|
Method
In developing a
dimensional scheme our aim was to use a
small number of numerical measures that
would usefully extend the existing
bipolar disorder diagnostic schemes – specifically, to retain
the key information required to make
diagnoses whilst maximizing the richness of
the additional descriptive information and
minimizing the problems inherent in the
categorical approach. In using the current
classifications for diagnosis of individuals
within the Bipolar spectrum, the following
key issues are considered within the
decision-making process:
1) The presence
and severity of manic syndromes.
2) The
presence
and
severity
of
depressive
syndromes.
3) The
presence
of psychotic
symptoms
and the
balance
of mood
and
psychotic symptomatology.
4) The
mood
congruence
of psychotic
symptoms
and the
temporal
relationship
between
affective
and
psychotic symptomatology.
In order
to
capture
information
relating
to the 4
key
issues
above,
we,
therefore,
chose to
use 4
dimensions,
one for
each
issue.
Each
dimension
was set
up to
provide
an
ordered
(not
necessarily
linear)
measure
of the
relevant
lifetime
experience
of
psychopathology
for the
individual
such
that
those
scoring
higher
on the
scale
would
have
experienced
more
clinically
important
and
convincing
psychopathology
–
typically
a mix of
severity
and
frequency/duration.
Ranges
and
anchor
points
in the
scales
were
initially
decided
after
discussion
by the
senior
investigators
and
informed
by (a)
the
current
concepts
of
severity
and type
of mood
syndrome
recognized
within DSMIV
and
ICD10,
(b) the
literature
regarding
severity
of
episodes
[8-10],
and (c)
our own
experience
in
clinical
work and
research
with
patients
with
bipolar
spectrum
disorders.
We
undertook
an
iterative
process
in which
we
initially
agreed
scale
definitions
and
rating
guidelines,
piloted
their
use on
sets of
cases
and
modified
the
scale
and
guidelines
to
improve
utility
and
reliability.
The
scale –
the
Bipolar
Affective
Disorders
Dimension
Scale, BADDS –
has been
under
development
by our
group
since
1996 and
has gone
through
several
iterations.
We
describe
the most
recent
iteration,
Version
3.0
which
has been
used by
our
group
and
collaborators
since
1999.
All
individuals
who were
assessed
with
Bipolar Affective Disorders Dimension Scale as
part of
the
diagnostic
assessment
provided
written
informed
consent
to
participate
in
family-genetic
studies
of mood
disorder
and our
protocols
received
approval
from
relevant
ethical
review
committees.
Results
Basic
structure
of BADDS
BADDS
(the Bipolar
Affective
Disorders
Dimension)
comprises
four
dimensions
that
provide
a
quantitative
measure
of
lifetime
experience
of
psychopathology
in each
of four
domains:
Manic-like
episodes
(the Mania
dimension,
M),
Depression-like
episodes
(the
Depression
dimension,
D),
Psychotic symptomatology
(the
Psychosis
dimension,
P) and
the
relationship
(in both
congruence
of
content
and in
timing)
between
psychotic
features
(if
present)
and mood
episodes
(the
Incongruence
dimension,
I) (see
supporting
material,
appendix
A for
the
BADDS
rating
guidelines).
Each
dimension
provides
a
composite
measure
that
takes
account
of both
severity
and
frequency
of
relevant
psychopathology
and is
rated
using
integers
in the
range 0
to 100,
inclusive.
As with
conventional
lifetime
best-estimate
categorical
diagnosis,
the
dimensional
ratings
are made
on the
basis of
all
available
information
– which
typically
would
include
semi-structured
lifetime
psychiatric
interview
and
review
of
psychiatric
case
notes.
The
criteria
used for
bipolar
spectrum
diagnoses
is
similar
within DSMIV
and
ICD10.
We have
used
ICD10 as
the
primary
source
for
episode
definitions
because
it
provides
a
clearer
differentiation
of
severity
for
depressive
episodes.
Basic
background
information
and
general
rating
guidelines
are
provided
in pages
1 and 2
of the BADDS
rating
guidelines
(see
Appendix
A). The
specific
characteristics
of each
dimension
are
described
below.
Mania
dimension,
M
The
severity
of the
lifetime
worst (ie.
most
severe)
episode
of manic
spectrum
psychopathology
identifies
a range
of
scores
on the M
dimension
to be
considered
(see
table
2
and the
rating
guidelines
for the
scale:
Appendix
A). The
lifetime
"amount"
of manic
spectrum
psychopathology
experienced
then
determines
the
score
within
the
range
according
to clear
guidelines
that
attach
weight
to the
number
and
severity
of
episodes
but
allow
sufficient
flexibility
that
ratings
can take
account
of other
factors
where
appropriate
(such as
length
of
episodes).
Once the
range
for
rating
has been
decided
by
considering
the
severity
of the
worst
episode,
the
score is
determined
by
starting
at the
lowest
score in
the
range
and
adding 2
points
for each
additional
episode
of equal
severity,
up to,
but not
exceeding,
the
maximum
score in
the
range.
Thus, an
individual
who has
experienced
7
episodes
of
incapacitating mania
would be
rated M
= 92
(the
range is
80–100
with 12
points
being
added to
the
initial
80
because
there
have
been 6
incapacitating
episodes
over and
above
the
worst
episode
that
identified
the
range).
Similarly
an
individual
who has
experienced
3
episodes
of hypomania
would be
rated as
M = 44.
An
individual
who has
experienced
50 near-hypomanic
episodes
(ie.
episodes
that
closely
approach,
but do
not
meet,
criteria
for
hypomania)
would be
rated as
M = 39.
For
individuals
who (as
is
common)
have
also
experienced
episodes
of lower
severity
than the
worst
ever
episode,
points
can be
added –
but with
a
substantially
lower
weighting
than for
additional
episodes
at the
same
severity.
Thus, an
individual
who has
experienced
2
episodes
of mania
(none
incapacitating)
and 10
episodes
of
hypomania
would
receive
a rating
of M =
67 (the
range is
60–79;
the
worst
episode
of mania
provides
a
starting
score of
60 to
which is
added 2
points
for the
second
manic
episode
and 5
points
for the
10 hypomanic
episodes).
An
individual
who has
experienced
2
episodes
of mania
(none
incapacitating)
and 10
episodes
of
near-hypomania
would
receive
a rating
of M =
62 or 63
depending
upon the judgement
of the
rater as
to the
importance
of the
near-hypomanic
episodes
(the
range is
60–79;
the
worst
episode
of mania
provides
a
starting
score of
60 to
which is
added 2
points
for the
second
manic
episode
and up
to one
point
for the
10 sub-hypomanic
episodes).
Depression
dimension,
D
The
principles
for this
dimension
follow
closely
those
for the
M
dimension.
The
severity
of the
lifetime
worst (ie.
most
severe)
episode
of
depression
spectrum
psychopathology
identifies
a range
of
scores
on the D
dimension
to be
considered
(see
table
3
and the
rating
guidelines
for the
scale:
Appendix
A). The
lifetime
"amount"
of
depression
spectrum
psychopathology
experienced
then
determines
the
score
within
the
range
according
to clear
guidelines
that
attach
weight
to the
number
and
severity
of
episodes
and
allows
sufficient
flexibility
that
ratings
can take
account
of other
factors
where
appropriate
(such as
length
of
episodes).
Once the
range
for
rating
has been
specified
by
considering
the
severity
of the
worst
episode,
the
score is
determined
by
adding 1
point
for each
additional
episode
of equal
severity
for the
mild and
moderate
depression
ranges
(each of
which
spans 10
points)
and 2
points
for each
additional
episode
of equal
severity
for the
other
ranges
(each of
which
spans 20
points).
Thus, an
individual
who has
experienced
11 or
more
episodes
of
incapacitating
depression
would be
rated D
= 100
(the
range is
80–100
with 20
points
being
added to
the
initial
80
because
there
have
been 10
or more
incapacitating
episodes
over and
above
the
worst
episode
that
identified
the
range).
An
individual
who has
experienced
3
episodes
of
moderate
depression
would be
rated as
D = 52
(the
range is
50–59
with 2
points
being
added to
the
initial
50
because
there
have
been 2
episodes
over and
above
the
worst
episode
that
identified
the
range).
As with
the M
dimension,
for
individuals
who have
also
experienced
episodes
of lower
severity
than the
worst
ever
episode,
points
can be
added
but with
a
substantially
lower
weighting
than for
additional
episodes
at the
same
severity.
Psychosis
dimension,
P
This
dimension
is
concerned
with
lifetime
occurrence
of
psychotic
and
near-psychotic
features.
It
provides
a
measure
of the
proportion
of
functional
psychotic
illness
in which
psychotic
symptoms
(delusions,
hallucinations,
positive
formal
thought
disorder,
catatonia
or
grossly
disorganized behaviour)
have
been
present.
The
rating
takes
account
of both
the
number
and
duration
of
episodes
with and
without
psychotic
features
(see
table
4
and the
rating
guidelines
for the
scale:
Appendix
A).
Near-psychotic
schizotypal
features
(specifically
the
following
DSMIV
schizotypal
items:
ideas of
reference;
odd
beliefs
or
magical
thinking
that
influences
behaviour
and is
inconsistent
with
sub-cultural
norms;
unusual
perceptual
experiences
including
bodily
illusions;
odd
thinking
and
speech;
suspiciousness
or
paranoid
ideation;
behaviour
or
appearance
that is
odd
eccentric
or
peculiar),
in the
absence
of
clear-cut
psychotic
features,
can be
rated in
the
lowest
range of
the
dimension
if there
have
been no
clear-cut
psychotic
features.
Rating
of 0 and
1 have
specific
definitions.
The
severity
and
amount
of
relevant
psychopathology
are
rated
within
the
ranges
2–9 (for
near-psychotic
features),
10–20
(for
relatively
brief
single
or
multiple
psychotic
features)
and
21–100
(for
individuals
having
multiple
episodes
where
psychotic
symptoms
are a
prominent
feature).
Thus, an
individual
for whom
psychotic
features
have
been
present
and
prominent
in each
episode
of
illness
would be
rated P
= 100
(whether
this is
a single
episode
or 20
episodes).
An
individual
for whom
psychotic
features
have
been
present
and
prominent
in one
third of
episodes
of
illness
would be
rated P
= 33. An
individual
for whom
multiple
psychotic
features
have
been
present
but were
brief
and
non-prominent
would be
rated P
= 20. An
individual
who has
never
experienced
clear-cut
psychotic
features
but has
had
frequent
near-psychotic
features
would be
rated P
= 9, and
such a
person
who has
had only
occasional
near-psychotic
features
would be
rated P
= 2.
Incongruence
dimension,
I
This
dimension
is the
most
complex
and
provides
lifetime
information
about
the
relationship
between
psychotic
and
affective
psychopathology,
specifically
in three
areas:
(a) the
mood
congruence
of any
psychotic
features
that
occur,
(b) the
occurrence
of
specific
symptoms
that
have
special
diagnostic
weight
in the
diagnosis
of
schizophrenia
and
schizoaffective
disorder
within
current
operational
classifications
(which
we
denote
for
convenience,
the "S
set":
thought
echo,
insertion,
withdrawal
or
broadcasting;
passivity
experiences;
hallucinatory
voices
giving
running
commentary,
discussing
subject
in third
person
or
originating
in some
part of
the
body;
bizarre
delusions;
catatonia),
and (c)
the
temporal
relationship
between
mood and
psychotic
psychopathology
(see
table
5
and the
rating
guidelines
for the
scale:
Appendix
A). The
dimension
is rated
only if
the P
dimension
has been
rated at
P > 9 (ie.
occurrence
of
definite
psychotic
symptoms
at some
time
during
lifetime);
otherwise,
it is
left
blank.
Thus, an
individual
who has
psychotic
features
only
during
affective
episodes
and for
whom the
psychotic
symptoms
are
mainly,
but not
exclusively
mood
congruent,
|