Search

People may be more likely to exercise if they have self-efficacy for exercise (SEE). We conducted an exploratory analysis of SEE using data from a clinical trial designed to increase physical activity (N = 340). We evaluated correlates of baseline SEE and the relationship between baseline SEE and physical activity. Low SEE at baseline was correlated with lower well-being, physical activity, and higher depression at baseline. Participants with high (vs. low) baseline SEE had higher physical activity (but no differential change in activity) over time. These data highlight the potential role of SEE in psychological health and physical activity.

ObjectivesThe association of bipolar disorder with early and excessive cardiovascular disease was identified over a century ago. Nonetheless, the vascular-bipolar link remains underrecognized, particularly with regard to how this link can contribute to our understanding of pathogenesis and treatment.MethodsAn international group of experts completed a selective review of the literature, distilling core themes, identifying limitations and gaps in the literature, and highlighting future directions to bridge these gaps.ResultsThe association between bipolar disorder and vascular disease is large in magnitude, consistent across studies, and independent of confounding variables where assessed. The vascular-bipolar link is multifactorial and is difficult to study given the latency between the onset of bipolar disorder, often in adolescence or early adulthood, and subsequent vascular disease, which usually occurs decades later. As a result, studies have often focused on risk factors for vascular disease or intermediate phenotypes, such as structural and functional vascular imaging measures. There is interest in identifying the most relevant mediators of this relationship, including lifestyle (eg, smoking, diet, exercise), medications, and systemic biological mediators (eg, inflammation). Nonetheless, there is a paucity of treatment studies that deliberately engage these mediators, and thus far no treatment studies have focused on engaging vascular imaging targets.ConclusionsFurther research focused on the vascular-bipolar link holds promise for gleaning insights regarding the underlying causes of bipolar disorder, identifying novel treatment approaches, and mitigating disparities in cardiovascular outcomes for people with bipolar disorder.

Aim: Bipolar disorder (BD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) are both serious psychiatric conditions that elevate the risk for harmful outcomes. Although these conditions represent distinct diagnostic entities, existing research suggests that approximately 20% of individuals with BD meet the criteria for comorbid BPD. Individuals with comorbid BD/BPD appear to have a markedly more severe and phenomenologically distinct clinical course when compared with those with BD alone. However, treatments have generally not been tested in this specific population, and currently, no formal treatment guidelines exist for this subgroup of patients. Method: In the current paper, we review the epidemiological and descriptive research characterizing those with comorbid BD/BPD and discuss the impact of this comorbidity on psychosocial treatment. We also review current findings on evidence‐based treatments for BD and BPD that show promise in treating those with comorbid BD/BPD. Results: In our review of the literature, we highlight the importance of recognizing this comorbidity and discuss avenues for developing and integrating evidence‐based treatment approaches for this understudied clinical population. Conclusions: Although formal trials of interventions targeted to comorbid BD/BPD are limited, there is promising evidence regarding the possibility of using or integrating existing evidence‐based approaches for this population. There are also several areas of clinical practice improvement and future research directions that stem from this literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The co-occurrence of bipolar disorder and substance use disorders presents significant clinical challenges, complicating diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. This review explores both psychosocial and psychopharmacological interventions evaluated in randomized, controlled trials to address this comorbidity. Findings indicate that while several interventions show promise, no single treatment is consistently effective across both mood and substance use domains as compared to placebo. These findings highlight the necessity of personalized, multimodal treatment plans tailored to the specific needs of individuals with comorbid bipolar disorder and substance use disorders. [Psychiatr Ann. 2024;54(9):e258–e262.] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveUp to 60% of patients with bipolar disorder develop a substance use disorder during their lifetime. The purpose of this paper was to assess the impact of substance use disorders on depression recovery among bipolar patients randomly assigned to different psychotropic medications and psychosocial interventions. We hypothesized that patients with a comorbid substance use disorder would benefit less from psychotherapy regardless of treatment intensity/length compared to patients without a comorbid substance use disorder.MethodWe conducted post hoc analyses among bipolar disorder patients ( n = 270) with and without comorbid substance use disorders enrolled in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder randomized psychosocial intervention trial. All patients entered during or shortly after the onset of a bipolar depressive episode. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess whether current or past substance use disorders moderated the response of patients to intensive psychosocial intervention or brief psychoeducation with collaborative care, operationalized as full recovery from an episode of bipolar depression.ResultsCurrent comorbid substance use disorders significantly predicted likelihood of recovery (odds ratio = 2.25, p = 0.025) and time to recovery (odds ratio = 1.71, p = 0.006) from bipolar depression. We found that 74.5% of patients with a current substance use disorder, compared to 56.5% without a current substance use disorder, recovered from bipolar depression. Past substance use disorders did not predict likelihood of recovery or time to recovery. Current substance use disorders did not significantly moderate response to intensive psychotherapy versus collaborative care.ConclusionContrary to our hypotheses, bipolar disorder participants with a current comorbid substance use disorder were more likely to recover from psychosocial treatment for bipolar depression than patients without a current comorbid substance use disorder. If this finding is replicated, it has implications for the ordering of treatment for patients with comorbid bipolar disorder and substance use disorders.

This study examined whether sleep disturbance predicted or moderated responses to psychotherapy in participants who participated in STEP-BD, a national, multisite study that examined the effectiveness of different treatment combinations for bipolar disorder. Participants received either a brief psychosocial intervention called collaborative care (CC; n = 130) or intensive psychotherapy (IP; n = 163), with study-based pharmacotherapy. Participants (N = 243) were defined as current (past week) short sleepers (

BackgroundWe sought to address how predictors and moderators of psychotherapy for bipolar depression - identified individually in prior analyses - can inform the development of a metric for prospectively classifying treatment outcome in intensive psychotherapy (IP) versus collaborative care (CC) adjunctive to pharmacotherapy in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program (STEP-BD) study.MethodsWe conducted post-hoc analyses on 135 STEP-BD participants using cluster analysis to identify subsets of participants with similar clinical profiles and investigated this combined metric as a moderator and predictor of response to IP. We used agglomerative hierarchical cluster analyses and k-means clustering to determine the content of the clinical profiles. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate whether the resulting clusters predicted or moderated likelihood of recovery or time until recovery.ResultsThe cluster analysis yielded a two-cluster solution: 1) "less-recurrent/severe" and 2) "chronic/recurrent." Rates of recovery in IP were similar for less-recurrent/severe and chronic/recurrent participants. Less-recurrent/severe patients were more likely than chronic/recurrent patients to achieve recovery in CC (p=.040, OR=4.56). IP yielded a faster recovery for chronic/recurrent participants, whereas CC led to recovery sooner in the less-recurrent/severe cluster (p=.034, OR=2.62).LimitationsCluster analyses require list-wise deletion of cases with missing data so we were unable to conduct analyses on all STEP-BD participants.ConclusionsA well-powered, parametric approach can distinguish patients based on illness history and provide clinicians with symptom profiles of patients that confer differential prognosis in CC vs. IP.

ObjectiveAt least 50% of individuals with bipolar disorder have a lifetime anxiety disorder. Individuals with both bipolar disorder and a co-occurring anxiety disorder experience longer illness duration, greater illness severity, and poorer treatment response. The study explored whether comorbid lifetime anxiety in bipolar patients moderates psychotherapy treatment outcome.MethodIn the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program randomized controlled trial of psychotherapy for bipolar depression, participants received up to 30 sessions of intensive psychotherapy (family-focused therapy, interpersonal and social rhythm therapy, or cognitive-behavioral therapy) or collaborative care, a three-session comparison treatment, plus pharmacotherapy. Using the number needed to treat, we computed effect sizes to analyze the relationship between lifetime anxiety disorders and rates of recovery across treatment groups after 1 year.ResultsA total of 269 patients (113 women) with a comorbid lifetime anxiety disorder (N=177) or without a comorbid lifetime anxiety disorder (N=92) were included in the analysis. Participants with a lifetime anxiety disorder were more likely to recover with psychotherapy than with collaborative care (66% compared with 49% recovered over 1 year; number needed to treat=5.88, small to medium effect). For patients without a lifetime anxiety disorder, there was no difference between rates of recovery in psychotherapy compared with collaborative care (64% compared with 62% recovered; number needed to treat=50, small effect). Participants with one lifetime anxiety disorder were likely to benefit from intensive psychotherapy compared with collaborative care (84% compared with 53% recovered; number needed to treat=3.22, medium to large effect), whereas patients with multiple anxiety disorders exhibited no difference in response to the two treatments (54% compared with 46% recovered; number needed to treat=12.5, small effect).ConclusionsDepressed patients with bipolar disorder and comorbid anxiety may be in particular need of additional psychotherapy for treating acute depression. These results need to be replicated in studies that stratify bipolar patients to treatments based on their anxiety comorbidity status.