes two major types of symptoms: obsessions and compulsions. A person diagnosed with OCD can experience both sets of symptoms, or only one of the two.

Obsessions are thoughts, urges, or images that just won’t leave a person alone. They’re perceived as being intrusive and unwanted, and they often lead to feelings of anxiety, shame, and doubt. Some common obsessions include:

Fear of contamination by coming in contact with germs, dirt, or bodily fluids
Unwanted sexual or violent thoughts
Fear of losing control of one’s own actions and acting on negative impulses
Excessive concern about evenness or exactness
Concern about morality or offending God
Fear of causing harm to self or others

Compulsions are repetitive behaviors that a person performs according to a rigid set of rules, or in response to an obsession. Compulsions are intended to reduce anxiety, although they have no realistic connection to the anxiety-producing situation, or they are excessive. Some common compulsions include:

Cleaning or washing excessively
Mentally reassuring oneself that everything is OK
Repeating activities a specific number of times
Rearranging items until they feel just right
Mentally reviewing a situation again and again
Excessively checking that a mistake was not made

Diagnostic Criteria of OCD
To meet the criteria for OCD, the individual must have obsessions or compulsions, or both.

Obsessions
1. Recurrent and persistent thoughts, urges, or impulses, that are experienced at some time during the disturbance as intrusive and unwanted, and often cause anxiety.

2. The individual attempts to ignore or suppress these thoughts, urges, or images, or to neutralize them with another thought or action.

Compulsions
1. Repetitive behaviors or mental acts that an individual feels driven to perform in response to their obsessions or in accordance with a rigid set of rules. These can include hand-washing, checking (such as repeatedly checking that a door is locked), counting, or repeating words silently.

2. The behaviors are intended to reduce anxiety, distress, or some dreaded event. However, the compulsive behaviors are not realistically connected to what the are trying to prevent, or they are excessive.

A diagnosis of obsessive-compulsive disorder also requires that the obsessions and compulsions are time-consuming (for example, they require over 1 hour every day), distressing for the individual, or they cause impairment in an important area of functioning.

Finally, the symptoms of OCD cannot be better explained by another cause, such as a drug or medical condition (including other mental disorders).

Adapted from the DSM-5 by the American Psychiatric Association

How Does OCD Work?
So, how does OCD actually work? First, to understand OCD, you need to know a little bit about anxiety. Your body uses anxiety as an alarm system to warn you about possible dangers. At a low level of perceived danger, your body might experience stress. At a high level of perceived danger, your body will experience fear. Normally, anxiety helps to keep us alive. It stops us from driving far too fast, and it keeps us alert when we walk down a dark street alone.

With OCD, the anxiety alarm system is triggered far too easily, and its warnings are much more intense than necessary. Minor dangers—or dangers that don’t even exist—might trigger a strong anxiety response.

Imagine that someone with OCD touches a doorknob, and becomes overwhelmed with the fear that their hand will become infected (this is the obsession). They immediately wash their hands, but not for 15 seconds like many people might. Instead, they wash their hands for 10 minutes (this is the compulsion).

The brain takes note of the serious response to touching a doorknob, and confirms to itself that touching doorknobs must be dangerous. Furthermore, the brain notices that the anxiety did in fact diminish after 10 minutes of hand washing, so it must have helped. This creates a negative feedback loop where small sources of anxiety result in extreme responses, which then further reinforce the obsessions and compulsions.

Diagram depicting the cycle of OCD.

During the treatment of OCD, this cycle will be identified and broken. One form of treatment that focuses on the disruption of this cycle is called exposure and response prevention therapy.

Exposure and Response Prevention Therapy

Exposure and response prevention therapy (ERP) is a form of psychotherapy that’s well supported, and commonly used, for the treatment of OCD. It falls under the broader category of cognitive behavioral therapy, and you may notice several similarities to the treatment of anxiety disorders.

Some forms of psychotherapy, such as those based around insight and finding the root cause of problems, may do more harm than good when it comes to OCD. They simply place more focus upon obsessions and compulsions, without providing any tools to manage them.

In the course of ERP, the client will be exposed to the sources of their anxiety, obsessions, and compulsions. As the client is exposed to their triggers, they will practice refraining from their compulsive behaviors. This will break the cycle of avoidance and the reinforcement of anxiety.

Psychoeducation
Before moving into the exposure portion of treatment, clients should have an understanding of how OCD works, what their obsessions and compulsions are (and how they are harmful), and how exposure will help them. Exposure therapies are, by definition, uncomfortable for clients. Few will consider facing their fears unless they believe in the treatment.

Proper psychoeduation includes a discussion about the length of treatment. Don’t expect a significant change in obsessions and compulsions after only one week. Explain that, at first, your client will simply be resisting their compulsions. It won’t feel great. After a week or more of practice, their anxiety will slowly begin to diminish. And then, in time, their obsessions and compulsions will also begin to fade (which will further reduce the anxiety).

OCD Exposure Hierarchy
Before beginning exposure, you’ll need to identify specific obsessions, compulsions, and sources of anxiety that you would like to target. This will require some exploration and analysis. Give special attention to situations that your client tends to avoid due to their anxiety.

This portion of treatment can also include discussion regarding the meaning of compulsions and rituals to your client. It can be valuable to begin labeling obsessions and compulsions as such.

After exploring your client’s sources of anxiety, collaborate to record them on an OCD Exposure Hierarchy form. Each trigger should be ranked and listed from the most to least distressing.

Worksheet IconOCD Exposure Hierarchy
worksheet

Example OCD Exposure Hierarchy Work sheet
Anxiety Obsession Compulsion

Trigger______________________________________________________________________________________________________________.

Level of Distress_________________________________________________________________________________________________________.

(1-10)
Using a public restroom. 9
Shaking a stranger’s hand. 7
Handling money. 5
Touching a doorknob in a public place. 2

The exposure hierarchy lays out a roadmap for the rest of treatment. Clients will face their triggers beginning with the least distressing items, and moving to more difficult levels as they improve. For this reason, be sure to list a variety of triggers, including some that that only cause a low level of distress, with a steady progression toward greater levels of distress.

Exposure and Response Prevention
During the exposure stage of treatment, your client will face a distressing situation (beginning at the bottom of the exposure hierarchy) and consciously refrain from their compulsion for at least two hours. This task should be practiced daily. Exposure can begin in session, but it should also continue throughout the week as homework. The standard hour-a-week sessions simply don’t leave enough time for adequate exposure.

Based upon the example exposure hierarchy from above, the client will first be asked to touch a doorknob in a public place, and then refrain from their compulsion (e.g. washing their hands) for two hours. During this time they will most likely experience anxiety and the desire to act on their compulsion, but they will consciously refrain.

If your client can’t contain their compulsions after grabbing a doorknob, ask them to touch it with only one finger. Be creative to come up with forms of exposure that are challenging, but not impossible.

As a normal, empathy-feeling human, you may be tempted to reassure your client that “everything will be OK” during exposure. While it’s fine to explain at the beginning of treatment that your client will never be placed in danger during their sessions, reassurance during exposure acts as a form of avoidance. Remember, your client is supposed to be experiencing anxiety, and reassuring them contradicts that goal.

Tip: In extreme cases where even the smallest trigger is too much for your client, collaborate to create a narrative about exposure to the trigger. In this narrative, your client’s fears should be realized. Remember, the goal is to incite anxiety, not to tell a fun story where everything goes great! Ask your client to vividly imagine the narrative.

One important note: Imagination is not a replacement for real life exposure. It’s just one step toward the next stage of the hierarchy.

After your client has become more comfortable with the lowest level of the hierarchy, move to the next trigger on the list. The anxiety associated with each level doesn’t have to totally disappear before you move on, but the next task should feel manageable (although challenging).

As a basic model for the progression through this stage of treatment, try to introduce your client to a new level on the exposure hierarchy each week during their therapy session. If possible, begin practicing the exposure in session, and ask that your client also practices every day at home until they return for their next session. The importance of properly completing the homework cannot be emphasized enough. Ask your client to set a timer for two to three hours after exposure to their trigger to keep track of how long they must resist their compulsion. No cheating!

Of course, the time frame for treatment will differ case-by-case. Use your professional judgement to move your client through the hierarchy at a pace that’s appropriate for them.

Tip: It is a common mistake to end treatment before a client has addressed their biggest fears. Treatment should address the full exposure hierarchy, and not stop early because it seems “close enough”. Unaddressed triggers can grow, and the anxiety will spread back to areas that were previously under control.

Handling Mental Compulsions
Mental compulsions, such as self-reassurance, internal counting, special prayers, mentally reviewing situations, and others, can pose a special challenge during response prevention. Mental compulsions are often automatic and almost involuntary.

Oftentimes, therapists’ natural response to this challenge is to teach clients to distract themselves. This may treat the symptoms in the moment, but not the underlying issue. Distraction works as a form of avoidance from the anxiety.

Instead, clients should be taught to “spoil” their mental compulsions by re-exposing themselves to the trigger with their thoughts.

For example, someone might experience a great deal of anxiety after having normal conversations. Afterwards, they mentally review the conversation again and again, looking for evidence that they acted normally. This mental process can be spoiled by replacing the reassuring thoughts with alternatives such as: “I might have made a fool of myself during that conversations.”

Spoiling the reassuring thoughts forces the client to continue their exposure to the anxiety, which will eventually result in its diminishment.

Other OCD Resources
We’ve collected several resources related to OCD to help you continue your education:

Book IconERP for OCD: Therapist Guide
book

Book IconA Kid’s Guide to Overcoming OCD
book

References
Abramowitz, J. S. (1996). Variants of exposure and response prevention in the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder: A meta-analysis. Behavior therapy, 27(4), 583-600.

Gillihan, S. J., Williams, M. T., Malcoun, E., Yadin, E., & Foa, E. B. (2012). Common pitfalls in exposure and response prevention (EX/RP) for OCD. Journal of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, 1(4), 251-257.

Posted in Work Sheet'S | Leave a comment

Thought Log

EVENT____________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________.

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________.

THOUGHT__________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________.

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________.

CONSEQUENCE / BEHAVIOR

 

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________.

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________.

RATIONAL COUNTER STATEMENT

 

_________________________________________________________________

 

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________.

 

_________________________________________________________________.

Posted in Work Sheet'S | Leave a comment