Glad

http://www.probux.com/?r=subhan786

Tuesday, 3 December 2013

Ordered thoughts on thought disorder

Ordered thoughts on thought disorder

  1. Ashley Rule, Consultant Psychiatrist

  1. Oxfordshire Mental HealthcareTrust, Littlemore Mental Health Centre, Sandford Lane, Littlemore, Oxford OX4 4XN, e-mail: ashleymrule@hotm

Abstract

AIMS AND METHOD
To review and clarify the large number of psychophenomenological terms used to describe thought disorder. The most recent editions of the major psychiatric textbooks and medical dictionaries in the library of a London teaching hospital were used to compile a list of such terms. The various, often conflicting definitions were compared.
RESULTS
There were 68 terms identified. There was significant redundancy in these terms (i.e. more terms than significantly different concepts described). Different sources gave different definitions for the same terms.
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
The understanding of many of the terms used to describe thought disorder is poor. This is confusing for clinicians, trainees and patients.
Disordered thinking is fundamental to the clinical picture of schizophrenia. The objective manifestation of thought disorder is disordered speech, and the recognition of this is one of the key features of the mental state examination which allows this diagnosis, as detailed in ICD–10 (World Health Organization, 1992) and DSM–IV (American Psychiatric Association, 1994).
Although the specific manner in which an individual’s speech may be disordered is as varied and idiosyncratic as the specific content of an individual’s delusions, there are only a few broadly definable ways in which speech, and by inference, thought, is found to be abnormal. Despite this, psychiatric literature contains many supposedly distinct concepts describing disordered thinking, and there have been few attempts to harmonise these concepts or to clarify their supposed differences.
Andreasen (1979) differentiated 18 different categories of ‘disorders of speech, language and communication’. Some of these categories were subsequently incorporated into the thought disorder sub-scales of Andreasen’s rating scales for schizophrenia (Scales for the Assessment of Negative/Positive Symptoms; Andreasen & Olsen, 1982). More recently, Liddleet al (2002) published a new rating scale, the Thought and Language Index (TLI) in which only eight broad categories of abnormality in schizophrenic speech are defined.
However, the psychiatric literature continues to describe a confusing array of psychophenomena associated with disordered thinking, particularly in schizophrenia. Not only do many of these concepts overlap, but also different psychiatric textbooks frequently offer conflicting definitions of the same concepts.
This paper attempts to collect as many of these psychophenomenological terms as possible, and reduce them to a more manageable number of concepts. It also attempts to highlight the potential sources of conflict and confusion in the definitions.

Method

The terms described were found in English-language psychiatric textbooks, dictionaries of medical terminology or academic papers published sinceAndreasen’s 1979 paper. These are given in the reference list. Definitions are based on consensus across the various sources, and have not been systematically cross-referenced with their original usage. They may not, therefore, correspond to the original usage of the term, but to the most commonly understood, current usage. When no consensus of definition could be discerned, all definitions are described.

Results

Sixty-eight terms were defined.

Descriptive terminology

The following terms are descriptive of the speech (and by inference, the thinking) of patients with thought disorders and do not attempt to explain the underlying cognitive defects.
Formal thought disorder simply means a disorder of the form of thought, as opposed to its content. Akata-phasia, similarly, is defined simply as a disorder in the expression of thought in speech. Paralogia is defined as ‘positive thought disorder’ (i.e. the intrusion of irrelevant or bizarre thought), whereas alogia (also known as laconic speech) describes ‘negative thought disorder’ or poverty of thought as expressed in speech. This latter concept should be differentiated from poverty of thought content, in which the number of words spoken may be normal, but little in the way of content can be distilled once redundant words are discounted. Empty speech is essentially similar. Bradyphasia refers to speech that is reduced in rate but not necessarily content.
Desultory thinking jumps from one idea to another without logical connections. Loosening of associations describes a similar concept, as doknight’s move thinking (alluding to the movement of the only chess piece which does not move in straight lines) and crowding of thought. Derailmentdescribes an unexpected change of direction of a ‘ train of thought’, which ‘derails’ onto a subsidiary idea. Loss of goal is essentially similar.Tangentiality describes a related concept, whereby a patient’s thoughts move off in an unexpected direction, never to return, in response to a direct question, rather than in spontaneous speech. A similar concept, vorbeireden(‘talking past the point’), describes thinking that bypasses the central idea to reach a different goal. Vorbeireden is often used interchangeably withvorbeigehen (‘going past the point’), although the latter was originally defined as part of the ‘ Ganser syndrome’, whereby some criminals would give incorrect answers (‘approximate answers’) to simple questions that none the less suggested that the correct answer was known (e.g. saying dogs have five legs).
Paragrammatism (literally meaning the wrong use of grammar) and parasyntax(the wrong use of syntax) are variously described as the inappropriate use of words, speech made difficult to understand because of the breakdown of grammatical/syntactical construction, and speech consisting of a mass of complicated clauses that do not achieve the goal of thought, despite the individual clauses making sense by themselves. Transitory thinking describes thinking characterised by derailments, substitutions and omissions.

Terminology implying the underlying faults in mental processing

The following terms attempt to describe the mental processes that have led to ‘normal’ thinking becoming ‘disordered’.
Condensation is defined as the phenomenon by which two ideas with something in common are blended into a single, false concept. This is similar to the concept of fusion. Displacement and substitution describe a process whereby one idea is used for an associated idea. Omission describes the phenomenon whereby a thought (or part of a thought) is inappropriately left out of speech. This has similarities with the concept of thought blocking (also known as snapping off) in which a thought suddenly ends before it is complete, with the patient reporting that their mind has emptied.
Incoordination describes a breakdown of connections between thoughts (akin to the term asyndesis). Interpenetration refers to the unwanted intrusion of unrelated themes into a thought that was originally goal-directed.Overinclusion describes the inability to maintain the boundaries of a thought when trying to convey a specific idea. Fragmentation describes the way a single idea is unintentionally broken up into several parts that are not, by themselves, understandable.

Grossly unintelligible speech

Occasionally speech becomes so disordered that its ability to convey any useful information is lost. Numerous terms describe this phenomenon and include drivelling, muddling, verbigeration (the senseless repetition of words or phrases), word salad, speech confusion, incoherence, aculalia, glossolalia, catalogia, cataphasia and schizophasia. Jargon aphasia refers to speech that is unintelligible because the individual words themselves are unintelligible or invented by the patient.

Idiosyncratic use of words

Speech is sometimes hard to understand not because of disordered linking of ideas, but because it contains words or phrases that are used in unusual ways, or have been invented by the patient. Neologisms (‘new words’) are an example of the latter, and convey meaning for the patient only. Word approximationsalso fill a semantic gap (e.g. calling a hat a ‘head shoe’) but have understandable meanings.
Metonymy is the usage of imprecise expressions, whereby a person uses a word or phrase related to the correct term in an unusual or inappropriate way (e.g. talking about eating a menu rather than a meal). Paraphasia is a similar concept, described variously as the substitution of one word for another with a similar morphology or phonetic composition, and also as the destruction of words with the interpolation of non-phonetic sounds. Paraphemia, pseudoagrammatism, and, confusingly, paraphrasia are all synonymous with paraphasia.
Some people use certain legitimate words or phrases in their speech far more frequently than would seem appropriate, and these words or phrases seem to convey a much greater range of meaning than would usually be understood. These stock words/phrases plug gaps in the person’s much-reduced working vocabulary.

Thought disorder usually associated with conditions other than schizophrenia

Perseveration is variously described as the simple repetition of words or phrases beyond the point of relevance, the use of a word or phrase repeatedly in different contexts within a single idea, and the repetition of the same response to different stimuli (e.g. giving the same answer to several unrelated questions). It is usually a sign of organic brain disease (e.g. dementia).Stereotypy describes the giving of the same response to different stimuli, rather than the simple repetition of a word. Echolalia specifically describes the continued repetition of a word (or part of a word), as does logoclonia. Both are also usually signs of organic illness.
Pressured speech (also known as tachyphasia) describes speech that is abnormally fast, with few pauses and difficult to interrupt. Patients describe its subjective equivalent, pressure of thought, as the feeling that their mind is so full of thoughts that they cannot keep up with them. Logorrhoea describes an increased amount, rather than rate, of speech, and is also referred to asverbosity. Fight of ideas describes a thought process that moves so rapidly between ideas that it is difficult to follow, although the links between ideas are understandable (unlike the situation in loosening of associations).Clanging describes a pattern of speech in which the sound of a word, rather than its meaning, determines the link with the next ideas. Such links include rhymes, puns, assonance and alliteration. All of these phenomena usually suggest mania.
Poverty of thought and poverty of thought content often occur in the negative syndrome of schizophrenia but are also found in depression.

Descriptive terms with unclear pathological implications

Circumstantiality describes speech containing much tedious and unnecessary details, although the goal of thought is eventually reached. Stilted speech has an excessively formal quality, and may seem outdated or pompous, frequently using multisyllabic words where simpler words are more appropriate. Self-referential speech repeatedly refers neutral topics under discussion back to the speaker himself. Illogicality refers to a pattern of speech characterised by frequent, unwarranted and illogical inferences between separate clauses, suggesting faulty inductive reasoning. All of these terms have been described in the context of psychiatric illness, but are also commonly described among the general population.

Discussion

Many of the concepts described above are similar, and the differences are best explained by remembering that they were described by different psychiatrists, practising in different eras and writing in different languages.
The large number of concepts defined, with little difference between them and conflicting definitions, may seem confusing and unsatisfactory. This is especially so when diagnoses in psychiatry are based on the subjective recognition of psychopathology by the psychiatrist, rather than by more objective measures such as blood tests or imaging studies. In routine clinical practice, however, the recognition of a few broad categories of disordered thought is usually sufficient to allow a diagnosis to be made, when taken in context with other symptoms such as delusions, abnormal perceptions and altered behaviour. This fact is reflected in many commonly used diagnostic schedules and rating scales.
Understanding of psychophenomenology is routinely tested in postgraduate examinations, although, as this paper shows, questions based on these concepts may not have unambiguous, ‘correct’ answers. It is hoped that this paper might prove useful in this context both to trainees and examiners.

References

  1.  
  2.  
  3.  
     
  4.  
  5.  
  6.  

Can Formal THought Disorder Be Treated?


Dr. Saltzman:

Is "formal thought disorder" treatable? 

[name withheld] 











Dear [name withheld]: 

Surprisingly, to me at least, I get more ask the psychologist letters on this topic than on any other except for the eternal questions about penis size.

Formal thought disorder is one of the symptoms of schizophrenia. Generally, symptoms of schizophrenia fall into four basic categories. First there are the behavior disorders such as catatonia in which the ill person may hold the same position for hours on end, unable to speak or to eat. A second category of schizophrenic symptoms involves disturbances to feeling and emotion, the classic one of these being so called "flat affect," in which events that in normal people would produce obvious emotional responses (very good news, for example, or sudden death of a loved one) produce no emotional response at all. A third category of schizophrenic symptoms is disorders of perception such as hearing voices or seeing things which are not apparent to healthy people. Finally, there is the collection of symptoms called "formal thought disorder." 







ask dr-robert ask psychologist todos santos ask psychologist dr robert saltzman









In formal thought disorder, people may give voice to strange or unrealistic thoughts. These may reach the level of fixed delusions such as the idea that a government agency has a way of implanting thoughts in one's mind, that hidden cameras are recording every movement, or that one is endowed with special, superhuman powers. Often in formal thought disorder the disturbed thinking becomes obvious to observers through speech or writing that sounds strange or disconnected, even to the point of being impossible to understand. 







ask dr-robert ask psychologist todos santos ask psychologist dr robert saltzman








Nancy Andreasen* has broken down into subcategories examples of the disordered speech associated with formal thought disorder. I take the liberty of quoting them here:
  • Pressure of speech - An increase in the amount of spontaneous speech compared to what is considered customary.
  • Distractible speech - During mid speech, the subject is changed in response to a stimulus. e.g. "Then I left San Francisco and moved to... where did you get that tie ?"
  • Tangentiality - Replying to questions in an oblique, tangential or irrelevant manner. e.g. "What city are you from ?", "Well, that's a hard question. I'm from Iowa. I really don't know where my relatives came from, so I don't know if I'm Irish or French".
  • Derailment - Ideas slip off the track on to another which is obliquely related or unrelated. e.g. "The next day when I'd be going out you know, I took control, like uh, I put bleach on my hair in California".
  • Incoherence (word salad) - Speech that is unintelligible due to the fact that, though the individual words are real words, the manner in which they are strung together results in incoherent gibberish, e.g. the question "Why do people believe in God?" elicits a response like "Because make a twirl in life, my box is broken help me blue elephant. Isn't lettuce brave? I like electrons, hello."
  • Illogicality - Conclusions are reached that do not follow logically (non sequiturs or faulty inductive inferences).
  • Clanging - Sounds rather than meaningful relationships appear to govern words. e.g. "I'm not trying to make noise. I'm trying to make sense. If you can't make sense out of nonsense, well, have fun".
  • Neologisms - New word formations. e.g. "I got so angry I picked up a dish and threw it at the geshinker".
  • Word approximations - Old words used in a new and unconventional way. e.g. "His boss was a seeover".
  • Circumstantiality - Speech that is very delayed at reaching its goal. Excessive long-windedness.
  • Loss of goal - Failure to show a chain of thought to a natural conclusion.
  • Perseveration - Persistent repetition of words or ideas. e.g. "I'll think I'll put on my hat, my hat, my hat, my hat, my hat, my hat, my hat, my hat..."
  • Echolalia - Echoing of other people's speech e.g. "Can we talk for a few minutes?", "Talk for a few minutes".
  • Blocking - Interruption of train of speech before completed.
  • Stilted speech - Speech excessively stilted and formal. e.g. "The attorney comported himself indecorously".
  • Self-reference - Patient repeatedly and inappropriately refers back to self. e.g. "What's the time?", "It's 7 o'clock. That's my problem".
  • Phonemic paraphasia - Mispronounciation; syllables out of sequence. e.g. "I slipped on the lice broke my arm".
  • Semantic paraphasia - Substitution of inappropriate word. e.g. "I slipped on the coat, on the ice I mean, and broke my book".








ask dr-robert ask psychologist todos santos ask psychologist dr robert saltzman








If a person falls into a sustained period of formal thought disorder, and if the symptoms are serious enough so that even a determined and sympathetic person cannot understand the speech, writing, or other communications of the ill person, you will understand that the ill person is now lost in a world of his or her own, unable to understand or be understood by people living in the ordinary world of consensual reality. This is total and complete isolation; a lonelier state cannot be imagined. 







ask dr-robert ask psychologist todos santos ask psychologist dr robert saltzman








Now, you ask if formal thought disorder can be treated. This is the same, you see, as asking if schizophrenia can be treated. The answer is yes. Not only can schizophrenia be treated, but it must be treated, and treated promptly and aggressively, because schizophrenia is a progressive condition which almost always worsens with time so that without treatment the schizophrenic person will likely end up totally disabled, often requiring custodial care merely in order to survive. 







ask dr-robert ask psychologist todos santos ask psychologist dr robert saltzman








Before beginning treatment of schizophrenia, it is important to rule out organic factors, such as brain tumor, which can produce the same kinds of symptoms as schizophrenia. Once these are ruled out, treatment usually involves trying to stabilize the patient, in other words, to bring the patient back into some useful contact with reality, and then trying to prevent relapses. 

Since we still do not know the etiology (the causes) of schizophrenia--the best contemporary thinking blames a genetic predisposition (an inborn imbalance of brain chemistry, that is) later potentiated by environmental factors such as family pressures--it cannot be said that there is a cure for schizophrenia, or even that a cure is in the offing. In other words, so far it is not known what schizophrenia really is, much less how to cure it. This leaves aggressive treatment of symptoms as the only option. The best treatment involves suppression of symptoms with such medicines as haloperidol decanoate (Haldol Decanoate) or fluphenazine decanoate (Prolixin Decanoate), combined with counseling and psychotherapy aimed at helping the patient to understand and deal with his or her situation. 







ask dr-robert ask psychologist todos santos ask psychologist dr robert saltzman








If you or anyone you care for shows symptoms of schizophrenia, whether they be disordered thinking, or any of the other indications, I urge you to seek expert advice immediately. You should begin with a visit to a physician who will move to rule out organic causes. Once these are ruled out, your physician will be able to arrange for the expert psychiatric care needed in all cases of schizophrenic illness. 

Be well. 


_____________________________________


*Thought, language, and communication disorders. I. Clinical assessment, definition of terms, and evaluation of their reliability. Archives of General Psychiatry 1979;36(12):1315-21





ask dr-robert ask psychologist todos santos ask psychologist dr robert saltzman