Abstract：
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of data on the mixed specifier from developing countries like India.
OBJECTIVE: In this background, the present study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of \"mixed specifier\" in patients with unipolar depression and bipolar depression. The additional aim was to evaluate the sociodemographic and clinical correlates of the mixed specifier.
METHODS: 110 patients (51 diagnosed with current episode unipolar depression and 59 diagnosed with current episode bipolar depression) were evaluated on DSM-5 criteria for mixed specifier for depression, Clinically Useful Depression Outcome Scale, Koukopoulos Mixed Depression Rating Scale, Hamilton depression rating scale (HDRS) and Young mania rating scale.
RESULTS: According to DSM-5, 11 (21.56%) out of the 51 patients with unipolar depression fulfilled at least 3 out of the 7 criteria for the mixed specifier for depression, and 14 (23.72%) out of 59 patients with bipolar depression fulfilled the criteria for the mixed specifier, with no significant difference in the prevalence across the 2 groups. There was no significant difference in the sociodemographic and clinical profile of those with and without mixed features in both unipolar and bipolar depression groups. However, those with mixed and without mixed features differ on certain depressive symptoms as assessed on HDRS.
CONCLUSIONS: About one-fifth of patients with unipolar and bipolar depression have mixed features during the acute phase of depression.
OBJECTIVE: In this background, the present study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of \"mixed specifier\" in patients with unipolar depression and bipolar depression. The additional aim was to evaluate the sociodemographic and clinical correlates of the mixed specifier.
METHODS: 110 patients (51 diagnosed with current episode unipolar depression and 59 diagnosed with current episode bipolar depression) were evaluated on DSM-5 criteria for mixed specifier for depression, Clinically Useful Depression Outcome Scale, Koukopoulos Mixed Depression Rating Scale, Hamilton depression rating scale (HDRS) and Young mania rating scale.
RESULTS: According to DSM-5, 11 (21.56%) out of the 51 patients with unipolar depression fulfilled at least 3 out of the 7 criteria for the mixed specifier for depression, and 14 (23.72%) out of 59 patients with bipolar depression fulfilled the criteria for the mixed specifier, with no significant difference in the prevalence across the 2 groups. There was no significant difference in the sociodemographic and clinical profile of those with and without mixed features in both unipolar and bipolar depression groups. However, those with mixed and without mixed features differ on certain depressive symptoms as assessed on HDRS.
CONCLUSIONS: About one-fifth of patients with unipolar and bipolar depression have mixed features during the acute phase of depression.
摘要：
背景：缺乏来自印度等发展中国家的混合指定者的数据。
目的：在此背景下，本研究旨在评估单相抑郁和双相抑郁患者中“混合说明符”的患病率。另一个目的是评估混合说明符的社会人口统计学和临床相关性。
方法：110例患者（51例被诊断为当前发作的单相抑郁症和59例被诊断为当前发作的双相抑郁症）根据DSM-5标准对抑郁症的混合规范进行评估。临床有用的抑郁结果量表，Koukopoulos混合抑郁量表，汉密尔顿抑郁量表（HDRS）和Young躁狂量表。
结果：根据DSM-5，在51例单相抑郁症患者中，有11例（21.56％）满足了抑郁症混合说明符的7项标准中的至少3项，59例双相抑郁患者中有14例(23.72%)符合混合说明符的标准，两组的患病率没有显着差异。在单相和双相抑郁组中，有和没有混合特征的人的社会人口统计学和临床特征没有显着差异。然而,根据HDRS评估，具有混合特征和不具有混合特征的患者在某些抑郁症状方面存在差异。
结论：约五分之一的单相和双相抑郁症患者在抑郁症急性期具有混合特征。
目的：在此背景下，本研究旨在评估单相抑郁和双相抑郁患者中“混合说明符”的患病率。另一个目的是评估混合说明符的社会人口统计学和临床相关性。
方法：110例患者（51例被诊断为当前发作的单相抑郁症和59例被诊断为当前发作的双相抑郁症）根据DSM-5标准对抑郁症的混合规范进行评估。临床有用的抑郁结果量表，Koukopoulos混合抑郁量表，汉密尔顿抑郁量表（HDRS）和Young躁狂量表。
结果：根据DSM-5，在51例单相抑郁症患者中，有11例（21.56％）满足了抑郁症混合说明符的7项标准中的至少3项，59例双相抑郁患者中有14例(23.72%)符合混合说明符的标准，两组的患病率没有显着差异。在单相和双相抑郁组中，有和没有混合特征的人的社会人口统计学和临床特征没有显着差异。然而,根据HDRS评估，具有混合特征和不具有混合特征的患者在某些抑郁症状方面存在差异。
结论：约五分之一的单相和双相抑郁症患者在抑郁症急性期具有混合特征。
