4.5 Review

Canadian clinical practice guidelines for the management of anxiety, posttraumatic stress and obsessive-compulsive disorders

期刊

BMC PSYCHIATRY
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-244X-14-S1-S1

关键词

-

资金

  1. Astra Zeneca Canada
  2. Eli-Lilly Canada
  3. Janssen Inc.
  4. Lundbeck Canada
  5. Pfizer Canada
  6. Purdue Canada
  7. Servier Canada Inc.
  8. Shire Canada
  9. Valeant Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Anxiety and related disorders are among the most common mental disorders, with lifetime prevalence reportedly as high as 31%. Unfortunately, anxiety disorders are under-diagnosed and under-treated. Methods: These guidelines were developed by Canadian experts in anxiety and related disorders through a consensus process. Data on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment (psychological and pharmacological) were obtained through MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and manual searches (1980-2012). Treatment strategies were rated on strength of evidence, and a clinical recommendation for each intervention was made, based on global impression of efficacy, effectiveness, and side effects, using a modified version of the periodic health examination guidelines. Results: These guidelines are presented in 10 sections, including an introduction, principles of diagnosis and management, six sections (Sections 3 through 8) on the specific anxiety-related disorders (panic disorder, agoraphobia, specific phobia, social anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and posttraumatic stress disorder), and two additional sections on special populations (children/adolescents, pregnant/lactating women, and the elderly) and clinical issues in patients with comorbid conditions. Conclusions: Anxiety and related disorders are very common in clinical practice, and frequently comorbid with other psychiatric and medical conditions. Optimal management requires a good understanding of the efficacy and side effect profiles of pharmacological and psychological treatments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据