Evaluating discussion board engagement in the MoodSwings online self-help program for bipolar disorder: protocol for an observational prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: Online, self-guided programs exist for a wide range of mental health conditions, including bipolar disorder, and discussion boards are often part of these interventions. The impact engagement with these discussion boards has on the psychosocial well-being of users is largely unknown. More specifically we need to clarify the influence of the type and level of engagement on outcomes. The primary aim of this exploratory study is to determine if there is a relationship between different types (active, passive or none) and levels (high, mid and low) of discussion board engagement and improvement in outcome measures from baseline to follow up, with a focus on self-reported social support, stigma, quality of life and levels of depression and mania. The secondary aim of this study is to identify any differences in demographic variables among discussion users. METHODS/DESIGN: The present study is a sub-study of the MoodSwings 2.0 3-arm randomised controlled trial (discussion board only (arm 1), discussion board plus psychoeducation (arm 2), discussion board, psychoeducation plus cognitive behavioural therapy-based tools (arm 3)). Discussion engagement will be measured via online participant activity monitoring. Assessments include online self-report as well as blinded phone interviews at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12&nbsp;months follow up. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will help to inform future programs about whether or not discussion boards are a beneficial inclusion in online self-help interventions. It will also help to determine if motivating users to actively engage in online discussion is necessary, and if so, what level of engagement is optimal to produce the most benefit. Future programs may benefit through being able to identify those most likely to poorly engage, based on demographic variables, so motivational strategies can be targeted accordingly. <br /

Relationship of comorbid personality disorders to prospective outcome in bipolar disorder

Introduction There is a high incidence of Axis II personality disorders (PDs) in patients with bipolar illness, but their influence on the prospectively measured course of bipolar disorder has been less well explicated. Methods 392 outpatients with bipolar disorder gave informed consent, completed the PDQ4 99 item personality disorder rating, and where clinically rated during at least one year of prospective naturalistic treatment. They were classified as Well on admission (N = 64) or Responders (N = 146) or Non-responders (N = 182) to treatment for at least six months. Results Patients who were positive for PDs were very infrequently represented in the category of Well on admission. In addition, patients with borderline, depressive, and schizoid PDs were significantly more likely to be Non-responders compared to Responders upon prospective naturalistic treatment in the network. Conclusions Patients with bipolar disorder and comorbid PDs were in general less likely to be Well from treatment in the community at network entry or to be a Responder to prospective treatment in the network. Therapeutic approaches to patients with PDs deserve specific study in an attempt to achieve a better long-term course of bipolar disorder

25 Years of the International Bipolar Collaborative Network (BCN)

Background The Stanley Foundation Bipolar Treatment Outcome Network (SFBN) recruited more than 900 outpatients from 1995 to 2002 from 4 sites in the United States (US) and 3 in the Netherlands and Germany (abbreviated as Europe). When funding was discontinued, the international group of investigators continued to work together as the Bipolar Collaborative Network (BCN), publishing so far 87 peer-reviewed manuscripts. On the 25th year anniversary of its founding, publication of a brief summary of some of the major findings appeared appropriate. Important insights into the course and treatment of adult outpatients with bipolar disorder were revealed and some methodological issues and lessons learned will be discussed. Results The illness is recurrent and pernicious and difficult to bring to a long-term remission. Virtually all aspects of the illness were more prevalent in the US compared to Europe. This included vastly more patients with early onset illness and those with more psychosocial adversity in childhood; more genetic vulnerability; more anxiety and substance abuse comorbidity; more episodes and rapid cycling; and more treatment non-responsiveness. Conclusions The findings provide a road map for a new round of much needed clinical treatment research studies. They also emphasize the need for the formation of a new network focusing on child and youth onset of mood disorders with a goal to achieve early precision diagnostics for intervention and prevention in attempting to make the course of bipolar illness more benign

Online ethics: where will the interface of mental health and the internet lead us?

While e-health initiatives are poised to revolutionize delivery and access to mental health care, conducting clinical research online involves specific contextual and ethical considerations. Face-to-face psychosocial interventions can at times entail risk and have adverse psychoactive effects, something true for online mental health programs too. Risks associated with and specific to internet psychosocial interventions include potential breaches of confidentiality related to online communications (such as unencrypted email), data privacy and security, risks of self-selection and self-diagnosis as well as the shortcomings of receiving psychoeducation and treatment at distance from an impersonal website. Such ethical issues need to be recognized and proactively managed in website and study design as well as treatment implementation. In order for online interventions to succeed, risks and expectations of all involved need to be carefully considered with a focus on ethical integrity

Mania and bipolar depression:complementing not opposing poles—a post-hoc analysis of mixed features in manic and hypomanic episodes

BACKGROUND: Depending on the classification system used, 5–40% of manic subjects present with concomitant depressive symptoms. This post-hoc analysis evaluates the hypothesis that (hypo)manic subjects have a higher burden of depression than non-(hypo)manic subjects. METHODS: Data from 806 Bipolar I or II participants of the Stanley Foundation Bipolar Network (SFBN) were analyzed, comprising 17,937 visits. A split data approach was used to separate evaluation and verification in independent samples. For verification of our hypotheses, we compared mean IDS-C scores ratings of non-manic, hypomanic and manic patients. Data were stored on an SQL-server and extracted using standard SQL functions. Linear correlation coefficients and pivotal tables were used to characterize patient groups. RESULTS: Mean age of participants was 40 ± 12 years (range 18–81). 460 patients (57.1%) were female and 624 were diagnosed as having bipolar I disorder (77.4%) and 182 with bipolar II (22.6%). Data of 17,937 visits were available for analyses, split into odd and even patient numbers and stratified into three groups by YMRS-scores: not manic < 12, hypomanic < 21, manic < 30. Average IDS-C sum scores in manic or hypomanic states were significantly higher (p < .001) than for non-manic states. (Hypo)manic female patients were likely to show more depressive symptoms than males (p < .001). Similar results were obtained when only the core items of the YMRS or only the number of depressive symptoms were considered. Analyzing the frequency of (hypo)manic mixed states applying a proxy of the DSM-5 mixed features specifier extracted from the IDS-C, we found that almost 50% of the (hypo)manic group visits fulfilled DSM-5 mixed features specifier criteria. CONCLUSION: Subjects with a higher manic symptom load are also significantly more likely to experience a higher number of depressive symptoms. Mania and depression are not opposing poles of bipolarity but complement each other. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40345-021-00241-5

Are personality disorders in bipolar patients more frequent in the US than Europe?

Objective: Bipolar patients in the United States (US) compared to those from the Netherlands and Germany (here abbrev. as “Europe”) have more Axis I comorbidities and more poor prognosis factors such as early onset and psychosocial adversity in childhood. We wished to examine whether these differences also extended to Axis II personality disorders (PDs). Methods: 793 outpatients with bipolar disorder diagnosed by SCID gave informed consent for participating in a prospective longitudinal follow up study with clinician ratings at each visit. They completed detailed patient questionnaires and a 99 item personality disorder inventory (PDQ-4). US versus European differences in PDs were examined in univariate analyses and then logistic regressions, controlling for severity of depression, age, gender, and other poor prognosis factors. Results: In the univariate analysis, 7 PDs were more prevalent in the US than in Europe, including antisocial, avoidant, borderline, depressive, histrionic, obsessive compulsive, and schizoid PDs. In the multivariate analysis, the last 4 of these PDs remained independently greater in the US than Europe. Conclusions: Although limited by use of self report and other potentially confounding factors, multiple PDs were more prevalent in the US than in Europe, but these preliminary findings need to be confirmed using other methodologies. Other poor prognosis factors are prevalent in the US, including early age of onset, more childhood adversity, anxiety and substance abuse comorbidity, and more episodes and rapid cycling. The interactions among these variables in relationship to the more adverse course of illness in the US than in Europe require further study

Quetiapine monotherapy in bipolar II depression: combined data from four large, randomized studies

BackgroundDespite being present in up to 1% of the population, few controlled trials have examined the efficacy of treatments for bipolar II depression. Pooled data are presented from four placebo-controlled studies (BOLDER I [5077US/0049] and II [D1447C00135]; EMBOLDEN I [D1447C00001] and II [D1447C00134]) that evaluated the efficacy of quetiapine monotherapy for depressive episodes in patients with bipolar II disorder.MethodsAll studies included an 8-week, double-blind treatment phase in which patients were randomly assigned to treatment with quetiapine 300 mg/day, quetiapine 600 mg/day, or placebo. Outcome measures included the change from baseline in MADRS total score at week 8, effect sizes, and MADRS response and remission rates.Results and discussionImprovements in mean MADRS total scores from baseline to week 8 were significantly greater with quetiapine 300 and 600 mg/day (&minus;15.58 [n&thinsp;=&thinsp;283] and &minus;14.88 [n&thinsp;=&thinsp;289]; p&thinsp;&lt;&thinsp;0.001) compared with placebo (&minus;11.61 [n&thinsp;=&thinsp;204]). The MADRS effect sizes were 0.44 for quetiapine 300 mg/day and 0.47 for 600 mg/day (p&thinsp;&lt;&thinsp;0.001 vs placebo). Significantly higher proportions of patients receiving quetiapine, at both doses, than placebo-treated patients achieved response and remission at week 8 (p&thinsp;&lt;&thinsp;0.01). Common adverse events associated with quetiapine (both doses) included dry mouth, somnolence, sedation, dizziness, and headache. Rates of mania and hypomania were similar for quetiapine and placebo. Quetiapine monotherapy demonstrated significant efficacy compared with placebo and was generally well tolerated in the treatment of bipolar II depression.<br /

The relationship between self-reported borderline personality features and prospective illness course in bipolar disorder

Abstract Background Although bipolar disorder (BD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) share clinical characteristics and frequently co-occur, their interrelationship is controversial. Especially, the differentiation of rapid cycling BD and BPD can be troublesome. This study investigates the relationship between borderline personality features (BPF) and prospective illness course in patients with BD, and explores the effects of current mood state on self-reported BPF profiles. Methods The study included 375 patients who participated in the former Stanley Foundation Bipolar Network. All patients met DSM-IV criteria for bipolar-I disorder (n = 294), bipolar-II disorder (n = 72) or bipolar disorder NOS (n = 9). BPF were assessed with the self-rated Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire. Illness course was based on 1-year clinician rated prospective daily mood ratings with the life chart methodology. Regression analyses were used to estimate the relationships among these variables. Results Although correlations were weak, results showed that having more BPF at baseline is associated with a higher episode frequency during subsequent 1-year follow-up. Of the nine BPF, affective instability, impulsivity, and self-mutilation/suicidality showed a relationship to full-duration as well as brief episode frequency. In contrast all other BPF were not related to episode frequency. Conclusions Having more BPF was associated with an unfavorable illness course of BD. Affective instability, impulsivity, and self-mutilation/suicidality are associated with both rapid cycling BD and BPD. Still, many core features of BPD show no relationship to rapid cycling BD and can help in the differential diagnosis

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) 2018 guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) previously published treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder in 2005, along with international commentaries and subsequent updates in 2007, 2009, and 2013. The last two updates were published in collaboration with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD). These 2018 CANMAT and ISBD Bipolar Treatment Guidelines represent the significant advances in the field since the last full edition was published in 2005, including updates to diagnosis and management as well as new research into pharmacological and psychological treatments. These advances have been translated into clear and easy to use recommendations for first, second, and third- line treatments, with consideration given to levels of evidence for efficacy, clinical support based on experience, and consensus ratings of safety, tolerability, and treatment-emergent switch risk. New to these guidelines, hierarchical rankings were created for first and second- line treatments recommended for acute mania, acute depression, and maintenance treatment in bipolar I disorder. Created by considering the impact of each treatment across all phases of illness, this hierarchy will further assist clinicians in making evidence-based treatment decisions. Lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, asenapine, aripiprazole, paliperidone, risperidone, and cariprazine alone or in combination are recommended as first-line treatments for acute mania. First-line options for bipolar I depression include quetiapine, lurasidone plus lithium or divalproex, lithium, lamotrigine, lurasidone, or adjunctive lamotrigine. While medications that have been shown to be effective for the acute phase should generally be continued for the maintenance phase in bipolar I disorder, there are some exceptions (such as with antidepressants); and available data suggest that lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, lamotrigine, asenapine, and aripiprazole monotherapy or combination treatments should be considered first-line for those initiating or switching treatment during the maintenance phase. In addition to addressing issues in bipolar I disorder, these guidelines also provide an overview of, and recommendations for, clinical management of bipolar II disorder, as well as advice on specific populations, such as women at various stages of the reproductive cycle, children and adolescents, and older adults. There are also discussions on the impact of specific psychiatric and medical comorbidities such as substance use, anxiety, and metabolic disorders. Finally, an overview of issues related to safety and monitoring is provided. The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope that these guidelines become a valuable tool for practitioners across the globe

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) 2018 guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142934/1/bdi12609.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142934/2/bdi12609_am.pd