An empirical study of defense mechanisms in panic disorder. (Las defensas psicológicas en el trastorno de angustia. Un estudio empírico.)

SUMMARY Panic disorder is present in 2.9% of females and 1.3% of males in the Mexican urban population; about two thirds of these patients have an associated depressive disorder. Genetics and psychosocial factors are intertwined in the etiology of this disorder. There are several studies related to the role of defense mechanisms in the pathogenesis of psychiatric disorders. Few studies of anxiety disorders have been conducted in Mexico, and there is little evidence about the importance of the defense mechanisms that are present in these disorders. In the DSM-IV-TR, defense mechanisms or coping styles are defined as “automatic psychological processes that protect the individual against anxiety and from the awareness of internal or external dangers or stressors. Individuals are often unaware of the processes as they operate”. The purpose of the present research was to identify the differential use of the defense mechanisms in normal controls and in patients with panic disorder alone or complicated mainly with mood disorders, and the patients who responded or did not respond to psychopharmacological treatment. Method. The sample of this study comprised 48 consecutive outpatients with panic disorder from the Instituto Nacional de Psiquiatria, Ramon de la Fuente Muniz. All of them were evaluated three times: first by a third grade psychiatry resident, in second place by a specialist in psychiatry and finally by one of the authors. After the patients agreed to participate, they completed a demographic questionnaire, the Hopkins Symptom Check List (SCL-90), and the Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ, Spanish Version). To evaluate the intensity of anxiety and depression, the Anxiety Hamilton Scale and the Hamilton Scale for Depression were used in their first appointment. Patients were treated as usual with a tricyclic antidepressant, a benzodiazepine, or both, during an eight week period. Then they were evaluated again with the same instruments and scales. The Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ) is a self-report instrument of common defense styles, which are empirically validated clusters of perceived defense mechanisms. Subjects rate their degree of agreement with 88 statements designed to tap defense or coping mechanisms on a nine-point scale. The DSQ is a widely used measure of empirically derived groupings of defense mechanisms ranking an adaptive hierarchy. A review of published studies, indicates strong evidence that adaptiveness of defense style correlates with mental health, and that some diagnoses are correlated with specific defense patterns (borderline personality disorder correlates with greater use of both, maladaptive and imagedistorting defenses, and less use of adaptive defenses). For other diagnoses, the pattern of defenses is less clear. The validity and the reliability of the DSQ Spanish Version were established before its application, in a sample of 261 psychiatric patients and controls. Two factors were obtained in the factor analysis. The first was denominated Mature Style. This category included: suppression, working orientation, sublimation, anticipation, affiliation, reactive formation, altruism, and humor. The Immature Style was the second factor; it included projection, acting out, repression, somatization, autistic fantasy, affective isolation and social withdrawal, inhibition, help rejection, splitting, undoing, consume, idealization, denial, projective identification, passive-aggression, and omnipotence. Higher mean scores indicated greater use of the individual defense mechanism and style. The mean scores for individual DSQ defense mechanisms and styles were calculated by adding and averaging the scores. The reliability calculated was . 89 (Cronbach alpha) for the items corresponding to the 25 defense mechanisms. Axis I was ascertained reliably with face-to-face interview and a list of the DSM-III-R criteria. This group had 32 patients with panic disorder and 16 patients with panic disorder associated to mood comorbidity or alcohol dependence, in persistent remission for at least one year; 32 subjects were included in the normal control group. Results. The comparison of patients with panic disorder, patients with panic disorder associated to mood disorders and controls, showed that both groups of patients used more projection, regression, inhibition, acting out, fantasy, splitting, help rejection, undoing, and reactive formation (p<.01), than the control group. The patients with panic disorder alone, used more somatization and denial (p<.01) than controls, but not more than the group of patients with panic and mood disorders. They also used less humor and sublimation as defenses than the control group (p=.03). The defense mechanisms of the patients who responded to pharmacological treatment were similar to the defenses of patients who did not improve or deserted. The only defense used more by the patients who responded to treatment was undoing. Conclusions. Overall, the results of this study on panic disorder draw us to the conclusion that patients with this disorder make