Search

Background. Functional remediation is a novel intervention with demonstrated efficacy at improving functional outcome in euthymic bipolar patients. However, in a previous trial no significant changes in neurocognitive measures were detected. The objective of the present analysis was to test the efficacy of this therapy in the enhancement of neuropsychological functions in a subgroup of neurocognitively impaired bipolar patients. Method. A total of 188 out of 239 DSM-IV euthymic bipolar patients performing below two standard deviations from the mean of normative data in any neurocognitive test were included in this subanalysis. Repeated-measures analyses of variance were conducted to assess the impact of the treatment arms [functional remediation, psychoeducation, or treatment as usual (TAU)] on participants' neurocognitive and functional outcomes in the subgroup of neurocognitively impaired patients. Results. Patients receiving functional remediation (n = 56) showed an improvement on delayed free recall when compared with the TAU (n = 63) and psychoeducation (n = 69) groups as shown by the group × time interaction at 6-month follow-up [F2,158 = 3.37, degrees of freedom (df) = 2, p = 0.037]. However, Tukey post-hoc analyses revealed that functional remediation was only superior when compared with TAU (p = 0.04), but not with psychoeducation (p = 0.10). Finally, the patients in the functional remediation group also benefited from the treatment in terms of functional outcome (F2,158 = 4.26, df = 2, p = 0.016). Conclusions. Functional remediation is effective at improving verbal memory and psychosocial functioning in a sample of neurocognitively impaired bipolar patients at 6-month follow-up. Neurocognitive enhancement may be one of the active ingredients of this novel intervention, and, specifically, verbal memory appears to be the most sensitive function that improves with functional remediation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: there is a lack of scientific data regarding speed of action of antimanic treatments, a relevant issue in clinical practice. Objective: to assess differences in the speed of onset of antimanic efficacy between haloperidol (as most studied first-generation antipsychotic) and second-generation antipsychotics. Experimental procedures: meta-analysis of double-blind randomized clinical trials in acute mania, comparing treatment with haloperidol and with second-generation antipsychotics. Search was conducted in MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases (last search: September 2011). Differences in mania scale score reduction at week 1 were assessed. Results: 8 randomized clinical trials fulfilled inclusion criteria and 1 of them was excluded due to low methodological quality. 2037 Manic patients had been treated with antipsychotics in the 7 trials. Haloperidol was found to be significantly more efficacious in the reduction of the mania scale score at week 1. The effect size was small, the Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) being 0.17, with a 95% Confidence Interval ranging from 0.01 to 0.32. Haloperidol was significantly more efficacious than olanzapine (SMD: 0.40 [0.21, 0.59]) and ziprasidone (0.39 [0.18, 0.61]). A non-significant trend towards superiority of haloperidol was found over aripiprazole (SMD: 0.13 [−0.02, 0.19]). There were no significant differences between haloperidol and quetiapine (0.17 [−0.11, 0.44]), and haloperidol and risperidone (SMD: −0.10 [0.30, 0.09]). Conclusions: haloperidol shows a faster onset of antimanic action than second-generation antipsychotics. This difference may be related to D2 affinity. Haloperidol may be considered a treatment option in severely ill manic patients who require urgent relief of symptoms. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of psychoeducation in the symptomatic and functional recovery, and quality of life (QoL) in a sample of patients with bipolar disorder (BD). Method: The sample comprised 55 patients with BD I and II in remission (Young Mania Rating Scale ≤6 and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ≤7). Out-patients were matched assigned to receive 16 sessions of psychoeducation [experimental group (EG)] or 16 sessions of placebo without psychoeducation [control group (CG)]. Groups were evaluated at study baseline, midpoint, endpoint, and at 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Results: No significant differences between the groups were found for the variables evaluated (mood symptoms, functioning and QoL), except for overall clinical improvement, subjectively perceived by EG subjects. Both groups showed a trend toward improved clinical global impression and QoL (environmental). No reduction in mood symptoms or improvement in psychosocial functioning was observed. Psychosocial treatment compliance was positively correlated with global functioning, social adjustment, sociability, and global clinical impression. Conclusion: Sixteen session psychoeducation seems to be ineffective to prevent mood episodes or improve functioning in a sample of bipolar patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Murru A, Pacchiarotti I, Nivoli AMA, Bonnin CM, Patrizi B, Amann B, Vieta E, Colom F. Rates and clinical correlates of treatment non-adherence in schizoaffective bipolar patients. Objective: To analyze demographical, clinical, and therapeutic variables that may be associated with pharmacological non-adherence in a sample of schizoaffective patients, bipolar type. Method: Adherence to treatment and its clinical correlates were assessed at the end of a 10-year follow-up in 76 patients meeting DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type. Adherent and poorly adherent patients were compared regarding clinical and therapeutic variables. Results: The rate of poorly adherent patients was 32/76 (41.2%) of the sample. Adherent patients were more likely to have presented an affective episode at illness onset and to have fewer purely - non-affective - psychotic episodes. Demographic or other clinical variables were not found to be associated to treatment adherence. Family history for psychiatric disorders or suicide did not correlate either, and neither did any specific pharmacological agent. Conclusion: Rates of non-adherence in schizoaffective disorder are high. Adherence seems to be associated to a more affective course of illness (affective first episode and fewer purely psychotic episodes). Patients with more prominent schizophrenia-like characteristics could be at higher risk for poor adherence and need to be closely followed and monitored. Even when properly treated, schizoaffective disorder is a disabling and severe disorder with high risk for recurrences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Maintenance therapy in bipolar disorder is primarily aimed at preventing recurrence of acute episodes. Clinicians often decide on the basis of their own experience whether mood stabilizer (MS) is properly satisfying the objective of preventing a relapse/recurrence. Evidence-based data seem far from clinical practice in assessing a MS efficacy, as they mainly focus on a drug''s efficacy to first relapse and not considering the patient''s course of illness. The problem of assessing MS''s efficacy seems further complicated when considering combination therapy, which, due to lack of evidence-based data, economical aspects, attitude of clinicians and legal issues may bring to cumulative prescriptions. Nowadays, the drug therapy for a bipolar patient is usually tailored after longitudinal observation of his specific course of illness. The course of illness should be considered also when choosing practical criteria for the suspension of a MS due to lack of efficacy. The authors propose some preliminary criteria which may help clinicians evaluating whether a mood stabilizer is being useful or not, dividing possible outcomes and suggesting subsequent therapeutic steps in the optimization of a patient''s treatment. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective: To summarize the conceptual and operational definitions of treatment-resistant bipolar depression and to review the evidence-based therapeutic options. Method: Structured searches of PubMed, Index Medicus, Excerpta Medica and Psyclit conducted in December 2008. Results: Criteria for treatment resistance in bipolar depression are commonly based on concepts stemming from treatment resistance as defined for unipolar depression, an approach that proved to be inadequate. In fact, the addition of an ad hoc criterion based on lithium and other mood stabilizer unresponsiveness after reaching adequate plasma levels appears to be a patch that attempts to take into account the uniqueness of bipolar depression but fails to become operational. Recent data from randomized clinical trials of new anticonvulsants and second-generation antipsychotics should lead to the development of a modern definition of treatment-resistant bipolar depression, and specific therapeutic algorithms. Conclusion: We suggest a redefinition of resistant bipolar I and II depression. We propose different degrees of severity within bipolar depression in a stepwise manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Colom F. The mechanism of action of psychotherapy. Bipolar Disord 2002: 4(Suppl. 1): 102. © Blackwell Munksgaard, 2002. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lithium (Li) and valproate (VPA) are used in the treatment of bipolar disorder (BD), with narrow therapeutic window requiring periodic control of serum levels. This prevents intoxication, lack of efficacy due to low serum concentrations, and allows monitoring adherence. We aimed at evaluating the bioequivalence of salivary and blood levels of LI or VPA in a sample of adult BD patients. Secondarily, lithium bioequivalence was evaluated across different patients’ lifespans. BD patients treated with either Li or VPA underwent contemporary standard serum and salivary measurements. Blood levels of both drugs were taken according to standard procedures. Li salivary levels were performed by an adapted potentiometric method on the AVL9180 electrolyte analyzer. VPA salivary levels were taken with an immune-assay method with turbidimetric inhibition. A total of 50 patients (38 on Li, 12 on VPA) were enrolled. Blood-saliva bioequivalence for VPA was not found due to a high variability in salivary measures. Li measures resulted in a high correlation ( r =0.767, p <0.001), showing no partial correlation with age ( r =0.147, p =0.380). Li salivary test is a reliable method of measuring Li availability and is equivalent to serum levels. Potential advantages of Li salivary testing are its non-invasive nature and the possibility of doing the test during the usual appointment with the psychiatrist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Poor adherence rates in Bipolar Disorder type I (BDI) and Schizoaffective Disorder, bipolar type (SAD) may be high This study was aimed at comparing the clinical correlates of adherence to treatment and the course of illness in BDI and SAD patients. Methods: 75 SAD and 150 BDI DSM-IV outpatients were included. Adherence was assessed on the basis of patients’ and care-givers’ reports and serum levels, when available. Socio-demographic, clinical and treatment variables were collected and compared between diagnostic subsamples and then between goodly and poorly adherent patients. Multiple logistic regressions were performed, controlling for diagnostic subsample differences, to identify correlates of adherence in BDI and SAD groups. Results: Poor adherence was highly prevalent both in BDI (32%) and in SAD patients (44%), with no significant differences between diagnostic categories. Presence of psychotic symptoms (p=0.029), higher number of manic relapses (p<0.001), comorbidity with personality disorders (p=0.002), and lithium therapy (p=0.003) were associated with poor adherence to treatment. Diagnostic subgroup analyses showed different predictive models, with the BDI poorly adherent subsample being more likely to include comorbid personality and manic recurrences and the SAD poorly adherent subsample being less clinically predictable. Limitations: The cross-sectional nature of the study limits de capacity to ascertain the direction of the relationship between certain variables. Conclusions: Rates of poor adherence to oral treatments are similar in SAD and BDI. BDI patients with comorbid personality and substance use disorders are likely to be poorly adherent. Treatment adherence may be more difficult to predict in SAD patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Schizoaffective disorder (SAD) is a chronic, severe and disabling illness consisting on the concurrent presentation of symptoms of schizophrenia and affective disorders (depression and/or mania). Evidence for the treatment of SAD mostly derives from studies based on mixed samples (i.e. schizophrenic and schizoaffective patients) or on extrapolations from studies on schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. The objective of the present review is to systematically consider and summarize the best evidence-based approaches to the treatment of SAD and extensively point out the gap between treatment research and clinical practice of this disorder. The complex problem of controlling the pleomorphic presentation of SAD''s syndromic construct is reflected in the lack of evidence on key topics, including: diagnostic consistency, pharmacological approaches (mood stabilizers, antidepressants, both in acute and maintenance treatment as well as their possible combination), and the adjunctive role of psychosocial and biophysical interventions. Finally, treatment strategies for SAD, both unipolar and bipolar type, are proposed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Introduction: We hypothesized that predominant episode-polarity would predict response to treatment of depressive episodes in bipolar I disorder (BPD) patients with treatment in a placebo-controlled trial, in the sense that patients with manic predominant polarity (PM) would respond better than patients with depressive predominant polarity (PD). Method: This post-hoc analysis of a published trial examined outcomes of 788 depressed (MADRS score ≥20) adult BPD patients with baseline and follow-up assessments, according to their predominant polarity based on previous recurrences of mania-hypomania vs. depression in ≥2:1 excess. Patients (total=833) were randomized to an 8-week trial of treatment with placebo (n =377), olanzapine (5–20 mg/day; n =370), or olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC; 6/25, 6/50, or 12/50 mg/day; n =86). Treatment response was based on improvement in Clinical Global Impression of depression severity (CGI-D). We analyzed for associations of this outcome with predominant lifetime illness-polarity, based on retrospective SCID-based assessment of individual clinical history. Results: Predominant polarity could be demonstrated in 367/788 patients (46.6%), showing a 2.7-fold excess of predominant depressive over manic past-illnesses (34.1%/12.4%), with similar distribution by sex and among treatment-arms. Moreover, based on least-square change in CGI-D severity (based on a mixed model of repeated measures [MMRM]), predominant polarity has different impact in the treatment outcome for each gender. Men with predominantly manic polarity had statistically significant better improvement than men with predominantly depressive polarity. Such difference was not observed in the female population. Other outcome measures yielded similar conclusions. Conclusions: Predominant previous depressive>manic episodes selectively yielded poorer responses of BPD to treatment for acute BP depression, particularly in men. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Introduction: Non adherence to treatment is especially common in patients with chronic relapsing disorders. Schizoaffective disorder is a chronic, severe and disabling illness consisting of the concurrent presentation of symptoms of schizophrenia and affective disorders. Its course and prognosis has been found to be intermediate to those two conditions. Objectives: To evaluate treatment adherence in a schizoaffective sample and to which demographical and clinical variables it may be associated. Methods: Adherence to treatment and its clinical correlates were assessed in 69 patients meeting DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, by means of adherence-focused interviews, measurements of plasma concentrations of mood stabilizers. Adherent and poorly adherent patients were compared with respect to several clinical and treatment variables. Results: Poorly adherent patients were 40% of the total sample. Demographic variables (i.e.: gender, marital status, cultural level, employment) were not associated to treatment adherence, nor were clinical variables (age at onset, polarity of the first episode, lifetime history of seasonal pattern, rapid cycling, atypical depression, melancholia, catatonia) or family history for generic psychiatric, affective disorders and suicide. No pharmacological treatment (atypical antipsychotic, mood stabilizer and antidepressant) was associated to adherence in our sample. Conclusions: Clinical and demographical factors are not related to medication adherence in our sample. Coherently with the general severity of this condition, and since there does not seem to be any clinical predictor of poor adherence, in clinical practice all schizoaffective patients should be monitored and treated as potentially non-adherent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]