Abstract
Obsessive–compulsive symptoms (OCS) in psychotic disorders are associated with unfavorable outcomes, whether this extends to cognitive function remains unclear. We conducted meta-analyses on several cognitive domains to investigate overall group differences between patients with a psychotic disorder and co-occurring OCS (OCS +) and those without OCS (OCS−). We used meta-regression to assess possible confounding effects. No overall associations between OCS + and OCS− in any of the 17 investigated cognitive domains were found. We predominantly found large heterogeneity in effect size and direction among studies. Post-hoc analyses of processing speed tasks not purely based on reaction-time showed worse performance in the OCS + group with a small effect size (SMD = − 0.190; p = 0.029). Meta-regression revealed advanced age was significantly correlated with worse performance of the OCS + group in processing speed (R2 = 0.7), working memory (R2 = 0.11), cognitive inhibition (R2 = 0.59), and cognitive flexibility (R2 = 0.34). Patients fulfilling the criteria for an obsessive–compulsive disorder showed less impairment in cognitive inhibition compared to the OCS + group (R2 = 0.63). Overall, comorbid OCS were not associated with cognitive impairment. However, large heterogeneity between studies highlights the complex nature of factors influencing cognition in people with psychotic disorder and comorbid OCS and warrants further research into possible moderating factors.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Comorbidities, such as depression, substance abuse and anxiety disorders, are highly prevalent in psychotic disorders [1,2,3,4]. Amongst common comorbidities are obsessive–compulsive symptoms (OCS) and obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD). Life-time prevalence of OCS and OCD in people with schizophrenia are, respectively, 31% and 12% [3, 5,6,7,8], with symptoms already being present in the at risk mental state (13% and 5%) and during the first episode of psychosis (17% and 7%), but with increasing prevalence in the later stages of disease [3, 9]. There is evidence that patients with comorbid OCS experience more severe psychotic and depressive symptoms, have increased rates of hospitalization and suicide attempts, and experience greater social and occupational impairments compared to schizophrenia patients without OCS [10,11,12].
In recent years, several reports evaluated the association between OCS and cognitive impairments in patients with psychotic disorders. Cognitive deficits are commonly present in people with schizophrenia as well as in people in an at risk mental state for psychosis [13, 14]. Cognitive deficits have been shown to be one of the most robust predictors of functional outcome in schizophrenia patients [15] and it has been assumed that burden due to comorbid psychopathology such as OCS might increase cognitive deficits in an additive manner. The extent and nature of cognitive deficits in people with psychotic illness and comorbid OCS are not yet clear. Since both schizophrenia and OCD have been consistently linked to impaired executive function, it has been proposed that schizophrenia patients with comorbid OCS might have heightened deficits in this domain [15,16,17,18,19]. In addition, OCD seems to be specifically linked to impairment in cognitive inhibition and flexibility, which are both executive functions [20]. Hence people with psychotic disorder and comorbid OCS might also show additional impairments in these domains. So far, results on executive function in comorbid OCS have been inconsistent. Some studies showed worse performance of comorbid patients in the Wisconsin Card Sorting test or a word fluency test [21,22,23,24], whereas others showed better performance in word fluency or the Wisconsin Card Sorting test of the comorbid group [25, 26]. One previous systematic review and meta-analysis by Cunill et al. [27] investigated executive functioning in this population. This meta-analysis demonstrated greater impairment in abstract thinking in the group of patients with OCS compared to the group without OCS, but inconsistent results were found for other executive domains. To the best of our knowledge, no meta-analysis investigated overall group differences between patients with OCS (OCS +) and those without OCS (OCS−) including different cognitive domains such as memory, social cognition, and attention. Furthermore, since the publication of the meta-analysis by Cunill et al. [27], several large studies on this subject have been conducted, allowing for an update of the meta-analytical findings in the executive domain.
Rationale and aims
The aims of the current study are to [1] examine the association of comorbid OCS in psychotic disorders and performance on different cognitive domains and to [2] examine which patient or study characteristics might explain heterogeneity of result between studies on cognitive function in patients with comorbid OCS. Our hypothesis is that patients with comorbid OCS show heightened cognitive impairment compared to those without comorbid OCS, specifically in the executive domain. Increased knowledge on the type or extent of cognitive dysfunction in patients with comorbid OCS, might have implications for classification and treatment of this patient group.
Methods
The current meta-analysis was conducted following the guidelines of the PRISMA statement. The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database under registration number CRD42019125689.
Search
The search was performed in cooperation with a clinical librarian (JD). We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science and PsychInfo on 27-5-2019. A set of reference articles and conference abstracts was used to refine the search strategy (supplemental material Sect. 1). In addition, we hand-searched the reference lists of all included articles. The search roughly had three components, namely ‘psychosis’, ‘OCS/OCD’, and ‘cognition’. The full search terms can be found in the supplemental material (Sect. 1).
Selection criteria and screening
References were screened by two researchers (LD + FS) and added to the initial selection of articles if the title or abstract (1) mentioned obsessive–compulsive symptoms or disorder in a population with psychotic illness, (2) mentioned a cognitive function or cognitive test, (3) mentioned that the study was not a case report, expert opinion, editorial or review, and (4) if the full text was in English, French, Dutch, Spanish, or German. Any discrepancies in selected articles were solved by consensus in a meeting between both researchers. We used the Rayyan app to screen articles and facilitate the comparison of articles between researchers [28]. Studies that were included in the meta-analysis after full-text review had to meet the following criteria: (1) the study evaluated patients with a psychotic illness and determined presence of OCS or OCD, (2) cognitive domains were assessed with neuropsychological tests, and (3) means and standard deviations for the neuropsychological test outcomes were reported in the paper or were made available upon request. Articles were also eligible for inclusion if a sample size and correlations between obsessive–compulsive symptoms and neuropsychological test outcomes were available.
Data extraction
Data were extracted by one investigator (LD) using a standardized data extraction form, that was developed and tested by two researchers (LD + FS). We emailed authors in case data on neurocognitive test outcomes or confounders were missing from their publication, with at least 3 attempts per publication. The full data extraction form can be accessed in the supplemental material (Sect. 2). In cases, where multiple studies were published by the same author or research group, studies were checked for potential duplicate data. In cases of duplicate data, the largest sample was used. As both cross-sectional and prospective studies were included, only baseline data were extracted from prospective studies.
Data synthesis and statistical analysis
First, the tests used in each study were classified into a cognitive (sub)domain according to the Strauss and the Lezak compendium of neuropsychological assessments [29, 30]. In addition, we used the classification of the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery initiative, as this battery was specifically designed for people with schizophrenia [31]. Details on how tests were aggregated can be found in the supplemental material (Sect. 3). We subdivided immediate verbal memory into two outcome measures: score of the first trial in a word learning task (‘trial 1 verbal memory’) and sum of immediate verbal memory trials in a word learning task (‘sum of trials verbal memory’), as the second outcome measure contains a learning element and thus measures something distinctly different from the first. In general, meta-analyses were performed in case a minimum of 4 studies were available per domain.
In cases, where authors provided us with full data sets of correlational or unpublished data, we used a YBOCS score of 8 as the cut-off to define the comorbid (OCS +) group, since this was a commonly used cut-off value in the references we included [32,33,34,35,36]. Analyses were restricted to the per study level,for instance, reported subgroups based on disease duration were combined into one OCS + and one OCS− group [37]. In case multiple subgroups based on YBOCS severity were compared, these were combined into one OCS + and one OCS− group. For example, in the study by Ongur et al. [38] we categorized the YBOCS scores up to 11 as the OCS- group and calculated weighted means and SD for this aggregated control group. For the study of Michalopoulou et al. [39] we left out the Stroop task in the cognitive inhibition domain, as it was not clear to us what the values reported in the original study meant.
We used Cohen’s d (standardized mean difference) as the primary measure to evaluate and compare effect sizes. To account for the expected heterogeneity between studies, a random-effects model was used for meta-analyses. The presence of heterogeneity was further evaluated by calculating the I2 metric.
We examined whether the applied cognitive test within a domain had an effect on the outcome in cases were multiple tests were compiled into one domain, by applying post-hoc sensitivity analysis for each outcome measure that appeared at least 6 times in a domain.
We aimed to perform meta-regression analyses for mean age, gender, mean PANSS positive score and clozapine use in the whole sample. In addition, meta-regression was done for mean YBOCS score of the comorbid group and the categorial variable full diagnoses of OCD vs. presence of OCS as the criterion for the comorbid group. According to methodological guidelines a minimum of ten studies per covariate was assumed appropriate for meta-regression analyses [40].
Comprehensive Meta-analysis software (CMA) version 3 was used for all analyses [41].
Quality assessment and publication bias
Included studies were assessed for quality using an adapted version of the National Institute of Health (NIH) Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-sectional studies by two researchers (LD and FS) and discrepancies were discussed and resolved.
Publication bias was assessed using Rosenthal’s fail safe N and a funnel plot. The above mentioned methods are generally more reliable when applied in a larger number of studies [42, 43]. We did not use statistical tests for funnel plot asymmetry, as these are known to be insensitive in cases, where there are less than ten studies in a meta-analysis [44].
Results
Search and screening
The search yielded a total of 2365 references from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, and Web of Science after removing duplicates using Endnote and Rayyan. In addition, we found three publications on the website ‘freefullpdf.com’ that were not indexed in the abovementioned databases [45,46,47]. Three studies were excluded, because the cognitive test used could not be grouped into a domain and one was excluded for poor quality reporting [47,48,49,50]. After full text review, aggregation of cognitive tests, and efforts to obtain data from authors, 32 records were included in the synthesis. Four publications presented data of two overlapping samples, but reporting different outcome measures, so these were combined. The Schulte et al. [51] conference abstract was combined with the corresponding full-text article in the synthesis referred to as ‘Veerman 2016’ [52]. The study of Schirmbeck et al. [33] and Mier et al. [36] were combined and now refer to the ‘Mannheim study’. Finally, access to baseline data of a larger GROUP sample, allowed us to recalculated earlier reported outcomes based on this larger sample [34, 53]. This resulted in a total of 30 studies represented in the meta-analysis. A flow-chart of the search and screening process can be found in Fig. 1.
Study characteristics
Most studies had a cross-sectional design and included schizophrenia patients in an outpatient setting. Four studies used consecutive sampling and eight used matched sampling, most studies did not report recruitment or sampling strategies. OCS definition was heterogeneous, with a variety of YBOCS cut-off scores or a full DSM diagnosis of OCD. Overall, a total of 2738 patients were included in the presented meta-analyses. Table 1 lists the included studies and their relevant characteristics. Study quality was generally fair and full ratings can be found in the supplemental material (Sect. 4).
Quantitative synthesis
Meta-analysis was possible for 17 individual domains. As shown in Table 2, meta-analyses were done for attention (with subdomains processing speed and sustained attention), memory (with subdomains working memory, immediate and delayed visual memory, and immediate and delayed verbal memory), executive function (fluency, cognitive inhibition, cognitive flexibility, set-shifting, abstract thinking, planning, and reasoning), facial affect recognition, and visual spatial ability. None of the meta-analyses showed significant results. However, when examining the forest plots, the studies showed a wide spread in effect sizes and even effect directions. Figure 2 shows the condensed forest plot for one of the largest meta-analysis, working memory, as an example of the heterogeneity in effect sizes and directions. Most studies also had a medium to high I2 statistic [54]. Table 2 shows a summary of the results of the meta-analyses and the corresponding forest plots can be found in the supplemental material (Sect. 5).
Post-hoc sensitivity analyses were conducted on more homogenous outcome measures within specific domains (see supplemental material Sect. 5a). Sensitivity analyses on processing speed only including not purely reaction time based outcome measures resulted in significantly worse performance of the OCS + group (SMD = − 0.190, p = 0.029) (Fig. 3). No other post-hoc analyses were significant.
Confounders and meta-regression
Due to a limited number of studies and missing information on confounders in the individual studies, we were only able to conduct meta-regression analyses with the following covariates: YBOCS score for the comorbid group, PANSS positive score for the whole sample, whether a full OCD diagnoses or OCS symptoms were used as the criterion to define the OCS + group, and the mean age for the whole sample. We did not have sufficient studies to examine more than one confounder in a single meta-regression. This resulted in a total of 19 meta-regressions. Meta-regression revealed advanced age was significantly correlated at the α = 0.05 level with worse performance of the comorbid group for processing speed (R2 = 0.7, p = 0.029), working memory (R2 = 0.11, p = 0.031), cognitive inhibition (R2 = 0.59, p = 0.024), and cognitive flexibility (R2 = 0.34, p = 0.015). We found that an OCD diagnosis (n = 7) instead of OCS (n = 3) was associated with better cognitive inhibition of the comorbid group (R2 = 0.63, p = 0.017). Neither PANSS positive score nor severity of OCS (reflected in the mean YBOCS scores) were associated with performance in the cognitive domains in which meta-regression was possible. The results of all meta-regressions can be found in the supplemental material (Sect. 8).
Publication bias and quality assessment
Publication bias upon visual inspection of the funnel plots was generally low. Rosenthal’s N showed varying degrees of publication bias, but this method is considered to be unreliable for small meta-analyses. Section 7 in the supplemental material shows the publication bias statistics. All included studies were rated for quality and all except one [45] received a rating of ‘fair’ quality. Section 4 in the supplemental material shows the quality assessments for each study.
Discussion
These comprehensive meta-analyses on the effect of OCS comorbidity on cognition combinedly included 30 studies describing several cognitive domains in a total of 2738 patients. We found no significant associations between functioning in different cognitive domains and the presence of OCS in patients with a psychotic disorder. Only when processing speed was assessed with measures that are not purely reaction time based, we found a small difference (SMD = − 0.190). Our findings do not support the hypothesis that patients with comorbid OCS are more impaired in cognitive functioning, compared to those without OCS. Notably, the heterogeneity in almost all meta-analyses was high, which was evident in the effect directions and effect sizes, as well as the I2 statistic. We further examined the role of several moderators on cognitive function in patients with comorbid OCS using meta-regression and found that advanced age in the study population was associated with relatively worse performance of the OCS + group in processing speed, working memory, cognitive inhibition, and cognitive flexibility.
Overall, the lack of significant differences in executive functioning stand in contradiction with the findings of the earlier conducted meta-analysis by Cunill et al. [27], which showed impaired abstract thinking in the OCS + group. The current meta-analyses was extended by 13 studies published after 2013 and handled different inclusion criteria, e.g., including correlational data, which resulted in the additional inclusion of three studies published before 2013 [25, 45, 62].
The main finding of our meta-analysis is the large heterogeneity between studies, which reflects the clinical and statistical differences between the individual studies. Without access to primary data, we were unable to fully disentangle this heterogeneity. A possible explanation for the wide dispersion in SMD’s could be that there are two distinct subgroups of people with comorbid OCS; those who have higher cognitive functioning and those who have inferior cognitive functioning compared to patients without OCS. This hypothesis needs further exploration. We attempted to examine factors that might determine these two subgroups using meta-regression. However, due to missing information on relevant variables (such as clozapine use or illness duration) only a limited number of confounders could be investigated. Age seemed to be most clearly associated with cognitive impairment in de OCS + group. Assuming age is a proxy for disease duration, this would be in line with some previous studies that showed OCS might have a protective effect in the early stages of psychotic illness, but a negative effect in the more chronic stage [11, 68,69,70]. These results might suggest that heterogeneity in our meta-analyses could be explained by differential associations in earlier vs. later disease stages. However, other studies found no moderating effect of illness duration [37].
Notably, studies on first-episode samples only reported better social functioning and less severe negative symptoms in case of co-occurring OCS, but not if criteria for an OCD diagnosis were fulfilled. In line, Meijer et al. [53] noted that in studies reporting an association between worse cognitive functioning and OCS, patients had a relatively high mean YBOCS score. In the current meta-analyses we were not able to demonstrate a possible moderating effect of OCS severity measured with YBOCS total score. However, when investigating a proxy for OCS severity (OCD diagnosis vs. OCS defining the comorbid group), we observed an unexpected result. Contrary to reported higher impairment in cognitive inhibition in primary OCD patients, a comorbid OCD diagnosis in the current meta-regression (and thus more severe symptoms) was associated with less impaired cognitive inhibition. As these findings have not been mentioned previously, careful interpretation and further investigation is warranted. Upon inspection of the underlying studies in this meta-regression, no clear explanation arose for this significant result. Overall, the limited number of possible confounders we were able to investigate, leaves the option open that there are other unknown reasons why some patients with comorbid OCS have improved cognitive outcome, while others have worse cognitive outcome. The use of benzodiazepines and anticholinergic medications for example was often left unassessed, even though they are frequently prescribed in this population, but are also known to impair cognitive performance [71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81]. Several arguments support the assumption that second generation antipsychotics, particularly clozapine, might aggravate or even induce OCS in a subgroup of patients with schizophrenia. In addition, it has been hypothesized that genetic risk-factors might dispose patients to develop these OCS [82]. Unfortunately, neither clozapine use nor genetic information was comprehensively reported. The presence of motor symptoms or extrapyramidal symptoms was also often left unaddressed. Performance on some cognitive tests might be worse because of these symptoms.
Regarding the results of the sensitivity analyses showing more impairment of the OCS group in processing speed, these align with literature in primary OCD. Impaired processing speed has been shown in patients with OCD compared to controls and it has even been hypothesized that processing speed is in fact the primary deficit in OCD [83,84,85].This could explain why we found a significantly higher impairment in processing speed in psychotic patients with comorbid OCS compared to those without, but not on other domains. However, cautious interpretation is warranted, as the significance of this finding could well be the result of multiple testing. This is strengthened by the fact that we did not demonstrate a significant difference in other cognitive domains that are partly dependent on processing speed, such as cognitive flexibility.
Finally, most of the SMD’s in our study were indeed small, and as people with psychotic illness already have significant cognitive impairments, any additional impairment associated with OCS might be difficult to detect.
Strengths and limitations
To the best of our knowledge this is the first meta-analysis investigating the association between comorbid OCS and functioning in multiple cognitive domains and the first on this subject to do subsequent meta-regression analyses. Furthermore, detailed search strategies enabled additional inclusions of publications and extensive attempts to obtain unpublished data made it possible to include data that had not been presented in the literature on cognition and OCS in psychotic disorders before.
This meta-analysis has several limitations. Firstly, we combined the results of a variety of neuropsychological tests within domains to increase the power of the meta-analyses, by which we consequently could have introduced heterogeneity within these domains. Over 60 different tests were used in the included studies and in addition, studies sometimes varied in applied scoring systems of these tests. This severely complicates attempts to compare and replicate results. However, where possible we performed subsequent sensitivity analyses with more homogeneous outcome measures (e.g., only using TMTB for cognitive flexibility) that showed comparable results. A second limitation was that some of the meta-analyses only included a small number of studies, which warrants cautious interpretation of the results as meta-analyses with small numbers of studies are less reliable than those with larger numbers of studies. In addition, analyses of multiple outcome measures, performing multiple sensitivity analyses and meta-regressions on the same data might impact the validity of meta-analytical results. As there is an ongoing debate on how to correct for multiplicity, while at the same time being cautious not to decrease power, we did not correct for alpha inflation [86]. However, we acknowledge that statistical significance testing needs cautious interpretation and clinical relevance of the results should rather be interpreted based on the average effects-sizes and confidence intervals. Thirdly, the included studies often only reported a select number of confounders and factors such as depressive symptoms, ethnicity, medication, and education status were often not reported. As mentioned above, some possibly important moderators or confounders which might explain the observed large heterogeneity between studies received very little attention in primary studies. In addition, many included studies used substance (ab)use as an exclusion criterion for selection of participants. This is, therefore, not a likely explanation for the observed heterogeneity in this meta-analysis, but as substance use is highly prevalent in people with psychotic illness [87, 88], current findings are probably not representative of the actual population. Apart from the limitations of the included studies, subgroup analyses and meta-regression can only be applied on the per study level, and factors that might vary between the OCS + and OCS− group or on the per person level, such as for example disease severity or ethnicity, cannot be investigated [40]. Finally, the combination of a small number of studies and missing data on confounders meant that the results of the meta-regression should also be interpreted cautiously. We could only enter one covariate at once due to the small number of studies and we could, therefore, not assess the interaction between covariates such as between age and symptom severity.
Future directions
In light of our findings, it seems that the way forward for research on cognitive function in people with a psychotic disorder and comorbid OCS is to focus on unveiling the cause for the large heterogeneity in results.
Adopting a dimensional approach could be more suitable to examine the association between cognitive performance and co-occurring OCS. As a variety of factors, among which the severity of OCS, might be at play, creating a dichotomy in people with and without OCS hampers the investigation of OCS severity and other moderating factors. Although some of the studies evaluated the association between dimensional measures [24, 50, 61, 62, 66], most used a categorical approach. Future studies should aim at using methods that allows to capture the complexity of this issue, for which a dimensional approach appears to be the most suitable option available. In this context the YBOCS should be used as the standard instrument as it has been validated in patients with psychotic disorders [89] and would ensure better comparability between individual studies. In addition, more prospective studies should be considered, as they could help shed light not only on the association between comorbid OCS and cognition, but also on the course and nature of the association. As most studies to date have been cross-sectional, causal conclusions cannot be drawn.
Finally, more uniformity should be sought in the type of cognitive tests used in this patient group. A possible solution could be the use of the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery, which was especially developed for people with schizophrenia [31, 90, 91]. This battery has the additional advantage of being relatively fast to administer (65 min), which might make it more suitable for people with more severe psychotic symptoms and which could allow for using it on larger samples. This battery could be supplemented by tasks that test domains that are impaired in primary OCD, such as the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test and the Trail Making Test part B for cognitive inflexibility [20].
Conclusion
The present meta-analysis highlights the complexity of cognitive function in people with psychotic illness and comorbid OCS. No obvious association between OCS and cognitive function emerges from the analyses, but it raises the question whether perhaps there are distinct groups of people with comorbid OCS; those with better cognitive function and those with worse cognitive function compared to people with psychotic illness without OCS. Our results indicate that age might be a factor that determines those groups, but further research will have to shed light on other factors that might determine cognitive function in patients with comorbid OCS.
References
Moreno-Küstner B, Martín C, Pastor L (2018) Prevalence of psychotic disorders and its association with methodological issues. A systematic review and meta-analyses. PLoS ONE 13(4):e0195687–e0195687. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195687
McGrath J, Saha S, Chant D, Welham J (2008) Schizophrenia: a concise overview of incidence, prevalence, and mortality. Epidemiol Rev 30:67–76. https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxn001
Achim AM, Maziade M, Raymond E, Olivier D, Merette C, Roy MA (2011) How prevalent are anxiety disorders in schizophrenia? A meta-analysis and critical review on a significant association. Schizophr Bull 37(4):811–821. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbp148
Buckley PF, Miller BJ, Lehrer DS, Castle DJ (2008) Psychiatric comorbidities and schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 35(2):383–402. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbn135%JSchizophreniaBulletin
Angst J, Gamma A, Endrass J, Goodwin R, Ajdacic V, Eich D, Rossler W (2004) Obsessive-compulsive severity spectrum in the community: prevalence, comorbidity, and course. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 254(3):156–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-004-0459-4
Nechmad A, Ratzoni G, Poyurovsky M, Meged S, Avidan G, Fuchs C, Bloch Y, Weizman R (2003) Obsessive-compulsive disorder in adolescent schizophrenia patients. Am J Psychiatry 160(5):1002–1004. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.160.5.1002
Poyurovsky M, Bergman J, Weizman R (2006) Obsessive-compulsive disorder in elderly schizophrenia patients. J Psychiatr Res 40(3):189–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2005.03.009
Swets M, Dekker J, van Emmerik-van OK, Smid GE, Smit F, de Haan L, Schoevers RA (2014) The obsessive compulsive spectrum in schizophrenia, a meta-analysis and meta-regression exploring prevalence rates. Schizophr Res 152(2–3):458–468
Schirmbeck F, Swets M, de Haan L (2015) Epidemiology: prevalence and clinical characteristics of obsessive-compulsive disorder and obsessive-compulsive symptoms in patients with psychotic disorders. In: De Haan L, Schirmbeck F, Zink M (eds) Obsessive-compulsive symptoms in schizophrenia. Springer, Cham, pp 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12952-5_4
Poyurovsky M, Zohar J, Glick I, Koran LM, Weizman R, Tandon R, Weizman A (2012) Obsessive-compulsive symptoms in schizophrenia: implications for future psychiatric classifications. Compr Psychiatry 53(5):480–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2011.08.009
de Haan L, Sterk B, Wouters L, Linszen DH (2013) The 5-year course of obsessive-compulsive symptoms and obsessive-compulsive disorder in first-episode schizophrenia and related disorders. Schizophr Bull 39(1):151–160. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbr077
Cunill R, Castells X, Simeon D (2009) Relationships between obsessive-compulsive symptomatology and severity of psychosis in schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Psychiatry 70(1):70–82
de Paula AL, Hallak JE, Maia-de-Oliveira JP, Bressan RA, Machado-de-Sousa JP (2015) Cognition in at-risk mental states for psychosis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 57:199–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.09.006
Heinrichs RW, Zakzanis KK (1998) Neurocognitive deficit in schizophrenia: a quantitative review of the evidence. Neuropsychology 12(3):426–445
Bowie CR, Harvey PD (2006) Cognitive deficits and functional outcome in schizophrenia. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat 2(4):531–536
Lysaker PH, Bryson GJ, Marks KA, Greig TC, Bell MD (2002) Association of obsessions and compulsions in schizophrenia with neurocognition and negative symptoms. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 14(4):449–453. https://doi.org/10.1176/jnp.14.4.449
Tibbo P, Warneke L (1999) Obsessive-compulsive disorder in schizophrenia: epidemiologic and biologic overlap. J Psychiatry Neurosci 24(1):15–24
Bottas A, Cooke RG, Richter MA (2005) Comorbidity and pathophysiology of obsessive-compulsive disorder in schizophrenia: is there evidence for a schizo-obsessive subtype of schizophrenia? J Psychiatry Neurosci 30(3):187–193
Snyder HR, Kaiser RH, Warren SL, Heller W (2015) Obsessive-compulsive disorder is associated with broad impairments in executive function: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Sci J Assoc Psychol Sci 3(2):301–330. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702614534210
Gruner P, Pittenger C (2017) Cognitive inflexibility in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Neuroscience 345:243–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2016.07.030
Hwang MY, Morgan JE, Losconzcy MF (2000) Clinical and neuropsychological profiles of obsessive-compulsive schizophrenia: a pilot study. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 12(1):91–94. https://doi.org/10.1176/jnp.12.1.91
Lysaker PH, Lancaster RS, Nees MA, Davis LW (2004) Patterns of obsessive-compulsive symptoms and social function in schizophrenia. Psychiatry Res 125(2):139–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2003.12.007
Sahoo S, Grover S, Nehra R (2018) Comparison of neurocognitive domains in patients with schizophrenia with and without co-morbid obsessive compulsive disorder. Schizophr Res 201:151–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2018.05.029
Whitton AE, Henry JD (2013) The relationship between sub-clinical obsessive-compulsive symptoms and social cognition in chronic schizophrenia. Br J Clin Psychol 52(2):115–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjc.12004
Tumkaya S, Karadag F, Oguzhanoglu NK, Tekkanat C, Varma G, Ozdel O, Atesci F (2009) Schizophrenia with obsessive-compulsive disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder with poor insight: a neuropsychological comparison. Psychiatry Res 165(1–2):38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2007.07.031
Lee MJ, Shin YB, Sunwoo YK, Jung SH, Kim WH, Kang MH, Lee JS, Bae JN, Kim CE (2009) Comparative analysis of cognitive function in schizophrenia with and without obsessive compulsive disorder. Psychiatry Investig 6(4):286–293. https://doi.org/10.4306/pi.2009.6.4.286
Cunill R, Huerta-Ramos E, Castells X (2013) The effect of obsessive–compulsive symptomatology on executive functions in schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Res 210(1):21–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2013.05.029
Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A (2016) Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev 5:210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4
Strauss PPE, Strauss E, Sherman NAAPDPCNEMS, Sherman EMS, Spreen O (2006) A compendium of neuropsychological tests: administration, norms, and commentary. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Lezak PNPNMD, Lezak MD, Howieson APNPDB, Howieson DB, Loring PNDW, Hannay HJ, Loring DW, Fischer JS (2004) Neuropsychological assessment. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Nuechterlein KH, Green MF, Kern RS, Baade LE, Barch DM, Cohen JD, Essock S, Fenton WS, Frese FJ 3rd, Gold JM, Goldberg T, Heaton RK, Keefe RS, Kraemer H, Mesholam-Gately R, Seidman LJ, Stover E, Weinberger DR, Young AS, Zalcman S, Marder SR (2008) The MATRICS consensus cognitive battery, part 1: test selection, reliability, and validity. Am J Psychiatry 165(2):203–213. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07010042
Whitney KA, Fastenau PS, Evans JD, Lysaker PH (2004) Comparative neuropsychological function in obsessive-compulsive disorder and schizophrenia with and without obsessive-compulsive symptoms. Schizophr Res 69(1):75–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2003.08.013
Schirmbeck F, Rausch F, Englisch S, Eifler S, Esslinger C, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Zink M (2013) Stable cognitive deficits in schizophrenia patients with comorbid obsessive-compulsive symptoms: a 12-month longitudinal study. Schizophr Bull 39(6):1261–1271. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbs123
Schirmbeck F, Swets M, Meijer CJ, Zink M, de Haan L (2016) Longitudinal association between cognitive performance and obsessive-compulsive symptoms in patients with psychosis and unaffected siblings. Acta Psychiatr Scand 133(5):399–409. https://doi.org/10.1111/acps.12558
Lysaker PH, Marks KA, Picone JB, Rollins AL, Fastenau PS, Bond GR (2000) Obsessive and compulsive symptoms in schizophrenia: clinical and neurocognitive correlates. J Nerv Ment Dis 188(2):78–83
Mier D, Schirmbeck F, Stoessel G, Esslinger C, Rausch F, Englisch S, Eisenacher S, de Haan L, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Kirsch P, Zink M (2018) Reduced activity and connectivity of left amygdala in patients with schizophrenia treated with clozapine or olanzapine. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 11:11
Kim S-W, Jeong B-O, Kim J-M, Shin I-S, Hwang MY, Paul Amminger G, Nelson B, Berk M, McGorry P, Yoon J-S (2015) Associations of obsessive-compulsive symptoms with clinical and neurocognitive features in schizophrenia according to stage of illness. Psychiatry Res 226(1):368–375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2015.01.021
Ongur D, Goff DC (2005) Obsessive-compulsive symptoms in schizophrenia: associated clinical features, cognitive function and medication status. Schizophr Res 75(2–3):349–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2004.08.012
Michalopoulou PG, Konstantakopoulos G, Typaldou M, Papageorgiou C, Christodoulou GN, Lykouras L, Oulis P (2014) Can cognitive deficits differentiate between schizophrenia with and without obsessive–compulsive symptoms? Compr Psychiatry 55(4):1015–1021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2013.12.004
Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JP, Rothstein HR (2011) Introduction to meta-analysis. Wiley, Hoboken
Borenstein M, Hedges L, Higgins J, Rothstein H (2005) Comprehensive meta-analysis version 3. Biostat, Croatia
Rosenthal R (1991) Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Sage, Newbury Park. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412984997
Field AP, Gillett R (2010) How to do a meta-analysis. Br J Math Statist Psychol 63(3):665–694. https://doi.org/10.1348/000711010x502733
Rothstein HR, Sutton AJ, Borenstein M (2006) Publication bias in meta-analysis: prevention assessment and adjustments. Wiley, Hoboken
Abdul Hamid AR, Abdul Razak O (2010) Obsessive-compulsive disorder in schizophrenia: clinical and neurocognitive correlates. Malays J Psychiatry 19(2):1
Focseneanu BE, Dobrescu I, Marian G, Rusanu V (2016) The impact of the obsessive-compulsive disorder on the cognitive function in the early stage of schizophrenia. IOSR-JDMS 15(4):112–126. https://doi.org/10.9790/0853-150401112126
Mahesh K, Pradeep S, Nikhil G (2015) Comparative study of cognitive function in schizophrenia with and without obsessive-compulsive disorder. SJAMS 3(1G):478–481
Bozikas VP, Ntouros E, Andreou C, Nazlidou EI, Floros G, Tsoura E, Garyfallos G (2015) The role of obsessive-compulsive symptoms in the perception of insincere speech in first-episode psychosis. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 37(8):842–852. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2015.1064863
Pallanti S, Castellini G, Chamberlain SR, Quercioli L, Zaccara G, Fineberg NA (2009) Cognitive event-related potentials differentiate schizophrenia with obsessive-compulsive disorder (schizo-OCD) from OCD and schizophrenia without OC symptoms. Psychiatry Res 170(1):52–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2008.11.002
Lysaker PH, Whitney KA, Davis LW (2009) Associations of executive function with concurrent and prospective reports of obsessive-compulsive symptoms in schizophrenia. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 21(1):38–42. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.neuropsych.21.1.38
Schulte P, Veerman S, Smith J, De Haan L (2015) Memantine augmentation in clozapine refractory schizophrenia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. Psychol Med 46(9):1909–1921
Veerman SR, Schulte PF, Smith JD, de Haan L (2016) Memantine augmentation in clozapine-refractory schizophrenia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. Psychol Med 46(9):1909–1921. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291716000398
Meijer JH, Swets M, Keeman S, Nieman DH, Meijer CJ (2013) Is a schizo-obsessive subtype associated with cognitive impairment? Results from a large cross-sectional study in patients with psychosis and their unaffected relatives. J Nerv Ment Dis 201(1):30–35. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0b013e31827ab2b2
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ (Clinical research ed) 327(7414):557–560. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
Berman I, Merson A, Viegner B, Losonczy MF, Pappas D, Green AI (1998) Obsessions and compulsions as a distinct cluster of symptoms in schizophrenia: a neuropsychological study. J Nerv Ment Dis 186(3):150–156
Bleich-Cohen M, Hendler T, Weizman R, Faragian S, Weizman A, Poyurovsky M (2014) Working memory dysfunction in schizophrenia patients with obsessive-compulsive symptoms: an fMRI study. Eur Psychiatry J Assoc Eur Psychiatr 29(3):160–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2013.02.004
Borkowska A, Pilaczynska E, Rybakowski JK (2003) The frontal lobe neuropsychological tests in patients with schizophrenia and/or obsessive-compulsive disorder. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 15(3):359–362. https://doi.org/10.1176/jnp.15.3.359
Frias A, Palma C, Farriols N, Becerra C, Alvarez A, Canete J (2014) Neuropsychological profile and treatment-related features among patients with comorbidity between schizophrenia spectrum disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder: is there evidence for a "schizo-obsessive" subtype? Psychiatry Res 220(3):846–854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014.10.003
Hermesh H, Weizman A, Gur S, Zalsman G, Shiloh R, Zohar J, Gross-Isseroff R (2003) Alternation learning in OCD/schizophrenia patients. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol J Eur Coll Neuropsychopharmacol 13(2):87–91
Kazhungil F, Kumar KJ, Viswanath B, Shankar RG, Kandavel T, Math SB, Venkatasubramanian G, Reddy YCJ (2017) Neuropsychological profile of schizophrenia with and without obsessive compulsive disorder. Asian J Psychiatry 29:30–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2017.04.004
Kontis D, Theochari E, Nikolakopoulou M, Andreopoulou A, Vassos D, Grigoriou V, Vassilouli S, Giannakopoulou D, Kouloumbi M, Tsaltas E (2016) Obsessive compulsive symptoms are associated with better functioning independently of cognition in schizophrenia. Compr Psychiatry 70:32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2016.06.009
Kumbhani SR, Roth RM, Kruck CL, Flashman LA, McAllister TW (2010) Nonclinical obsessive-compulsive symptoms and executive functions in schizophrenia. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 22(3):304–312. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.neuropsych.22.3.304
Ntouros E, Bozikas VP, Andreou C, Kourbetis D, Lavrentiadis G, Garyfallos G (2014) Emotional perception and theory of mind in first episode psychosis: the role of obsessive-compulsive symptomatology. Psychiatry Res 220(1–2):112–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014.07.058
Patel DD, Laws KR, Padhi A, Farrow JM, Mukhopadhaya K, Krishnaiah R, Fineberg NA (2010) The neuropsychology of the schizo-obsessive subtype of schizophrenia: a new analysis. Psychol Med 40(6):921–933. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291709991255
Tiryaki A, Ozkorumak E (2010) Do the obsessive-compulsive symptoms have an effect in schizophrenia? Compr Psychiatry 51(4):357–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2009.10.007
Tonna M, Ottoni R, Pellegrini C, Bettini E, Accardi V, Ossola P, De Panfilis C, Marchesi C (2019) The “obsessive paradox”: the complex relationship between cognitive and obsessive dimensions in schizophrenia. J Nerv Ment Dis. https://doi.org/10.1097/nmd.0000000000000932
Wang YM, Zou LQ, Xie WL, Yang ZY, Zhu XZ, Cheung EFC, Sorensen TA, Moller A, Chan RCK (2019) Altered functional connectivity of the default mode network in patients with schizo-obsessive comorbidity: a comparison between schizophrenia and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Schizophr Bull 45(1):199–210
de Haan L, Hoogenboom B, Beuk N, van Amelsvoort T, Linszen D (2005) Obsessive-compulsive symptoms and positive, negative, and depressive symptoms in patients with recent-onset schizophrenic disorders. Can J Psychiatry 50(9):519–524. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370505000904
Zink M, Schirmbeck F, Rausch F, Eifler S, Elkin H, Solojenkina X, Englisch S, Wagner M, Maier W, Lautenschlager M, Heinz A, Gudlowski Y, Janssen B, Gaebel W, Michel TM, Schneider F, Lambert M, Naber D, Juckel G, Krueger-Oezguerdal S, Wobrock T, Hasan A, Riedel M, Müller H, Klosterkötter J, Bechdolf A (2014) Obsessive–compulsive symptoms in at-risk mental states for psychosis: associations with clinical impairment and cognitive function. Acta Psychiatr Scand 130(3):214–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/acps.12258
Hur JW, Shin NY, Jang JH, Shim G, Park HY, Hwang JY, Kim SN, Yoo JH, Hong KS, Kwon JS (2012) Clinical and neurocognitive profiles of subjects at high risk for psychosis with and without obsessive–compulsive symptoms. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 46(2):1440–1614
Tor P-C, Ng TP, Yong K-H, Sim K, Xiang Y-T, Wang C-Y, Lee EHM, Fujii S, Yang S-y, Chong M-Y (2011) Adjunctive benzodiazepine treatment of hospitalized schizophrenia patients in Asia from 2001 to 2008. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 14(6):735–745
Fond G, Boyer L, Favez M, Brunel L, Aouizerate B, Berna F, Capdevielle D, Chereau I, Dorey JM, Dubertret C, Dubreucq FC, Gabayet F, Laouamri H, Lancon C, Le Strat Y, Misdrahi D, Rey R, Passerieux C, Schandrin A, Schurhoff F, Tronche AM, Urbach M, Vidalhet P, Llorca PM, Pelissolo A, AtF-SgJ P (2016) Medication and aggressiveness in real-world schizophrenia. Results FACE-SZ Dataset 233(4):571–578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-015-4167-8
Weinbrenner S, Assion HJ, Stargardt T, Busse R, Juckel G, Gericke CA (2009) Drug prescription patterns in schizophrenia outpatients: analysis of data from a german health insurance fund. Pharmacopsychiatry 42(02):66–71. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0028-1103293
Haw C, Stubbs J (2007) Benzodiazepines–a necessary evil? A survey of prescribing at a specialist UK psychiatric hospital. J Psychopharmacol (Oxford, England) 21(6):645–649. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269881106072386
Clark RE, Xie H, Brunette MF (2004) Benzodiazepine prescription practices and substance abuse in persons with severe mental illness. J Clin Psychiatry 65(2):151–155
Suokas JT, Suvisaari JM, Haukka J, Korhonen P, Tiihonen JJSP, Epidemiology P (2013) Description of long-term polypharmacy among schizophrenia outpatients. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 48(4):631–638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-012-0586-6
Aronson JK (2015) Meyler’s side effects of drugs: the international encyclopedia of adverse drug reactions and interactions. Elsevier, Amsterdam
Waller DG, Sampson T (2013) Medical pharmacology and therapeutics e-book. Elsevier Health Sciences, Amsterdam
Ogino S, Miyamoto S, Miyake N, Yamaguchi N (2014) Benefits and limits of anticholinergic use in schizophrenia: focusing on its effect on cognitive function. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 68(1):37–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/pcn.12088
Ruxton K, Woodman RJ, Mangoni AA (2015) Drugs with anticholinergic effects and cognitive impairment, falls and all-cause mortality in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Clin Pharmacol 80(2):209–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.12617
Minzenberg MJ, Poole JH, Benton C, Vinogradov S (2004) Association of anticholinergic load with impairment of complex attention and memory in schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry 161(1):116–124. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.161.1.116
Schirmbeck F, Zink M (2013) Comorbid obsessive-compulsive symptoms in schizophrenia: contributions of pharmacological and genetic factors. Front Pharmacol 4:99. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2013.00099
Abramovitch A, Abramowitz JS, Mittelman A (2013) The neuropsychology of adult obsessive–compulsive disorder: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev 33(8):1163–1171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.09.004
Abramovitch A, Cooperman A (2015) The cognitive neuropsychology of obsessive-compulsive disorder: a critical review. J Obs Compuls Relat Disord 5:24–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocrd.2015.01.002
Burdick KE, Robinson DG, Malhotra AK, Szeszko PR (2008) Neurocognitive profile analysis in obsessive-compulsive disorder. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 14(4):640–645. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617708080727
Polanin JR, Pigott TD (2015) The use of meta-analytic statistical significance testing. Res Synth Methods 6(1):63–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1124
Karpov B, Joffe G, Aaltonen K, Suvisaari J, Baryshnikov I, Koivisto M, Melartin T, Suominen K, Naatanen P, Heikkinen M, Oksanen J, Isometsa E (2017) Psychoactive substance use in specialized psychiatric care patients. Int J Psychiatry Med 52(4–6):399–415. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091217417738937
Addy PH, Radhakrishnan R, Cortes JA, D’Souza DC (2012) Comorbid alcohol, cannabis, and cocaine use disorders in schizophrenia: epidemiology, consequences, mechanisms, and treatment. Focus 10(2):140–153
Boyette L, Swets M, Meijer C, Wouters L (2011) Factor structure of the Yale-Brown Obsessive–Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) in a large sample of patients with schizophrenia or related disorders and comorbid obsessive–compulsive symptoms. Psychiatry Res 186(2):409–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2010.07.048
Green MF, Nuechterlein KH, Kern RS, Baade LE, Fenton WS, Gold JM, Keefe RS, Mesholam-Gately R, Seidman LJ, Stover E, Marder SR (2008) Functional co-primary measures for clinical trials in schizophrenia: results from the MATRICS Psychometric and Standardization Study. Am J Psychiatry 165(2):221–228. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07010089
Kern RS, Nuechterlein KH, Green MF, Baade LE, Fenton WS, Gold JM, Keefe RS, Mesholam-Gately R, Mintz J, Seidman LJ, Stover E, Marder SR (2008) The MATRICS consensus cognitive battery, part 2: co-norming and standardization. Am J Psychiatry 165(2):214–220. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07010043
Acknowledgements
The authors of this work would like to give special thanks to MA J.G. Daams, the clinical librarian who assisted us in our search for data.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Study design: FS, LDH and LD. Data collection: LD. Data analysis: LD. Interpretation of data: FS, LDH, JV, and LD. Writing of the report: FS, LDH, JV, and LD.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. No funding was received for this work.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Dijkstra, L., Vermeulen, J., de Haan, L. et al. Meta-analysis of cognitive functioning in patients with psychotic disorders and obsessive–compulsive symptoms. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 271, 689–706 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-020-01174-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-020-01174-3