{"title":"基线NDDI-E评分bbbb13的癫痫患者抑郁和自杀的前瞻性评估:与癫痫发作频率和精神治疗的关系","authors":"Satoshi Saito , Go Taniguchi , Hideo Kato , Chihiro Nakata , Izumi Kuramochi","doi":"10.1016/j.ebr.2025.100810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy (NDDI-E) is commonly used to screen for major depressive disorder (MDD) in patients with epilepsy, yet little is known about longitudinal changes in NDDI-E scores in relation to seizure control and psychiatric care. This study evaluated temporal changes in NDDI-E total and Item 4 scores (ΔNDDI-E, ΔItem 4) over ≥6 months in 34 adults (≥18 years) with baseline NDDI-E scores >13. Patients were seen in a specialized outpatient psychiatry clinic within an epilepsy center. Data included Clinical Global Impression–Improvement (CGI-I) ratings by psychiatrists specialized in epilepsy care, seizure frequency, DSM-5-based psychiatric diagnoses, and treatment interventions (e.g., medication adjustments, psychotherapy, and psychosocial support). Patients also completed a self-report questionnaire. No significant difference in MDD diagnoses was found between those with baseline NDDI-E scores of 14–16 and ≥17 (6.7 % vs. 21.1 %, p = 0.36). Comorbidities included autism spectrum disorder, dissociative disorder, and other mental health conditions. Changes in seizure frequency did not correlate with ΔNDDI-E or CGI-I scores, while ΔNDDI-E and ΔItem 4 showed moderate correlations with CGI-I (<em>ρ</em> = 0.51 and 0.56). All patients with improved Item 4 scores had better CGI-I ratings (p < 0.001). Qualitative analysis indicated that emotional fluctuations and psychosocial stressors influenced NDDI-E scores. These results suggest that longitudinal improvement in NDDI-E Item 4 may serve as a marker for psychiatric benefit. Effective use of the NDDI-E requires considering the psychiatric and psychosocial dimensions beyond seizure control. To validate these findings, studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are necessary.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36558,"journal":{"name":"Epilepsy and Behavior Reports","volume":"31 ","pages":"Article 100810"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prospective assessment of depression and suicidality in patients with epilepsy having baseline NDDI-E Scores > 13: Associations with seizure frequency and psychiatric treatment\",\"authors\":\"Satoshi Saito , Go Taniguchi , Hideo Kato , Chihiro Nakata , Izumi Kuramochi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ebr.2025.100810\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy (NDDI-E) is commonly used to screen for major depressive disorder (MDD) in patients with epilepsy, yet little is known about longitudinal changes in NDDI-E scores in relation to seizure control and psychiatric care. This study evaluated temporal changes in NDDI-E total and Item 4 scores (ΔNDDI-E, ΔItem 4) over ≥6 months in 34 adults (≥18 years) with baseline NDDI-E scores >13. Patients were seen in a specialized outpatient psychiatry clinic within an epilepsy center. Data included Clinical Global Impression–Improvement (CGI-I) ratings by psychiatrists specialized in epilepsy care, seizure frequency, DSM-5-based psychiatric diagnoses, and treatment interventions (e.g., medication adjustments, psychotherapy, and psychosocial support). Patients also completed a self-report questionnaire. No significant difference in MDD diagnoses was found between those with baseline NDDI-E scores of 14–16 and ≥17 (6.7 % vs. 21.1 %, p = 0.36). Comorbidities included autism spectrum disorder, dissociative disorder, and other mental health conditions. Changes in seizure frequency did not correlate with ΔNDDI-E or CGI-I scores, while ΔNDDI-E and ΔItem 4 showed moderate correlations with CGI-I (<em>ρ</em> = 0.51 and 0.56). All patients with improved Item 4 scores had better CGI-I ratings (p < 0.001). Qualitative analysis indicated that emotional fluctuations and psychosocial stressors influenced NDDI-E scores. These results suggest that longitudinal improvement in NDDI-E Item 4 may serve as a marker for psychiatric benefit. Effective use of the NDDI-E requires considering the psychiatric and psychosocial dimensions beyond seizure control. To validate these findings, studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are necessary.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36558,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epilepsy and Behavior Reports\",\"volume\":\"31 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100810\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epilepsy and Behavior Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S258998642500070X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epilepsy and Behavior Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S258998642500070X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
癫痫神经障碍抑郁量表(NDDI-E)通常用于筛查癫痫患者的重度抑郁障碍(MDD),但NDDI-E评分与癫痫发作控制和精神护理之间的纵向变化知之甚少。本研究评估了34名具有基线NDDI-E评分的成人(≥18岁)在≥6个月内NDDI-E总量和第4项评分(ΔNDDI-E, ΔItem 4)的时间变化[gt;13]。患者在癫痫中心的专门门诊精神病学诊所就诊。数据包括临床总体印象改善(CGI-I)由专门从事癫痫治疗的精神病学家评分,癫痫发作频率,基于dsm -5的精神病诊断和治疗干预(例如,药物调整,心理治疗和社会心理支持)。患者还完成了一份自我报告问卷。基线NDDI-E评分为14-16分和≥17分的患者在MDD诊断方面无显著差异(6.7% vs. 21.1%, p = 0.36)。合并症包括自闭症谱系障碍、分离性障碍和其他精神健康状况。发作频率的变化与ΔNDDI-E或CGI-I评分无相关性,而ΔNDDI-E和ΔItem 4与CGI-I有中度相关性(ρ = 0.51和0.56)。所有第4项评分提高的患者CGI-I评分均提高(p <;0.001)。定性分析表明情绪波动和心理社会压力因素影响NDDI-E评分。这些结果表明NDDI-E第4项的纵向改善可以作为精神病学获益的标志。有效使用NDDI-E需要考虑癫痫控制之外的精神病学和社会心理层面。为了验证这些发现,需要更大样本量和更长时间的随访研究。
Prospective assessment of depression and suicidality in patients with epilepsy having baseline NDDI-E Scores > 13: Associations with seizure frequency and psychiatric treatment
The Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy (NDDI-E) is commonly used to screen for major depressive disorder (MDD) in patients with epilepsy, yet little is known about longitudinal changes in NDDI-E scores in relation to seizure control and psychiatric care. This study evaluated temporal changes in NDDI-E total and Item 4 scores (ΔNDDI-E, ΔItem 4) over ≥6 months in 34 adults (≥18 years) with baseline NDDI-E scores >13. Patients were seen in a specialized outpatient psychiatry clinic within an epilepsy center. Data included Clinical Global Impression–Improvement (CGI-I) ratings by psychiatrists specialized in epilepsy care, seizure frequency, DSM-5-based psychiatric diagnoses, and treatment interventions (e.g., medication adjustments, psychotherapy, and psychosocial support). Patients also completed a self-report questionnaire. No significant difference in MDD diagnoses was found between those with baseline NDDI-E scores of 14–16 and ≥17 (6.7 % vs. 21.1 %, p = 0.36). Comorbidities included autism spectrum disorder, dissociative disorder, and other mental health conditions. Changes in seizure frequency did not correlate with ΔNDDI-E or CGI-I scores, while ΔNDDI-E and ΔItem 4 showed moderate correlations with CGI-I (ρ = 0.51 and 0.56). All patients with improved Item 4 scores had better CGI-I ratings (p < 0.001). Qualitative analysis indicated that emotional fluctuations and psychosocial stressors influenced NDDI-E scores. These results suggest that longitudinal improvement in NDDI-E Item 4 may serve as a marker for psychiatric benefit. Effective use of the NDDI-E requires considering the psychiatric and psychosocial dimensions beyond seizure control. To validate these findings, studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are necessary.