Search

Background There has been much speculation about untoward effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on psychological symptoms. OCD may be expected to be especially impacted. Our aim was to distil the current evidence base on relationships between the pandemic and obsessive-compulsive symptoms, in patients, and general population samples. Methods We conducted a rapid scoping review, in the form of a systematic literature search, coupled with narrative review. 32 relevant papers were identified. Results and interpretation (1) A sizable proportion of people with OCD (but not all) experienced/reported symptom worsening during the pandemic, especially during initial restrictions (approximately 20–65 % of cases in longitudinal studies); (2) contamination/washing symptoms appeared particularly susceptible; and (3) OCD symptoms in general population samples were associated with trait compulsivity and pandemic-related-stress. The literature was heterogeneous with various methodological issues being commonplace. Future directions The review identified important unaddressed issues: how should exposure based therapy be adapted during pandemics? How can we minimise harm from exacerbation of OCD in vulnerable individuals arising from public health messaging? Why do some but not all OCD patients experience worsening? And does Covid-19 infection affect (or lead to) OCD symptoms?

Functional neurological disorder (FND) is a core neuropsychiatric condition. To date, promising yet inconsistently identified neural circuit profiles have been observed in patients with FND, suggesting that gaps remain in our systems-level neurobiological understanding. As such, other important physiological variables, including autonomic, endocrine, and inflammation findings, need to be contextualized for a more complete mechanistic picture.The investigators conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of available case-control and cohort studies of FND. PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase databases were searched for studies from January 1, 1900, to September 1, 2020, that investigated autonomic, endocrine, and inflammation markers in patients with FND. Sixty-six of 2,056 screened records were included in the review, representing 1,699 patients; data from 20 articles were used in the meta-analysis.Findings revealed that children and adolescents with FND, compared with healthy control subjects (HCs), have increased resting heart rate (HR); there is also a tendency toward reduced resting HR variability in patients with FND across the lifespan compared with HCs. In adults, peri-ictal HR differentiated patients with functional seizures from those with epileptic seizures. Other autonomic and endocrine profiles for patients with FND were heterogeneous, with several studies highlighting the importance of individual differences.Inflammation research in FND remains in its early stages. Moving forward, there is a need for the use of larger sample sizes to consider the complex interplay between functional neurological symptoms and behavioral, psychological, autonomic, endocrine, inflammation, neuroimaging, and epigenetic/genetic data. More research is also needed to determine whether FND is mechanistically (and etiologically) similar or distinct across phenotypes.

Background and purpose Functional neurological disorder (FND) is common, and symptoms can be severe. There have been no international large-scale studies of patient experiences of FND. Methods A patient questionnaire was created to assess FND patient characteristics, symptom comorbidities and illness perceptions. Respondents were recruited internationally through an open access questionnaire via social media and patient groups over a month-long period. Results In total, 1048 respondents from 16 countries participated. Mean age was 42 years (86% female). Median FND symptom duration was 5 years, and median time from first symptom to diagnosis was 2 years. Mean number of current symptoms (core FND and associated) was 9.9. Many respondents had associated symptoms, for example fatigue (93%), memory difficulties (80%) and headache (70%). Self-reported psychiatric comorbidities were relatively common (depression, 43%; anxiety, 51%; panic, 20%; and post-traumatic stress disorder, 22%). Most respondents reported that FND had multiple causes, including physical and psychological. Conclusions This large survey adds further evidence that people with FND typically have high levels of multiple symptom comorbidity with resultant distress. It also supports the notion that associated physical symptoms are of particular clinical significance in FND patients. Dualistic ideas of FND were not supported by respondents, who generally preferred to conceptualize the disorder as one at the interface of mind and brain. The need for a broad approach to this poorly served patient group is highlighted. Potential selection and response biases due to distribution of the survey online, mostly via FND patient groups, are a key limitation.

Background The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on mental health is still being unravelled. It is important to identify which individuals are at greatest risk of worsening symptoms. This study aimed to examine changes in depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms using prospective and retrospective symptom change assessments, and to find and examine the effect of key risk factors. Method Online questionnaires were administered to 34 465 individuals (aged 16 years or above) in April/May 2020 in the UK, recruited from existing cohorts or via social media. Around one-third (n = 12 718) of included participants had prior diagnoses of depression or anxiety and had completed pre-pandemic mental health assessments (between September 2018 and February 2020), allowing prospective investigation of symptom change. Results Prospective symptom analyses showed small decreases in depression (PHQ-9: −0.43 points) and anxiety [generalised anxiety disorder scale – 7 items (GAD)-7: −0.33 points] and increases in PTSD (PCL-6: 0.22 points). Conversely, retrospective symptom analyses demonstrated significant large increases (PHQ-9: 2.40; GAD-7 = 1.97), with 55% reported worsening mental health since the beginning of the pandemic on a global change rating. Across both prospective and retrospective measures of symptom change, worsening depression, anxiety and PTSD symptoms were associated with prior mental health diagnoses, female gender, young age and unemployed/student status. Conclusions We highlight the effect of prior mental health diagnoses on worsening mental health during the pandemic and confirm previously reported sociodemographic risk factors. Discrepancies between prospective and retrospective measures of changes in mental health may be related to recall bias-related underestimation of prior symptom severity.

Functional neurological (conversion) disorder (FND) is a neuropsychiatric condition whereby individuals present with sensorimotor symptoms incompatible with other neurological disorders. Early-life maltreatment (ELM) is a risk factor for developing FND, yet few studies have investigated brain network-trauma relationships in this population. In this neuroimaging-gene expression study, we used two graph theory approaches to elucidate ELM subtype effects on resting-state functional connectivity architecture in 30 patients with motor FND. Twenty-one individuals with comparable depression, anxiety, and ELM scores were used as psychiatric controls. Thereafter, we compared trauma endophenotypes in FND with regional differences in transcriptional gene expression as measured by the Allen Human Brain Atlas (AHBA). In FND patients only, we found that early-life physical abuse severity, and to a lesser extent physical neglect, correlated with corticolimbic weighted-degree functional connectivity. Connectivity profiles influenced by physical abuse occurred in limbic (amygdalar-hippocampal), paralimbic (cingulo-insular and ventromedial prefrontal), and cognitive control (ventrolateral prefrontal) areas, as well as in sensorimotor and visual cortices. These findings held adjusting for individual differences in depression/anxiety, PTSD, and motor phenotypes. In FND, physical abuse also correlated with amygdala and insula coupling to motor cortices. In exploratory analyses, physical abuse correlated connectivity maps overlapped with the AHBA spatial expression of three gene clusters: (i) neuronal morphogenesis and synaptic transmission genes in limbic/paralimbic areas; (ii) locomotory behavior and neuronal generation genes in left-lateralized structures; and (iii) nervous system development and cell motility genes in right-lateralized structures. These circuit-specific architectural profiles related to individual differences in childhood physical abuse burden advance our understanding of the pathophysiology of FND.

BackgroundCatatonia, a severe neuropsychiatric syndrome, has few studies of sufficient scale to clarify its epidemiology or pathophysiology. We aimed to characterise demographic associations, peripheral inflammatory markers and outcome of catatonia.MethodsElectronic healthcare records were searched for validated clinical diagnoses of catatonia. In a case–control study, demographics and inflammatory markers were compared in psychiatric inpatients with and without catatonia. In a cohort study, the two groups were compared in terms of their duration of admission and mortality.ResultsWe identified 1456 patients with catatonia (of whom 25.1% had two or more episodes) and 24 956 psychiatric inpatients without catatonia. Incidence was 10.6 episodes of catatonia per 100 000 person-years. Patients with and without catatonia were similar in sex, younger and more likely to be of Black ethnicity. Serum iron was reduced in patients with catatonia [11.6 v. 14.2 μmol/L, odds ratio (OR) 0.65 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45–0.95), p = 0.03] and creatine kinase was raised [2545 v. 459 IU/L, OR 1.53 (95% CI 1.29–1.81), p < 0.001], but there was no difference in C-reactive protein or white cell count. N-Methyl-d-aspartate receptor antibodies were significantly associated with catatonia, but there were small numbers of positive results. Duration of hospitalisation was greater in the catatonia group (median: 43 v. 25 days), but there was no difference in mortality after adjustment.ConclusionsIn the largest clinical study of catatonia, we found catatonia occurred in approximately 1 per 10 000 person-years. Evidence for a proinflammatory state was mixed. Catatonia was associated with prolonged inpatient admission but not with increased mortality.

Background A substantial portion of people with COVID-19 subsequently experience lasting symptoms including fatigue, shortness of breath, and neurological complaints such as cognitive dysfunction many months after acute infection. Emerging evidence suggests that this condition, commonly referred to as long COVID but also known as post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) or post-COVID-19 condition, could become a significant global health burden. Main text While the number of studies investigating the post-COVID-19 condition is increasing, there is no agreement on how this new disease should be defined and diagnosed in clinical practice and what relevant outcomes to measure. There is an urgent need to optimise and standardise outcome measures for this important patient group both for clinical services and for research and to allow comparing and pooling of data. Conclusions A Core Outcome Set for post-COVID-19 condition should be developed in the shortest time frame possible, for improvement in data quality, harmonisation, and comparability between different geographical locations. We call for a global initiative, involving all relevant partners, including, but not limited to, healthcare professionals, researchers, methodologists, patients, and caregivers. We urge coordinated actions aiming to develop a Core Outcome Set (COS) for post-COVID-19 condition in both the adult and paediatric populations.

Adverse life events precede the onset of functional neurological disorder (FND, also known as conversion disorder) more commonly than other neuropsychiatric conditions, but their aetiological role is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and quantitative analysis of the type, timing and number of life events preceding the onset of FND in adults, and a meta-analysis of the proportions of types of events in controlled studies. Fifty-one studies of different designs, covering 4247 patients, were eligible for inclusion. There was no clear majority of any type of preceding event. Family problems were the most common category of events, followed by relationship problems. Females were more likely to experience preceding family/relationship problems than males, who reported more work problems. Family problems were the commonest type of preceding event in studies in developing countries, whereas family and health problems were equally common in developed countries. Abuse was associated with early symptom onset, while patients with later onset were more likely to report family problems. The median number of events was one, and the events occurred closer to onset than in controls. Meta-analysis found that family, relationship and work events were all relatively more common in patients than pathological controls, as were events where symptoms might provide a solution to the stressor. In conclusion, although a range of events precede the onset of FND, they do not appear to do so uniformly. This may support a different aetiological role for stressors than in other disorders, although the support is indirect and the quality generally low.

Background The impact of COVID-19 on physical and mental health and employment after hospitalisation with acute disease is not well understood. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of COVID-19-related hospitalisation on health and employment, to identify factors associated with recovery, and to describe recovery phenotypes. Methods The Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) is a multicentre, long-term follow-up study of adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital in the UK with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19, involving an assessment between 2 and 7 months after discharge, including detailed recording of symptoms, and physiological and biochemical testing. Multivariable logistic regression was done for the primary outcome of patient-perceived recovery, with age, sex, ethnicity, body-mass index, comorbidities, and severity of acute illness as covariates. A post-hoc cluster analysis of outcomes for breathlessness, fatigue, mental health, cognitive impairment, and physical performance was done using the clustering large applications k-medoids approach. The study is registered on the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN10980107). Findings We report findings for 1077 patients discharged from hospital between March 5 and Nov 30, 2020, who underwent assessment at a median of 5·9 months (IQR 4·9–6·5) after discharge. Participants had a mean age of 58 years (SD 13); 384 (36%) were female, 710 (69%) were of white ethnicity, 288 (27%) had received mechanical ventilation, and 540 (50%) had at least two comorbidities. At follow-up, only 239 (29%) of 830 participants felt fully recovered, 158 (20%) of 806 had a new disability (assessed by the Washington Group Short Set on Functioning), and 124 (19%) of 641 experienced a health-related change in occupation. Factors associated with not recovering were female sex, middle age (40–59 years), two or more comorbidities, and more severe acute illness. The magnitude of the persistent health burden was substantial but only weakly associated with the severity of acute illness. Four clusters were identified with different severities of mental and physical health impairment (n=767): very severe (131 patients, 17%), severe (159, 21%), moderate along with cognitive impairment (127, 17%), and mild (350, 46%). Of the outcomes used in the cluster analysis, all were closely related except for cognitive impairment. Three (3%) of 113 patients in the very severe cluster, nine (7%) of 129 in the severe cluster, 36 (36%) of 99 in the moderate cluster, and 114 (43%) of 267 in the mild cluster reported feeling fully recovered. Persistently elevated serum C-reactive protein was positively associated with cluster severity. Interpretation We identified factors related to not recovering after hospital admission with COVID-19 at 6 months after discharge (eg, female sex, middle age, two or more comorbidities, and more acute severe illness), and four different recovery phenotypes. The severity of physical and mental health impairments were closely related, whereas cognitive health impairments were independent. In clinical care, a proactive approach is needed across the acute severity spectrum, with interdisciplinary working, wide access to COVID-19 holistic clinical services, and the potential to stratify care. Funding UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health Research.

The scientific community rapidly responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by developing novel SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (table 1). As of early June 2021, an estimated 2 billion doses have been administered worldwide.1 Neurological adverse events following immunisation (AEFI), such as cerebral venous sinus thrombosis and demyelinating episodes, have been reported. In some countries, these have led to the temporary halting of both vaccine trials and roll-out programmes. In the absence of clear evidence of causal associations between the vaccine and adverse events, or the rarity of the AEFIs themselves, programmes have thus far been restarted, although sometimes with modifications to recommendations.2 View this table: Table 1 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines approved for use by at least one regulatory body at the time of submission (early June 2021)71 Transient influenza-like symptoms such as headache, myalgia and fatigue have been reported in up to 5% of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine recipients in clinical trials,3 4 although these symptoms often indicate an appropriate immune response to vaccination.5 More severe potential adverse effects in the open-label phase of vaccine roll-outs are being collected through national surveillance systems. In the USA, roughly 372 adverse events have been reported per million doses, which is a lower rate than expected based on the clinical trials.6 In the UK, adverse events are reported via the Coronavirus Yellow Card reporting website. As of early June 2021, approximately 250 000 Yellow Cards have been submitted, equating to around three to seven Yellow Cards per 1000 doses.7 For comparison, the 2010 Pandemrix vaccination had a rate of around 0.6 Yellow Card submissions per 1000 doses.8 Increased pharmacovigilance surrounding SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations may lead to surveillance bias,9 safety alerts may lead to notoriety bias10 and recall bias may also occur. Nevertheless, with large numbers of people being vaccinated, often with a two-dose schedule, rare complications …

There is accumulating evidence of the neurological and neuropsychiatric features of infection with SARS-CoV-2. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to describe the characteristics of the early literature and estimate point prevalences for neurological and neuropsychiatric manifestations. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL up to 18 July 2020 for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies and case series. Studies reporting prevalences of neurological or neuropsychiatric symptoms were synthesised into meta-analyses to estimate pooled prevalence. 13 292 records were screened by at least two authors to identify 215 included studies, of which there were 37 cohort studies, 15 case-control studies, 80 cross-sectional studies and 83 case series from 30 countries. 147 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The symptoms with the highest prevalence were anosmia (43.1% (95% CI 35.2% to 51.3%), n=15 975, 63 studies), weakness (40.0% (95% CI 27.9% to 53.5%), n=221, 3 studies), fatigue (37.8% (95% CI 31.6% to 44.4%), n=21 101, 67 studies), dysgeusia (37.2% (95% CI 29.8% to 45.3%), n=13 686, 52 studies), myalgia (25.1% (95% CI 19.8% to 31.3%), n=66 268, 76 studies), depression (23.0% (95% CI 11.8% to 40.2%), n=43 128, 10 studies), headache (20.7% (95% CI 16.1% to 26.1%), n=64 613, 84 studies), anxiety (15.9% (5.6% to 37.7%), n=42 566, 9 studies) and altered mental status (8.2% (95% CI 4.4% to 14.8%), n=49 326, 19 studies). Heterogeneity for most clinical manifestations was high. Neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms of COVID-19 in the pandemic’s early phase are varied and common. The neurological and psychiatric academic communities should develop systems to facilitate high-quality methodologies, including more rapid examination of the longitudinal course of neuropsychiatric complications of newly emerging diseases and their relationship to neuroimaging and inflammatory biomarkers.

SARS-CoV-2 is associated with new-onset neurological and psychiatric conditions. Detailed clinical data, including factors associated with recovery, are lacking, hampering prediction modelling and targeted therapeutic interventions. In a UK-wide cross-sectional surveillance study of adult hospitalized patients during the first COVID-19 wave, with multi-professional input from general and sub-specialty neurologists, psychiatrists, stroke physicians, and intensivists, we captured detailed data on demographics, risk factors, pre-COVID-19 Rockwood frailty score, comorbidities, neurological presentation and outcome. A priori clinical case definitions were used, with cross-specialty independent adjudication for discrepant cases. Multivariable logistic regression was performed using demographic and clinical variables, to determine the factors associated with outcome. A total of 267 cases were included. Cerebrovascular events were most frequently reported (131, 49%), followed by other central disorders (95, 36%) including delirium (28, 11%), central inflammatory (25, 9%), psychiatric (25, 9%), and other encephalopathies (17, 7%), including a severe encephalopathy (n = 13) not meeting delirium criteria; and peripheral nerve disorders (41, 15%). Those with the severe encephalopathy, in comparison to delirium, were younger, had higher rates of admission to intensive care and a longer duration of ventilation. Compared to normative data during the equivalent time period prior to the pandemic, cases of stroke in association with COVID-19 were younger and had a greater number of conventional, modifiable cerebrovascular risk factors. Twenty-seven per cent of strokes occurred in patients 60 years old, the younger stroke patients presented with delayed onset from respiratory symptoms, higher rates of multi-vessel occlusion (31%) and systemic thrombotic events. Clinical outcomes varied between disease groups, with cerebrovascular disease conferring the worst prognosis, but this effect was less marked than the pre-morbid factors of older age and a higher pre-COVID-19 frailty score, and a high admission white cell count, which were independently associated with a poor outcome. In summary, this study describes the spectrum of neurological and psychiatric conditions associated with COVID-19. In addition, we identify a severe COVID-19 encephalopathy atypical for delirium, and a phenotype of COVID-19 associated stroke in younger adults with a tendency for multiple infarcts and systemic thromboses. These clinical data will be useful to inform mechanistic studies and stratification of patients in clinical trials., Ross Russell et al. report novel details of COVID-19 neurological complications: multiple overlapping diagnoses in the same patients, a severe encephalopathy atypical for delirium, and a lowered threshold for stroke in younger adults. Higher age, pre-morbid frailty score and white cell count predicted clinical outcome., Graphical Abstract Graphical Abstract

ObjectivesThere is accumulating evidence of the neurological and neuropsychiatric features of infection with SARS-CoV-2. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to describe the characteristics of the early literature and estimate point prevalences for neurological and neuropsychiatric manifestations.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL up to 18 July 2020 for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies and case series. Studies reporting prevalences of neurological or neuropsychiatric symptoms were synthesised into meta-analyses to estimate pooled prevalence.Results13,292 records were screened by at least two authors to identify 215 included studies, of which there were 37 cohort studies, 15 case-control studies, 80 cross-sectional studies and 83 case series from 30 countries. 147 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The symptoms with the highest prevalence were anosmia (43.1% [35.2—51.3], n=15,975, 63 studies), weakness (40.0% [27.9—53.5], n=221, 3 studies), fatigue (37.8% [31.6—44.4], n=21,101, 67 studies), dysgeusia (37.2% [30.0—45.3], n=13,686, 52 studies), myalgia (25.1% [19.8—31.3], n=66.268, 76 studies), depression (23.0 % [11.8—40.2], n=43,128, 10 studies), headache (20.7% [95% CI 16.1—26.1], n=64,613, 84 studies), anxiety (15.9% [5.6—37.7], n=42,566, 9 studies) and altered mental status (8.2% [4.4—14.8], n=49,326, 19 studies). Heterogeneity for most clinical manifestations was high.ConclusionsNeurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms of COVID-19 in the pandemic’s early phase are varied and common. The neurological and psychiatric academic communities should develop systems to facilitate high-quality methodologies, including more rapid examination of the longitudinal course of neuropsychiatric complications of newly emerging diseases and their relationship to neuroimaging and inflammatory biomarkers.

Historical epidemiological perspectives from past pandemics and recent neurobiological evidence link infections and psychoses, leading to concerns that COVID-19 will present a significant risk for the development of psychosis. But are these concerns justified, or mere sensationalism? In this article we review the historical associations between viral infection and the immune system more broadly in the development of psychosis, before critically evaluating the current evidence pertaining to SARS-CoV-2 and risk of psychosis as an acute or post-infectious manifestation of COVID-19. We review the 42 cases of psychosis reported in infected patients to date, and discuss the potential implications of in utero infection on subsequent neurodevelopment and psychiatric risk. Finally, in the context of the wider neurological and psychiatric manifestations of COVID-19 and our current understanding of the aetiology of psychotic disorders, we evaluate possible neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms as well as the numerous challenges in ascribing a causal pathogenic role to the infection.

Highlights • 1st Neuroimaging Workgroup Meeting in Functional Neurological Disorder (FND). • Underscores the importance of FND cohort characterization in brain imaging research. • Details methodological approaches taken in FND neuroimaging research to date. • Research agenda proposed to definitely elucidate the neural circuitry of FND. • Discussions underway regarding having FND researchers join the ENIGMA consortium., Functional neurological disorder (FND) was of great interest to early clinical neuroscience leaders. During the 20th century, neurology and psychiatry grew apart – leaving FND a borderland condition. Fortunately, a renaissance has occurred in the last two decades, fostered by increased recognition that FND is prevalent and diagnosed using “rule-in” examination signs. The parallel use of scientific tools to bridge brain structure - function relationships has helped refine an integrated biopsychosocial framework through which to conceptualize FND. In particular, a growing number of quality neuroimaging studies using a variety of methodologies have shed light on the emerging pathophysiology of FND. This renewed scientific interest has occurred in parallel with enhanced interdisciplinary collaborations, as illustrated by new care models combining psychological and physical therapies and the creation of a new multidisciplinary FND society supporting knowledge dissemination in the field. Within this context, this article summarizes the output of the first International FND Neuroimaging Workgroup meeting, held virtually, on June 17th, 2020 to appraise the state of neuroimaging research in the field and to catalyze large-scale collaborations. We first briefly summarize neural circuit models of FND, and then detail the research approaches used to date in FND within core content areas: cohort characterization; control group considerations; task-based functional neuroimaging; resting-state networks; structural neuroimaging; biomarkers of symptom severity and risk of illness; and predictors of treatment response and prognosis. Lastly, we outline a neuroimaging-focused research agenda to elucidate the pathophysiology of FND and aid the development of novel biologically and psychologically-informed treatments.

Background: Neurological COVID-19 disease has been reported widely, but often without using standard case definitions or detailed diagnostic work up. Several meta-analyses, based on such reports, describe the neurological diagnoses but give little information on outcomes and risk factors. Methods: We conducted an individual patient data meta-analysis of hospitalised patients with neurological COVID-19 disease, using standard case definitions. We invited authors of studies from the first pandemic wave, plus clinicians in the Global COVID-Neuro Network with unpublished data, to contribute, and extracted aggregate data from published reports. We analysed features associated with poor outcome (moderate to severe sequelae or death, 3-6, on the modified Rankin scale) using multivariable models. Findings: We identified 381 studies (31 unpublished) describing 4443 patients with COVID-19 and neurological disease: 83 of these provided IPD for 1979 (45%) patients. Encephalopathy (978 [49%]) and cerebrovascular events (506 [26%]), were the most common diagnoses in the IPD database and aggregate data. Respiratory and systemic symptoms preceded neurological features in 93% of patients; one third developed neurological disease after hospital admission. A poor outcome was more common in patients with cerebrovascular events (76% [95% CI 67-82]), than encephalopathy (54% [42-65]). Intensive care use was high (38% [35-41] overall), and also greater in the cerebrovascular patients. In the cerebrovascular, but not encephalopathic patients, risk factors for poor outcome included breathlessness on admission and elevated D-Dimer. Overall, 30-day mortality was 30% (27-32). The hazard of death was reduced for patients in the WHO European region, but increased in low- and lower-middle-income countries. Interpretation: Neurological COVID-19 disease poses a considerable burden in terms of disease outcomes and use of hospital resources. The different risk factors for encephalopathy and stroke suggest different disease mechanisms which may be amenable to intervention, especially in those who develop neurological symptoms after hospital admission. Funding This study was funded by the UK Medical Research Council’s Global Effort on COVID-19 Programme (MR/V033441/1); UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)-funded Global Health Research Group on Acute Brain Infections (17/63/110); and the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections (NIHR200907), at University of Liverpool in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford (Grant Nos. IS-HPU-1112-10117 and NIHR200907). Declaration of Interests: BS reports a grant from UKRI/DHSC Global Effort on COVID-19 Research (Medical Research Council) and non-financial support from UK National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Group on Brain Infections. SL and TS are supported by a grant from the EU Zika Preparedness Latin American Network consortium (ZikaPLAN). ZikaPLAN has received funding from the EU's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement number 734584. LCG reports non-financial support from Pfizer, non-financial support from Gilead. LB reports grants from GlaxoSmithKline, Research England and Wellcome Trust. AMBM reports grants from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico CNPq/Brazil, and Sao Paulo Research Foundation FAPESP/Brazil. AP reports personal fees from ZAMBON, UCB , BIOMARIN, and ABBvie pharma. TS was an adviser to the GlaxoSmithKline Ebola Vaccine programme, chaired a Siemens Diagnostics clinical advisory board, and advises the WHO Brain Health Unit Forum on Neurology and COVID-19; TS has also previously filed a patent for a test for bacterial meningitis based on a blood test (GB 1606537.7, April 14, 2016), and has grants from the UK Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research. All other authors declare no conflict of interest

Worldwide SARS-CoV-2 vaccination campaigns for prevention of COVID-19 are currently underway. In clinical trials and in open-label monitoring the vaccines have shown efficacy against COVID-19 and there have been limited and transient side effects. Previous vaccination campaigns have taught us that neurological adverse events to vaccinations can occur. In this review, we summarise what is already known about neurological and neuropsychiatric adverse events of COVID-19 vaccinations, and place this in the context of historical vaccination campaigns. There have been a number of neurological and neuropsychiatric adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) in association with SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, however in each case there is either no definitive evidence currently to support causality or recognised adverse events are extremely rare. Causality assessment aids such as the Causality Assessment of an Adverse Event Following Immunization from the World Health Organisation and the Bradford Hill criteria may help us better understand potential neurological and neuropsychiatric adverse events to COVID-19 vaccinations. Functional neurological disorder (FND) can be precipitated by the process of vaccination and has previously been noted to potentially spread between individuals, particularly in younger communities. Importantly FND does not implicate the vaccine constituents and therefore should not hamper ongoing vaccination campaigns. Although neurological and neuropsychiatric AEFI may occur after SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, at present there are no common causally associated neurological adverse events. It is likely that some patients will develop FND in response to vaccination, although this does not implicate vaccine constituents. In cases of future serious neurological or neuropsychiatric AEFIs, judicious and rapid assessment of causality must occur. In general, the benefits of ARS-CoV-2 vaccination at present outweigh the risks from a neurological standpoint, although in specific situations the risk-benefit ratio will vary depending on geographic and demographic factors as well as population risk factors. Ensuring as minimal disruption as possible to ongoing swift worldwide vaccination campaigns is essential to establish the herd immunity required to end the COVID-19 pandemic.

Encephalopathy is a common complication of COVID-19 that can both be a challenge to manage and also negatively impacts prognosis. Whilst encephalopathy may be due to common systemic causes, such as hypoxia, COVID-19 has also been associated with more prolonged encephalopathy due to less common but nevertheless severe complications, such as inflammation of the brain parenchyma, cerebrovascular involvement and seizures, which may be disproportionate to COVID-19 severity and which require specific management. The aim of this review is to provide pragmatic guidance on the management of COVID-19 encephalopathy through a consensus agreement of the Global COVID-19 Neuro-Research Coalition. A systematic literature search of Medline, MedRxiv, and BioRx was conducted between 1st January 2020 and 11th June 2021 with additional review of references cited within the identified bibliographies. A modified Delphi-approach was then undertaken to develop recommendations along with a parallel approach to score the strength of both the recommendation and the supporting evidence. This manuscript presents analysis of contemporaneous evidence for definition, epidemiology, and pathophysiology of COVID-19 encephalopathy and practical guidance for clinical assessment, investigation, and acute and long-term management.

ObjectivesTranscranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been used therapeutically for functional (conversion) motor symptoms but there is limited evidence for its efficacy and the optimal protocol. We examined the feasibility of a novel randomised controlled trial (RCT) protocol of TMS to treat functional limb weakness.DesignA double-blind (patient, outcome assessor) two parallel-arm, controlled RCT.SettingSpecialist neurology and neuropsychiatry services at a large National Health Service Foundation Trust in London, UK.ParticipantsPatients with a diagnosis of functional limb weakness (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - Fifth Edition). Exclusion criteria included comorbid neurological or major psychiatric disorder, contraindications to TMS or previous TMS treatment.InterventionsPatients were randomised to receive either active (single-pulse TMS to primary motor cortex (M1) above resting motor threshold) or inactive treatment (single-pulse TMS to M1 below resting motor threshold). Both groups received two TMS sessions, 4 weeks apart.Outcome measuresWe assessed recruitment, randomisation and retention rates. The primary outcome was patient-rated symptom change (Clinical Global Impression–Improvement scale, CGI-I). Secondary outcomes included clinician-rated symptom change, psychosocial functioning and disability. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, both TMS visits and at 3-month follow-up.ResultsTwenty-two patients were recruited and 21 (96%) were successfully randomised (active=10; inactive=11). Nineteen (91%) patients were included at follow-up (active=9; inactive=10). Completion rates for most outcomes were good (80%–100%). Most patients were satisfied/very satisfied with the trial in both groups, although ratings were higher in the inactive arm (active=60%, inactive=92%). Adverse events were not more common for the active treatment. Treatment effect sizes for patient-rated CGI-I scores were small-moderate (Cliff’s delta=−0.1–0.3, CIs−0.79 to 0.28), reflecting a more positive outcome for the active treatment (67% and 44% of active arm-rated symptoms as ‘much improved’ at session 2 and follow-up, respectively, vs 20% inactive group). Effect sizes for secondary outcomes were variable.ConclusionsOur protocol is feasible. The findings suggest that supramotor threshold TMS of M1 is safe, acceptable and potentially beneficial as a treatment for functional limb weakness. A larger RCT is warranted.Trial registration numberNCT51225587.

Background:Concerns regarding potential neurological complications of COVID-19 are being increasingly reported, primarily in small series. Larger studies have been limited by both geography and specialty. Comprehensive characterisation of clinical syndromes is crucial to allow rational selection and evaluation of potential therapies. The aim of this study was to investigate the breadth of complications of COVID-19 across the UK that affected the brain.Methods:During the exponential phase of the pandemic, we developed an online network of secure rapid-response case report notification portals across the spectrum of major UK neuroscience bodies, comprising the Association of British Neurologists (ABN), the British Association of Stroke Physicians (BASP), and the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych), and representing neurology, stroke, psychiatry, and intensive care. Broad clinical syndromes associated with COVID-19 were classified as a cerebrovascular event (defined as an acute ischaemic, haemorrhagic, or thrombotic vascular event involving the brain parenchyma or subarachnoid space), altered mental status (defined as an acute alteration in personality, behaviour, cognition, or consciousness), peripheral neurology (defined as involving nerve roots, peripheral nerves, neuromuscular junction, or muscle), or other (with free text boxes for those not meeting these syndromic presentations). Physicians were encouraged to report cases prospectively and we permitted recent cases to be notified retrospectively when assigned a confirmed date of admission or initial clinical assessment, allowing identification of cases that occurred before notification portals were available. Data collected were compared with the geographical, demographic, and temporal presentation of overall cases of COVID-19 as reported by UK Government public health bodies.Findings:The ABN portal was launched on April 2, 2020, the BASP portal on April 3, 2020, and the RCPsych portal on April 21, 2020. Data lock for this report was on April 26, 2020. During this period, the platforms received notification of 153 unique cases that met the clinical case definitions by clinicians in the UK, with an exponential growth in reported cases that was similar to overall COVID-19 data from UK Government public health bodies. Median patient age was 71 years (range 23–94; IQR 58–79). Complete clinical datasets were available for 125 (82%) of 153 patients. 77 (62%) of 125 patients presented with a cerebrovascular event, of whom 57 (74%) had an ischaemic stroke, nine (12%) an intracerebral haemorrhage, and one (1%) CNS vasculitis. 39 (31%) of 125 patients presented with altered mental status, comprising nine (23%) patients with unspecified encephalopathy and seven (18%) patients with encephalitis. The remaining 23 (59%) patients with altered mental status fulfilled the clinical case definitions for psychiatric diagnoses as classified by the notifying psychiatrist or neuropsychiatrist, and 21 (92%) of these were new diagnoses. Ten (43%) of 23 patients with neuropsychiatric disorders had new-onset psychosis, six (26%) had a neurocognitive (dementia-like) syndrome, and four (17%) had an affective disorder. 18 (49%) of 37 patients with altered mental status were younger than 60 years and 19 (51%) were older than 60 years, whereas 13 (18%) of 74 patients with cerebrovascular events were younger than 60 years versus 61 (82%) patients older than 60 years. Interpretation:To our knowledge, this is the first nationwide, cross-specialty surveillance study of acute neurological and psychiatric complications of COVID-19. Altered mental status was the second most common presentation, comprising encephalopathy or encephalitis and primary psychiatric diagnoses, often occurring in younger patients. This study provides valuable and timely data that are urgently needed by clinicians, researchers, and funders to inform immediate steps in COVID-19 neuroscience research and health policy. Funding: None.

An increasing proportion of cognitive difficulties are recognized to have a functional cause, the chief clinical indicator of which is internal inconsistency. When these symptoms are impairing or distressing, and not better explained by other disorders, this can be conceptualized as a cognitive variant of functional neurological disorder, termed functional cognitive disorder (FCD). FCD is likely very common in clinical practice but may be under-diagnosed. Clinicians in many settings make liberal use of the descriptive term mild cognitive impairment (MCI) for those with cognitive difficulties not impairing enough to qualify as dementia. However, MCI is an aetiology-neutral description, which therefore includes patients with a wide range of underlying causes. Consequently, a proportion of MCI cases are due to non-neurodegenerative processes, including FCD. Indeed, significant numbers of patients diagnosed with MCI do not ‘convert’ to dementia. The lack of diagnostic specificity for MCI ‘non-progressors’ is a weakness inherent in framing MCI primarily within a deterministic neurodegenerative pathway. It is recognized that depression, anxiety and behavioural changes can represent a prodrome to neurodegeneration; empirical data are required to explore whether the same might hold for subsets of individuals with FCD. Clinicians and researchers can improve study efficacy and patient outcomes by viewing MCI as a descriptive term with a wide differential diagnosis, including potentially reversible components such as FCD. We present a preliminary definition of functional neurological disorder–cognitive subtype, explain its position in relation to other cognitive diagnoses and emerging biomarkers, highlight clinical features that can lead to positive diagnosis (as opposed to a diagnosis of exclusion), and red flags that should prompt consideration of alternative diagnoses. In the research setting, positive identifiers of FCD will enhance our recognition of individuals who are not in a neurodegenerative prodrome, while greater use of this diagnosis in clinical practice will facilitate personalized interventions.

Reply by the current author to the comments made by Mark A Oldham et al (see record 2020-79526-008) and Dorothy Wade et al (see record 2020-79526-009) on the original article (see record 2020-71085-023) We thank Dorothy Wade and colleagues and Mark Oldham and colleagues for their recognition of the cross-speciality effort of members of the UK's major professional neuroscience bodies who undertook this challenging UK-wide study during the exponential phase of the COVID-19 pandemic We also welcome the involvement of geriatricians and psychologists in future research We agree that delirium is common, especially in severe infections and in the intensive care unit As stated in our Article, we acknowledge that the study might have not recorded all such cases Changes in mental status with clear and recognised risk factors were not the focus of this study We agree that if such commonly observed complications were included, they might have substantially increased the number of patients recruited, mirroring the situation in other critical illnesses In this situation, the burden of CNS complications arising from COVID-19 would be even greater than we found in our study (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)

Functional neurological (conversion) disorder (FND) is a prevalent and disabling condition at the intersection of neurology and psychiatry. Advances have been made in elucidating an emerging pathophysiology for motor FND, as well as in identifying evidenced-based physiotherapy and psychotherapy treatments. Despite these gains, important elements of the initial neuropsychiatric assessment of functional movement disorders (FND-movt) and functional limb weakness/paresis (FND-par) have yet to be established. This is an important gap from both diagnostic and treatment planning perspectives. In this article, the authors performed a narrative review to characterize clinically relevant variables across FND-movt and FND-par cohorts, including time course and symptom evolution, precipitating factors, medical and family histories, psychiatric comorbidities, psychosocial factors, physical examination signs, and adjunctive diagnostic tests. Thereafter, the authors propose a preliminary set of clinical content that should be assessed during early-phase patient encounters, in addition to identifying physical signs informing diagnosis and potential use of adjunctive tests for challenging cases. Although clinical history should not be used to make a FND diagnosis, characteristics such as acute onset, precipitating events (e.g., injury and surgery), and a waxing and waning course (including spontaneous remissions) are commonly reported. Active psychiatric symptoms (e.g., depression and anxiety) and ongoing psychosocial stressors also warrant evaluation. Positive physical examination signs (e.g., Hoover's sign and tremor entrainment) are key findings, as one of the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria. The neuropsychiatric assessment proposed emphasizes diagnosing FND by using "rule-in" physical signs while also considering psychiatric and psychosocial factors to aid in the development of a patient-centered treatment plan.

Background and purpose: Cauda equina syndrome (CES) is a neurosurgical emergency which warrants lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Many patients with suggestive symptoms of CES have no radiological correlate. A functional (non-organic) aetiology has been proposed in some, but currently little is known about this patient group and their clinical outcomes. Methods: At a tertiary referral centre, 155 adult patients underwent urgent lumbar MRI for suspected CES in 1 year from December 2014. Data regarding clinical symptoms and follow-up were obtained from records. Patients were divided into CES (n = 25), radiculopathy (n = 68) and scan-negative (SN) groups (n = 62) from scans. Up to 3 years post-discharge, postal questionnaires were sent to patients with Oswestry Disability Index, Pain Catastrophizing score, Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) 9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) 7, PHQ 15 and Work and Social Adjustment Scale measures. Results: No clinical symptoms were found to differentiate CES from SN patients. Functional comorbidities were significantly more common in SN patients but mental health diagnosis frequency did not differ. Follow-up was variable with no consistent referral pathways, particularly for the SN group. 33% (n = 47) responded to the postal questionnaires; high levels of pain, symptom chronicity and disability were ubiquitous but self-reported mental health diagnoses and PHQ 15 were higher for SN patients. Conclusions: Conflicting data suggest further research is needed to investigate the prevalence of mental illness and somatic symptoms in SN cases. SN patients have higher rates of comorbid functional disorders and inconsistent referral pathways. Self-report measures indicate impaired quality of life across all groups. The low response rate limits the generalizability of findings but neuropsychiatric assessment and care pathway optimization should be considered.

IntroductionWe will use an occupational sample to study the impact of COVID-19 on current staff and postgraduate research students at a large UK university. The cohort study will address some of the key questions about COVID-19 for the international community, while also providing feedback to the employer and educator.Methods and analysisParticipants were recruited via email to their University email address. Administrative records were available to compare the composition of volunteer participants to underlying staff and postgraduate student populations of the University. The study comprises a baseline survey, longitudinal follow-up surveys and a viral antibody study. Baseline information was collected in April 2020 including demographics, working situation, current stresses and worries, mental health and neurological symptoms. Personal experiences of COVID-19, indirect experiences and attitudes towards the pandemic were queried, as well as satisfaction with communication and support at work. Longitudinal surveys will assess changes in COVID-19 exposure and mental health. A viral antibody detection component is being planned and will also be longitudinal in nature.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been gained from KCL’s Psychiatry, Nursing and Midwifery Research Ethics Committee (HR-19/20-18247). Participants were provided with information and agreed to a series of consent statements before enrolment. Data are kept on secure servers with access to personally identifiable information limited. Researchers may apply to have access to pseudonymised data. Findings will be disseminated internally to the University and participants, and externally through scientific publications.

OBJECTIVE Altered attentional processing (automatically attending to negative or illness-relevant information) and interpretative biases (interpreting ambiguous information as negative or illness relevant) may be mechanistically involved in functional neurological disorder (FND). Common mechanisms between FND and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) have been proposed but not compared experimentally. METHODS We compared the cognitive task performance of FND, CFS, and healthy control (HC) groups. The tasks assessed attentional bias toward illness-relevant stimuli (visual probe task), attentional control (attention network task), and somatic interpretations (interpretative bias task), alongside self-reported depression, anxiety, fatigue, and general health. RESULTS Thirty-seven participants diagnosed with FND, 52 participants diagnosed with CFS, and 51 HC participants were included. Although participants with CFS showed attentional bias for illness-relevant stimuli relative to HC (t = -3.13, p = .002, d = 0.624), individuals with FND did not (t = -1.59, p = .118, d = 0.379). Both the FND (t = 3.08, p = .003, d = 0.759) and CFS (t = 2.74, p = .007, d = 0.548) groups displayed worse attentional control than did the HC group. Similarly, the FND (t = 3.63, p < .001, d = 0.801) and CFS groups (t = 4.58, p < .001, d = 0.909) showed more somatic interpretative bias than did the HC group. CONCLUSIONS Similar attentional control deficits and somatic interpretative bias in individuals with FND and CFS support potential shared mechanisms underlying symptoms. Interpretative bias toward somatic and illness-relevant stimuli in functional disorders may prove a therapeutic target.

Objectives: This International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Report: (a) summarizes the literature about “driving and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES)”; (b) presents the views of international experts; and (c) proposes an approach to assessing the ability of persons with PNES (PwPNES) to drive. Methods: Phase 1: Systematic literature review. Phase 2: Collection of international expert opinion using SurveyMonkey®. Experts included the members of the ILAE PNES Task Force and individuals with relevant publications since 2000. Phase 3: Joint analysis of the findings and refinement of conclusions by all participants using email. As an ILAE Report, the resulting text was reviewed by the Psychiatry Commission, the ILAE Task Force on Driving Guidelines, and Executive Committee. Results: Eight studies identified by the systematic review process failed to provide a firm evidence base for PNES-related driving regulations, but suggest that most health professionals think restrictions are appropriate. Twenty-six experts responded to the survey. Most held the view that decisions about driving privileges should consider individual patient and PNES characteristics and take account of whether permits are sought for private or commercial driving. Most felt that those with active PNES should not be allowed to drive unless certain criteria were met and that PNES should be thought of as “active” if the last psychogenic seizure had occurred within 6 months. Significance: Recommendations on whether PwPNES can drive should be made at the individual patient level. Until future research has determined the risk of accidents in PwPNES a proposed algorithm may guide decisions about driving advice. Fil: Asadi Pooya, Ali A.. Shiraz University Of Medical Sciences; Irán Fil: Nicholson, Timothy R.. King's College London; Reino Unido Fil: Pick, Susannah. King's College London; Reino Unido Fil: Baslet, Gaston. Harvard Medical School; Estados Unidos Fil: Benbadis, Selim R.. University Of South Florida; Estados Unidos Fil: Beghi, Massimiliano. Department of Mental Health; Italia Fil: Brigo, Francesco. Franz Tappeiner Hospital; Italia Fil: Buchhalter, Jeffrey. University of Calgary; Canadá Fil: D`alessio, Luciana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Houssay. Instituto de Biología Celular y Neurociencia "Prof. Eduardo de Robertis". Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Biología Celular y Neurociencia; Argentina Fil: Dworetzky, Barbara. Harvard Medical School; Estados Unidos Fil: Gigineishvili, David. Tbilisi State University; Estados Unidos Fil: Kanaan, Richard A.. University of Melbourne; Australia Fil: Kozlowska, Kasia. University of Sydney; Australia Fil: LaFrance, W. Curt. University Brown; Estados Unidos Fil: Lehn, Alexander. Princess Alexandra Hospital; Australia Fil: Perez, David L.. Harvard Medical School; Estados Unidos Fil: Popkirov, Stoyan. No especifíca; Fil: Pretorius, Chrisma. No especifíca; Fil: Szaflarski, Jerzy P.. No especifíca; Fil: Tolchin, Benjamin. University of Yale; Estados Unidos Fil: Valente, Kette. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil Fil: Stone, Jon. University of Edinburgh; Reino Unido Fil: Reuber, Markus. The University Of Sheffield; Reino Unido

Funder: UCLH Biomedical Research Centre; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100012317, Funder: National Institute for Health Research; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, INTRODUCTION: Neuronal antibodies can cause encephalopathy syndromes often presenting with subacute cognitive impairment, sometimes resembling neurodegenerative dementias. METHODS: We searched Medline and Embase for studies reporting associations between neuronal surface antibodies in all-cause dementia versus controls. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool adjusted estimates across studies. RESULTS: Six studies were included, all reporting frequency of serum NMDAR antibodies in dementia with four also reporting frequency in atypical dementias. Both IgG [OR = 8.09 (1.51; 56.85), p = 0.036] and IgA/IgM NMDAR antibodies [OR = 42.48 (11.39; 158.52), p < 0.001] were associated with atypical dementia, but neither were associated with all-cause dementia. DISCUSSION: In the first meta-analysis to explore this literature, serum IgG and IgA/IgM NMDAR antibodies were significantly more common in atypical dementias. However, methodological issues and small-sample sizes necessitate caution interpreting this result. Further studies measuring both serum and CSF antibodies are needed to investigate the role of neuronal antibodies in dementia, since evidence of pathogenicity in even a subset of patients could pave the way for novel treatment options.

ObjectivesWe aimed to identify existing outcome measures for functional neurological disorder (FND), to inform the development of recommendations and to guide future research on FND outcomes.MethodsA systematic review was conducted to identify existing FND-specific outcome measures and the most common measurement domains and measures in previous treatment studies. Searches of Embase, MEDLINE and PsycINFO were conducted between January 1965 and June 2019. The findings were discussed during two international meetings of the FND-Core Outcome Measures group.ResultsFive FND-specific measures were identified—three clinician-rated and two patient-rated—but their measurement properties have not been rigorously evaluated. No single measure was identified for use across the range of FND symptoms in adults. Across randomised controlled trials (k=40) and observational treatment studies (k=40), outcome measures most often assessed core FND symptom change. Other domains measured commonly were additional physical and psychological symptoms, life impact (ie, quality of life, disability and general functioning) and health economics/cost–utility (eg, healthcare resource use and quality-adjusted life years).ConclusionsThere are few well-validated FND-specific outcome measures. Thus, at present, we recommend that existing outcome measures, known to be reliable, valid and responsive in FND or closely related populations, are used to capture key outcome domains. Increased consistency in outcome measurement will facilitate comparison of treatment effects across FND symptom types and treatment modalities. Future work needs to more rigorously validate outcome measures used in this population.

Introduction: We aimed to examine susceptibility to dissociation and the impact of dissociation on interoceptive processing in individuals with functional neurological disorder (FND). We hypothesised that dissociative states would be elevated and interoceptive accuracy and awareness impaired at baseline in people with FND, and that such differences would be exacerbated following acute dissociation. Methods: Nineteen adults with FND were compared to 20 healthy controls. A modified heart-beat tracking task measured interoceptive accuracy and awareness (confidence) before and after a validated dissociation induction procedure. An exteroceptive processing control task was included. Mann–Whitney tests and r-values (effect size) were computed for between-group comparisons. Results: The FND group displayed elevated dissociation at baseline (p = 0.001, r = 0.528) compared to controls which increased following dissociation-induction (p r = 0.663). Interoceptive accuracy did not differ between groups at baseline (p = 0.967, r = 0.009); however, the FND group had lower accuracy scores post-induction (p = 0.021, r = 0.379). A negative correlation (trend) between change scores for dissociation and interoceptive accuracy was noted (rs = −0.411, p = 0.057). Confidence ratings on interoceptive and exteroceptive processing tasks were lower in the FND group (p-values r-values 0.331–0.489). Conclusions: Individuals with FND experienced greater susceptibility to dissociation, metacognitive deficits and impaired interoceptive accuracy than controls after acute dissociation.

Comments on an article by Maxime Taquet et al. (see record 2021-39396-023). Authors read with interest the Article by Maxime Taquet et al. At face value, this specific finding reported by Taquet et al. could indicate an important neuromuscular complication in COVID-19. Authors recommend that COVID-19- related neuromuscular complications are investigated in more detail. Neuromuscular disorders after COVID-19 might have substantial implications for patient recovery and utilization of physical rehabilitation health-care resources. In authors' view, critical illness myopathy might be the most likely explanation for this previously unrecognized, important finding. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

H.A.B. is funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Lectureship. R.B. is supported by a NIHR Academic Clinical Fellowship. D.J.B. is funded by Alzheimer's Research UK & Rosetrees. D.J.B., M.R. and A.V. acknowledge the support of the National Institute for Health Research Sheffield Biomedical Research Centre (Translational Neuroscience). M.J.E. is funded by NIHR and the Medical Research Council. S.M.F. is funded by the Wellcome Trust & the Royal Society. J.H. is funded by a Wellcome Clinical Research Career Development Fellowship. R.H., N.C.F., J.M.S. and M.N.R. acknowledge the support of the National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. L.M. receives philanthropic funding from Baillie Gifford. T.R.N. is funded by an NIHR Clinician Scientist Award. C.P. is funded by the Innovative Medicines Initiative, BRACE, and the David Telling Charitable Trust. J.S. is supported by a National Research Scotland Career Researcher Fellowship. This publication presents independent research; the views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the specified funding bodies.

Antibodies to the voltage-gated potassium channel (VGKC) complex and glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) have been reported in some cases of psychosis. We conducted the first systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate their prevalence in people with psychosis and report a case series of VGKC-complex antibodies in refractory psychosis. Only five studies presenting prevalence rates of VGKC seropositivity in psychosis were identified, in addition to our case series, with an overall prevalence of 1.5% (25/1720) compared to 0.7% in healthy controls (12/1753). Meta-analysis established that the pooled prevalence of GAD65 autoantibodies was 5.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0-15.6%; I2 = 91%; nine studies) in psychotic disorders, with a prevalence of 4.6% (95%CI: 1.2-15.9%; nine studies; I2 = 89%) and 6.2% (95%CI: 1.2-27.0%; two studies; I2 = 69%) in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, respectively. People with psychosis were more likely to have GAD65 antibodies than controls (odds ratio [OR], 2.24; 95%CI: 1.28-3.92%; P = 0.005; eight studies; I2 = 0%). Among 21 participants with treatment-resistant psychosis, none had VGKC antibodies. The prevalence of VGKC antibodies is low in psychosis. Our preliminary meta-analysis suggests that GAD autoantibodies are more common in people with psychosis than in controls, although few studies accounted for the possibility of co-existing type 1 diabetes mellitus and the clinical significance of reported GAD titers remains unclear. The paucity of studies reporting thresholds for defining GAD abnormality and rates of comorbid type 1 diabetes mellitus precludes interpretations regarding the influence of GAD antibodies on the development of psychotic disorders and may have led to an overestimate of the prevalence of GAD. Our case series fails to support the hypothesis that VGKC antibodies are linked to treatment resistance in psychosis, but the literature to date is remarkably sparse.

From the simple message of ‘I will please’ (Latin placēbō ) encapsulated in a sugar pill, to the famous theatrics of Jean-Martin Charcot’s hypnotic seizure inductions and treatments (figure 1), implicit and explicit narratives of healing and illness have been noted to exert a particularly strong influence on functional neurological disorder (FND). Although the placebo effect is near universal in medicine, and cultural frameworks are relevant for any illness experience, expectancy plays a more central mechanistic role in FND.1 Techniques of suggestion are still occasionally used in neurology practice, specifically to diagnose functional motor deficits by demonstrating reversibility,2 or to provoke dissociative seizures during video electroencephalography monitoring to enable a definitive diagnosis.3 Figure 1 The painting ‘Une lecon clinique a la Salpetriere’ (1887) by Andre Brouillet depicts Jean-Martin Charcot inducing neurological symptoms through hypnotic suggestion. His student Joseph Babinski (pictured holding the patient) later proposed changing the term hysteria to pithiathism (from Ancient Greek peithō , meaning ‘I convince’ ), emphasising the suggestibility of symptoms as a cardinal feature. Source: …

For over 4 months, we have been in the privileged position of witnessing real-time trends in the literature via our weekly curation of The Neurology and Neuropsychiatry of COVID-19 blog.1 There is an emerging recognition of the need to report the severity and outcomes of neurological complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Stroke is a rare but well-documented complication, with most prevalence estimates varying slightly around 0.8%.2 It is therefore important to elucidate both those at risk of developing stroke and stratifying those at risk of more severe outcomes when stroke occurs. We were greatly interested to read the letter by Dmytriw et al ,3 which highlighted potential racial disparities in outcomes from ischaemic stroke after COVID-19. Their novel study built on the hypothesis that black and minority ethnic (BAME) individuals have poorer outcomes from COVID-19 in general.4 An editorial commentary by Renieri5 further highlighted the need to elucidate mechanisms that may drive an interaction between stroke and COVID-19 to explain increased mortality in ethnic minorities. Previously also, Katz et al reported that patients with stroke with COVID-19 were more likely to be from a BAME population than patients with stroke without COVID-19. The potential over-representation of BAME individuals in COVID-19 stroke cohorts …

The development and selection of optimal outcome measures is increasingly recognized as a key component of evidence-based medicine, particularly the need for the development of a standardized set of measures for use in clinical trials. This process is particularly complex for functional neurological disorder (FND) for several reasons. FND can present with a wide range of symptoms that resemble the full spectrum of other neurological disorders. Additional physical (e.g., pain, fatigue) and psychological (e.g., depression, anxiety) symptoms are commonly associated with FND, which also can be highly disabling with implications for prognosis, and warrant concurrent assessment, despite an unclear etiological relationship with FND. Furthermore, several unique clinical aspects of FND make it likely that the usual prioritization of "objective" (or clinician-rated) over "subjective" (or patient-rated) measures might not be appropriate. Self-report measures may be more clinically meaningful in this patient population. Despite being a common and disabling disorder, there has been little research into outcome measures in FND, and to date trials have largely used measures designed for the assessment of other disorders. An international FND Core Outcome Measure group (FND-COM) has been established to develop a consensus battery of outcomes for FND: a "core outcome set." In this perspective article, the authors reviewed the process of outcome measure development and selection before considering the specific features of FND affecting the development of a core outcome set, as well as a research agenda to optimize outcome measurement in this complex neuropsychiatric disorder.

Purpose The aim of this multicenter international cross-cultural study was to compare clinical variables in a large sample of people with adult-onset psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES). Methods In this retrospective study, we evaluated persons with documented PNES, who were older than 16 years of age at the onset, from four countries (i.e., Iran, Brazil, Venezuela, and Argentina) regarding their age, gender, PNES semiology, and possible predisposing factors. Results We included 389 patients (244 from Iran, 66 from Brazil, 51 from Venezuela, and 28 from Argentina). Age at diagnosis was 32 ± 9 years (range: 17–64 years), and age at the onset of seizures was 27 ± 8 years (range: 17–49 years). There was a female predominance in all countries. The demographic characteristics and factors associated with PNES were similar among the countries. However, there were significant semiological differences among the countries. Conclusion This study corroborates the notion that PNES share more similarities than differences cross-culturally and across international borders. However, the background determined by cultural, ethnic, and religious differences may influence the semiology of PNES. Further cross-cultural studies involving more than two continents may advance our understanding of PNES. Fil: Asadi Pooya, Ali A.. Shiraz University Of Medical Sciences; Irán. Thomas Jefferson University; Estados Unidos Fil: Valente, Kette. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil Fil: Restrepo, Anilu Daza. La Trinidad Medical Center; Venezuela Fil: D`alessio, Luciana. Universidad Nacional Arturo Jauretche. Unidad Ejecutora de Estudios en Neurociencias y Sistemas Complejos. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Ministerio de Salud. Hospital Alta Complejidad en Red El Cruce Dr. Néstor Carlos Kirchner Samic. Unidad Ejecutora de Estudios en Neurociencias y Sistemas Complejos. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - La Plata. Unidad Ejecutora de Estudios en Neurociencias y Sistemas Complejos; Argentina Fil: Homayoun, Maryam. Shiraz University of Medical Sciences; Irán Fil: Bahrami, Zahra. Shiraz University Of Medical Sciences; Irán Fil: Alessi, Rudá. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil Fil: Paytan, Angélica Aroni. La Trinidad Medical Center; Venezuela Fil: Kochen, Sara Silvia. Universidad Nacional Arturo Jauretche. Unidad Ejecutora de Estudios en Neurociencias y Sistemas Complejos. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Ministerio de Salud. Hospital Alta Complejidad en Red El Cruce Dr. Néstor Carlos Kirchner Samic. Unidad Ejecutora de Estudios en Neurociencias y Sistemas Complejos. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - La Plata. Unidad Ejecutora de Estudios en Neurociencias y Sistemas Complejos; Argentina Fil: Myers, Lorna. Northeast Regional Epilepsy Group; Estados Unidos Fil: Sawchuk, Tyson. Alberta Children's Hospital; Canadá. University of Nicosia; Chipre Fil: Buchhalter, Jeffrey. Alberta Children's Hospital; Canadá. University of Calgary; Canadá Fil: Taha, Firas. Northeast Regional Epilepsy Group; Estados Unidos Fil: Lazar, Lorraine M.. Northeast Regional Epilepsy Group; Estados Unidos Fil: Pick, Susannah. Kings' College London; Reino Unido Fil: Nicholson, Timothy. Kings' College London; Reino Unido