Comparison of Stress Coping Among Psychogenic Non-epileptic Seizure (PNES) Patients with and Without Alexithymia
Abstract number :
2.309
Submission category :
11. Behavior/Neuropsychology/Language / 11A. Adult
Year :
2022
Submission ID :
2204200
Source :
www.aesnet.org
Presentation date :
12/4/2022 12:00:00 PM
Published date :
Nov 22, 2022, 05:23 AM
Authors :
Lorna Myers, Ph,D. – Northeast Regional Epilepsy Group; Sam Hammer, BA – Research coordinator, Psychology, Northeast Regional Epilepsy Group; Marcelo Lancman, M.D. – Medical Director, Epilepsy, Northeast Regional Epilepsy Group; Robert Trobliger, Ph.D. – Director, Neuropsychology, Neuropsychology, Northeast Regional Epilepsy Group
Rationale: Persons with psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PWPs) have been reported to have higher rates of alexithymia than normal controls. Those who are characterized as alexithymic present with an impaired ability to understand and communicate their emotions. It is reasonable to expect that this impairment in emotion perception and expression might be associated with less efficient stress coping skills. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether patients with alexithymia report using less effective stress coping strategies (i.e., emotion and avoidance/distraction-based) than those without alexithymia.
Methods: This is a retrospective study of 297 patients diagnosed with PNES (2009-2022). All patients were administered the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (TAS) and the Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS). Subjects were divided into two groups: those that scored a 61 or above (N1 = 122) and those that scored a 60 or below (N2 = 176) on the TAS. The first group is classified as “alexithymic.”
Results: We found that patients with alexithymia reported a significantly lower use of the more effective Task Oriented stress coping style (M1 = 41.12 SD = 12.63) than those without (M2 = 45.85, SD =12.60) t (3.18455), p < .0008. Furthermore, the alexithymic group reported a significantly higher use of the less effective Emotional stress coping (M1 – 60.91 SD = 10.90) compared to the non-alexithymic group (M2 = 51.84 SD = 11.67) (t (-6.75096), p < .00001). No significant difference was noted between both groups on Avoidant stress coping (t (0.40121), p < .3443) or on Distraction as a stress coping approach (t (-0.48931), p < .3125).
Behavior