Table 2.
Characteristics of presence hallucinations in the 52 patients
| Contenta | |
|
| |
| Unidentified | 30 (58) |
| Identified, living | 11 (21) |
| Identified, deceased < 1 year | 2 (4) |
| Identified, deceased > 1 yearb | 12 (23) |
|
| |
|
Temporal characteristics
| |
| Predominant schedule | |
| Evening or night | 17 (33) |
| Sleep onset or outset | 3 (6) |
| Other or none | 32 (62) |
|
| |
| Frequency | |
| ≥ 1/day | 16 (31) |
| < 1/day and ≥ 1/week | 25 (48) |
| < 1/week | 11 (21) |
|
| |
| Duration | |
| Seconds | 41 (79) |
| Minutes | 9 (17) |
| Hours | 2 (4) |
|
| |
| Link with fluctuations | |
| Present in “off” state | 5 (10) |
|
| |
|
Spatial characteristics
| |
| Location of the “presence” | |
| Behind | 14 (27) |
| To one sidec | 30 (58) |
| Other room | 6 (12) |
| Other/unknown | 2 (4) |
|
| |
| Location of the patient | |
| Indoors | 41 (79) |
| Outdoors | 3 (6) |
| Indoors or outdoors | 8 (15) |
|
| |
|
Repercussions for the patient
| |
| Insight | |
| Present | 40 (77) |
| Absent or partial | 12 (23) |
|
| |
| Influence | |
| Yes | 5 (10) |
|
| |
| Checking for a real presence | |
| Yes | 41 (79) |
|
| |
| Emotional impact | |
| Unpleasant | 20 (38) |
| Neutral | 28 (54) |
| Pleasant | 4 (8) |
|
| |
|
Visual experience concomitant with SP
| |
| Seeing a “shadow” | 16 (31) |
| Using imagery terms to describe the experience | 6 (12) |
|
| |
|
Associated psychotic symptomsd
| |
| Minor phenomena | |
| Visual illusions | 30 (58) |
| Passage hallucinations | 15 (29) |
| At least one type | 35 (67) |
|
| |
| Hallucinations | |
| Complex visual | 20 (38) |
| Auditory | 14 (27) |
| Tactile | 14 (27) |
| Olfactory | 9 (17) |
| Gustatory | 5 (10) |
| At least one type | 32 (62) |
|
| |
| Delusions | |
| Present | 7 (13) |
Values are numbers of patients (%).
a
Three patients felt two types of presence.
b
In one case, the felt presence was that of a dog previously owned by the patient.
c
Right side: 10 (19%); left side: 9 (17%); one or the other side (or uncertain): 11 (21%).
d
Associated psychotic symptoms did not occur concomitantly with the sense of presence