Kraepelinian dichotomy

Emil Kraepelin (1856-1926)

The Kraepelinian dichotomy is the division of the major endogenous psychoses into the disease concepts of dementia praecox, which was reformulated as schizophrenia by Eugen Bleuler by 1908,[1][2] and manic-depressive psychosis, which has now been reconceived as bipolar disorder.[3] This division was formally introduced in the sixth edition of Emil Kraepelin's psychiatric textbook Psychiatrie. Ein Lehrbuch für Studirende und Aerzte, published in 1899.[3] It has been highly influential on modern psychiatric classification systems, the DSM-IV-TR and ICD-10, and is reflected in the taxonomic separation of schizophrenia from affective psychosis.[4] However, there is also a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder to cover cases that seem to show symptoms of both.

History

Karl Ludwig Kahlbaum (1828-1899)

The Kraepelinian system and the modern classification of psychoses are ultimately derived from the insights of Karl Kahlbaum.[5] In 1863 the Prussian psychiatrist published his habilitation which was entitled, Die Gruppierung der psychischen Krankheiten (The Classification of Psychiatric Diseases).[6] In this text he reviewed the then heterogeneous state of medical taxonomies of mental illness and enumerated the existence of some thirty such nosologies from the early seventeenth-century until the mid-nineteenth-century.[7] The major contribution of his published dissertation, which is still the foundation of modern psychiatric nosology,[7] was to first formulate the clinical method for the classification of psychosis by symptom, course and outcome.[8]

Kahlbaum also differentiated between two major groups of mental illnesses which he termed vecordia and vesania.[7]

Emil Kraepelin first introduced his proposed dichotomy between the endogenous psychoses of manic-depressive illness and dementia praecox during a public lecture in Heidelberg, Germany on 27 November 1898.[9]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Jablensky 2007, p. 383; Greene 2007, p. 362
  2. ↑ Yuhas, Daisy. "Throughout History, Defining Schizophrenia Has Remained a Challenge". Scientific American Mind (March 2013). Retrieved 2 March 2013.
  3. 1 2 Decker 2007, p. 399.
  4. ↑ Greene 2007, p. 361; Palm & Möller 2011, p. 318
  5. ↑ Jablensky 1999, p. 96; Berrios, Luque & Villagrán 2003, p. 126
  6. ↑ Noll 2007, p. 242; Kahlbaum 1863
  7. 1 2 3 Angst 2002, p. 6.
  8. ↑ Angst 2002, p. 6; Möller 2008, p. 60
  9. ↑ Noll 2007, p. 262.

Bibliography

  • Angst, J. (2002). "Historical aspects of the dichotomy between manic-depressive disorders and schizophrenia". Schizophrenia Research. 57 (1): 5–13. doi:10.1016/S0920-9964(02)00328-6. PMID 12165371.
  • Angst, J.; Gamma, A. (2008). "Diagnosis and course of affective psychoses: was Kraepelin right?". European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 258: 107–10. doi:10.1007/s00406-008-2013-2. PMID 18516522.
  • Bentall, R. (2006). "Madness explained: why we must reject the Kraepelinian paradigm and replace it with a 'complaint-orientated' approach to understanding mental illness". Medical Hypotheses. 66 (2): 220–33. doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2005.09.026. PMID 16300903.
  • Berrios, German E.; Luque, Rogelio; Villagrán, José M. (2003). "Schizophrenia: a conceptual history". International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy. 3 (2): 111–40.
  • Bora, E.; Yucel,, M.; Fornito, A.; Berk, M.; Pantelis, C. (2008). "Major psychoses with mixed psychotic and mood symptoms: are mixed psychoses associated with different neurobiological markers?". Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 118 (3): 172–87. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.2008.01230.x. ISSN 0001-690X. PMID 18699952.
  • Briole, G. (2012). "Emil Kraepelin: The Fragility of a Colossal Oeuvre". Hurly-Burly 8: 125-147.
  • Craddock, N.; Owen, M.J. (2005). "The beginning of the end for the Kraepelinian dichotomy". British Journal of Psychiatry. 186 (5): 364–6. doi:10.1192/bjp.186.5.364. PMID 15863738.
  • Craddock, N.; Owen, M. J. (2010). "The Kraepelinian dichotomy - going, going... but still not gone". The British Journal of Psychiatry. 196 (2): 92–5. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.109.073429. ISSN 0007-1250. PMC 2815936. PMID 20118450.
  • Crow, T. J. (2008). "Craddock & Owen vs Kraepelin: 85 years late, mesmerised by 'polygenes'". Schizophrenia Research. 103 (1–3): 156–60. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2008.03.001. PMID 18434093.
  • Cuesta, M. J.; Peralta, V. (2009). "Psychopathological assessment of schizophrenia: relevance for classification". Current Psychiatry Reports. 11 (4): 324–31. doi:10.1007/s11920-009-0047-4. PMID 19635242.
  • Decker, Hannah S. (2007). "How Kraepelinian was Kraepelin? How Kraepelinian are the neo-Kraepelinians? - from Emil Kraepelin to the DSM-III". History of Psychiatry. 18 (3): 337–60. doi:10.1177/0957154X07078976.
  • deVries, M. W (2008). "Multifactorial inheritance, rates of maturation and psychiatry's taxonomic dilemma". European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 258: 25–8. doi:10.1007/s00406-008-2005-2. PMID 18516513.
  • Fischer, B. A.; Carpenter, W. T. (2009). "Will the Kraepelinian Dichotomy Survive DSM-V?". Neuropsychopharmacology. 34 (9): 2081–7. doi:10.1038/npp.2009.32. PMC 2721021. PMID 19295511.
  • Gaebel, W.; Zielasek, J. (2008). "The DSM-V initiative "deconstructing psychosis" in the context of Kraepelin's concept on nosology". European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 258 (Suppl. 2): 41–7. doi:10.1007/s00406-008-2009-y. PMID 18516517.
  • Greene, Talya (2007). "The Kraepelinian dichotomy: the twin pillars crumbling?". History of Psychiatry. 18 (3): 361–79. doi:10.1177/0957154X07078977.
  • Häfner, Heinz; Heiden, Wolfram an der; Maurer, Kurt (2008). "Evidence for separate diseases?". European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 258 (Suppl. 2): 85–96. doi:10.1007/s00406-008-2011-4. PMID 18516520.
  • Hippius, H.; Müller, N. (2008). "The work of Emil Kraepelin and his research group in München". European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 258 (Suppl. 2): 3–11. doi:10.1007/s00406-008-2001-6. PMID 18516510.
  • Jablensky, Assen (1999). "The conflict of the nosologists: views on schizophrenia and manic-depressive illness in the early part of the 20th century". Schizophrenia Research. 39 (2): 95–100. doi:10.1016/S0920-9964(99)00106-1. PMID 10507518.
  • Jablensky, Assen (2007). "Living in a Kraepelinian world. Kraepelin's impact on modern psychiatry". History of Psychiatry. 18 (3): 381–8. doi:10.1177/0957154X07079690.
  • Kahlbaum, Karl Ludwig (1863). Die Gruppierung der psychischen Krankheiten und die Eintheilung der Seelenstörungen: Entwurf einer historisch-kritischen Darstellung der bisherigen Eintheilungen und Versuch zur Anbahnung einer empirisch-wissenschaftlichen Grundlage der Psychiatrie als klinischer Disciplin. Danzig: Kafemann.
  • Lake, Charles Ray; Hurwitz, Nathaniel (2008). "Schizoaffective Disorder—Its Rise and Fall: Perspectives for DSM-V". Clinical Schizophrenia & Related Psychoses. 2 (1): 91–7. doi:10.3371/csrp.2.1.8.
  • Maier, Wolfgang (2006). "Do schizoaffective disorders exist at all?". Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 113 (5): 369–371. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.2006.00763.x. ISSN 0001-690X. PMID 16603028.
  • Möller, Hans-Jürgen; Bottlender, R.; Gross, A; Hoff, P.; Wittmann, J.; Wegner, U.; Strauss, A. (2002). "The Kraepelinian dichotomy: preliminary results of a 15-year follow-up study on functional psychoses: focus on negative symptoms". Schizophrenia Research. 56 (1–2): 87–94. doi:10.1016/S0920-9964(01)00252-3. PMID 12084423.
  • Möller, Hans-Jürgen (2008). "Systematic of psychiatric disorders between categorical and dimensional approaches: Kraepelin's dichotomy and beyond". European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 258 (Suppl. 2): 48–73. doi:10.1007/s00406-008-2004-3. PMID 18516518.
  • Müller, N.; Schwarz, M. J (2008). "A psychoneuroimmunological perspective to Emil Kraepelins dichotomy". European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 258: 97–106. doi:10.1007/s00406-008-2012-3.
  • Noll, Richard (2007). The Encyclopedia of Schizophrenia and other Psychotic Disorders (3rd ed.). New York: Infobase Publishing. ISBN 0-8160-6405-9.
  • Palm, Ulrich; Möller, Hans-Jürgen (2011). "Reception of Kraepelin's ideas 1900–1960". Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences. 65 (4): 318–325. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1819.2011.02226.x. PMID 21682810.
  • Pilgrim, D. (2002). "The biopsychosocial model in Anglo-American psychiatry: past, present and future". Journal of Mental Health. 11 (6): 585–94. doi:10.1080/09638230020023930.
  • Radden, Jennifer (1996). "Lumps and Bumps:Kantian Faculty Psychology, Phrenology, and Twentieth-Century Psychiatric Classification". Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology. 3 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1353/ppp.1996.0008. ISSN 1086-3303.
  • Roelcke, Volker (1997). "Biologizing social facts: An early 20th century debate on Kraepelin's concepts of culture, neurasthenia, and degeneration". Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry. 21 (4): 383–403. doi:10.1023/A:1005393121931.
  • Rogler, L.H. (1997). "Making Sense of Historical Changes in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: Five Propositions". Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 38 (1): 9–20. doi:10.2307/2955358. PMID 9097505.
  • Stefanis, N. (2008). "Genes do not read DSM-IV: implications for psychosis classification". Annals of General Psychiatry. 7 (Suppl 1): S68. doi:10.1186/1744-859X-7-S1-S68.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.