4.7 Article

Psychological Assessment of Primary Aldosteronism: A Controlled Study

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Volume 96, Issue 6, Pages E878-E883

Publisher

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2010-2723

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Our objective was to investigate psychological correlates in a population with primary aldosteronism (PA) using methods found to be sensitive and reliable in psychosomatic research. Methods: Twenty-three PA patients (12 male, 11 female; mean age 50 +/- 9 yr) were compared with 23 patients with essential hypertension (EH) (15 male, eight female; mean age 47 +/- 8 yr) and 23 matched normotensive subjects. A modified version of the Structural Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, a shortened version of the structured interview for the Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research, and two self-rating questionnaires, the Psychosocial Index and the Symptom Questionnaire, were administered. Results: Twelve of 23 patients with PA (52.2%) suffered from an anxiety disorder compared with four of 23 with EH (17.4%) and one control (4.3%) (P < 0.001). Generalized anxiety disorder was more frequent in PA than in EH patients and controls (P < 0.05). As assessed by Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research, irritable mood was more frequent in PA and EH compared with controls (P < 0.05) but did not differentiate PA from EH. According to Psychosocial Index results, patients with PA had higher levels of stress (P < 0.01) and psychological distress (P < 0.01) and lower level of well-being (P < 0.05) than controls. Compared with EH patients, PA patients had higher scores in stress subscale (P < 0.05). The Symptom Questionnaire showed higher levels of anxiety (P < 0.01), depression (P < 0.01) and somatization (P < 0.01) and lower physical well-being (P < 0.05) in PA than controls. Conclusion: A role of mineralocorticoid regulatory mechanisms in clinical situations concerned with anxiety and stress is suggested. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab 96: E878-E883, 2011)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available