OBJECTIVE Various approaches to cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) have been shown to be effective for social anxiety disorder. For psychodynamic therapy, evidence for efficacy in this disorder is scant. The authors tested the efficacy of psychodynamic therapy and CBT in social anxiety disorder in a multicenter randomized controlled trial. METHOD In an outpatient setting, 495 patients with social anxiety disorder were randomly assigned to manual-guided CBT (N=209), manual-guided psychodynamic therapy (N=207), or a waiting list condition (N=79). Assessments were made at baseline and at end of treatment. Primary outcome measures were rates of remission and response, based on the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale applied by raters blind to group assignment. Several secondary measures were assessed as well. RESULTS Remission rates in the CBT, psychodynamic therapy, and waiting list groups were 36%, 26%, and 9%, respectively. Response rates were 60%, 52%, and 15%, respectively. CBT and psychodynamic therapy were significantly superior to waiting list for both remission and response. CBT was significantly superior to psychodynamic therapy for remission but not for response. Between-group effect sizes for remission and response were small. Secondary outcome measures showed significant differences in favor of CBT for measures of social phobia and interpersonal problems, but not for depression. CONCLUSIONS CBT and psychodynamic therapy were both efficacious in treating social anxiety disorder, but there were significant differences in favor of CBT. For CBT, the response rate was comparable to rates reported in Swedish and German studies in recent years. For psychodynamic therapy, the response rate was comparable to rates reported for pharmacotherapy and cognitive-behavioral group therapy.

IgA-EmA and IgA-anti-TG2 tests appear highly accurate to diagnose CD. IgG-anti-DGP tests may help in excluding CD. IgA-AGA and IgA-DGP tests show inferior accuracy. POC tests may achieve high accuracy in the hands of experienced readers, but IgA-anti-TG2/EmA were superior.

The number of publications investigating costs in EDs has increased recently. However, no COI provided a comprehensive estimate of costs, and the comparability of CEA was limited. Nonetheless, the results indicate that the costs arising from EDs are substantial.

Costs resulting from health care utilization and productivity loss are substantial, although the sample studied had not received sufficient treatment. Future research should analyze the development of costs over time.

ObjectiveTo analyse predictors of costs in dementia from a societal perspective in a longitudinal setting.MethodHealthcare resource use and costs were assessed retrospectively using a questionnaire in four waves at 6-month intervals in a sample of dementia patients (N = 175). Sociodemographic data, dementia severity and comorbidity at baseline, cognitive impairment and impairment in basic and instrumental activities of daily living were also recorded. Linear mixed regression models with random intercepts for individuals were used to analyse predictors of total and sector-specific costs.ResultsImpairment in activities of daily living significantly predicted total costs in dementia patients, with associations between basic activities of daily living and formal care costs on the one and instrumental activities of daily living and informal care costs on the other hand. Nursing home residence was associated with lower total costs than residence in the community. There was no effect of cognition on total or sector-specific costs.ConclusionCognitive deficits in dementia are associated with costs only via their effect on the patients' capacity for activities of daily living. Transition into a nursing home may reduce total costs from a societal perspective, owing to the fact that a high amount of informal care required by severely demented patients prior to transition into a nursing home may cause higher costs than inpatient nursing care.