Search

Introduction: In mental health prevention, person-centered, and rights-based approaches, the role of recovery is highlighted (WHO, 2021). Various evaluation tools are used in rehabilitation objectives and programs, including the Specific Levels of Functioning Scale (SLOF) (Mucci et al. Schizophr Res 2014;159 144-50) and the Recovery Assessment Scale – Domains and Stages (RAS-DS), a self-measure of mental health recovery. It includes 38 items clustered into four recovery domains and meets two functions. In addition to measuring self-reported outcomes, it increases service-user control towards objectives and recovery action plans (Honey et al. BMC Psychiatry 2023;23 500). Objectives: To evalue the efficacy of RAD-DS in a psychiatric rehabilitation facility to be used as a routine tool in daily rehabilitation activity. Methods: In our observational study, we recruited 103 inpatients (total: 103 patients, females: 38 patients, males: 65 patients) in a psychiatric rehabilitation facility. The patient presented with psychiatric disorders that met the diagnostic criteria of DMS-5 (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, MDD, personality borderline disorder). Epidemiological data are shown in Table 1. All patients were undergoing a psychiatric rehabilitation program and were observed during a one-year evaluation. In all patients, the following rating scales were administered at baseline (T0) and after a year (T1): For the evaluation of social measures, life outcomes, and functioning and recovery: - Recovery Assessment Scale – Domains and Stages RAS-DS - Specific Levels of Functioning Scale (SLOF) - Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) For psychopathological evaluation: - Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) The data were statistically analyzed with the EZAnalyze 3.0 software for the Excel platform. Results: The RAS-DS total score results (Table 2) show a not significant difference between T0 vs. T1 (mean: 101.80 vs. 104.37, p. 0.193). An improvement in the score was observed after one year of rehabilitation treatment in the subgroup " Doing things I value " (T0 vs. T1: mean 16.15 vs. 18.77, p 0.001). Statistically significant differences were observed in the subgroups " Mastering my illness " (T0 vs. T1: mean 18.3 vs. 20.85, p. 0.021). In the other subgroups, the differences were not statistically significant. Interestingly, these results are comparable to those found with SLOF and GAF (respectively, p. 0.972 and p. 0.873). Image: Image 2: Conclusions: The current trend of research and clinical practice is to give more importance to psychiatric rehabilitation treatment (Franza Psychiatr Danub 2022;34(Suppl 8) 9-13). The results obtained with our observational study indicate the possible usefulness of indicators of patient well-being, as well as the RAS-DS in the management of psychiatric rehabilitation programs. The expectations, indications, and perceptions of psychiatric patients can be decisive in improving recovery. Disclosure of Interest: None Declared [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Bipolar Disorders have been consistently associated with cognitive dysfunction across a broad range of cognitive domains (patients, who usually took psychiatric drugs, sometimes presented changes of cognitive disorders). Many studies have focused on improving the illness severity of patients with MDD or BD by combining mood-stabilizing drugs with atypical antipsychotics (AA). However, the results are contradictory and have not confirmed the certain superiority of AA to other therapeutic strategies. Among these, the cognitive remedy has demonstrated important effectiveness on cognitive variations in this group of patients. Objectives: In our study, we tried to evaluate some changes in cognitive function in patients with BD treated with antipsychotics related to critical problems with typical cognitive tests. Methods: In our observational study, we recruited forty-three inpatients (20 females, 23 males) affected by Bipolar Disorder (DSM-5 criteria; particularly 78.5% affected by BD-I), in a psychiatric rehabilitation center. All patients were included in the ordinary rehabilitation treatment. All patients were treated with mood stabilizers (lithium n. 14; valproate n. 29), and at least one AA. The AAs have been the following: quetiapine, aripiprazole, and olanzapine (authorized in Italy)(Table 1). The observation period lasted three years, during three significant waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. All patients at baseline (T0) (March-April 2020), T1 (Maj-June 2021), T2 (April-Maj 2022), and T3 (April – June 2023) were administered the following rating scales: BPRS, YMRS, GAF, and HAM-D The data were statistically analyzed with the EZAnalyze 3.0 software for the Excel platform. Results: In Table 2 and Graphic the results obtained with the rating scales and statistical analysis are shown. In BRPS the data shows a statistically significant reduction in the total score in all periods analyzed. Similar results were found in the GAF and YRMS scales. However, with the HAM-D Scale, there was evidence of an increase in T2, although the differences were not statistically demonstrated. The differences in mean scores are more evident for quetiapine and olanzapine. Image: Image 2: Image 3: Conclusions: Our observational study showed that the atypical antipsychotics used in our work allowed a significant improvement of the symptoms in BD. However, the pandemic waves have no correlation with the treatment performed. New studies are necessary to highlight the relationship of the pharmacological treatment of BD with the progress of the COVID-19 pandemic. Disclosure of Interest: None Declared [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]