Person:

Bauer, Mark

Objective

Few studies have compared treatment outcomes of African-American, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic white patients with bipolar disorder. The U.S. Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder compared one-year outcomes for bipolar I or II disorder from each of these racial-ethnic groups.

Methods

African Americans (N=155) were retrospectively compared with a matched group of non-Hispanic whites (N=729), and Hispanics (N=152) were compared with a separate matched group of non-Hispanic whites (N=822). Response and recovery outcomes were examined. Survival analysis was used to compare time to treatment response for depression (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale) and mania (Young Mania Rating Scale) as well as global assessment of functioning (Global Assessment of Functioning).

Results

For manic and depressive symptoms, time to response and proportion of responders were similar across groups. Over the study year the proportion of days well was similar across groups. A smaller proportion of African Americans met criteria for improved global functioning. Depression response among African Americans with psychotic symptoms was slower than the response among African Americans without psychotic symptoms and among non-Hispanic whites with or without psychotic symptoms. No differences between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites in response times and recovery were observed.

Conclusions

Results are consistent with U.S. clinical trials for other psychiatric disorders, which have reported similar outcomes for ratings of primary symptoms. Baseline psychotic symptoms are likely a significant contributor when African Americans with bipolar disorder are slow to recover. These results may be less generalizable to uninsured patients.

Background

Evidence suggests that patients with bipolar disorder have an elevated risk for comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) compared to those without a bipolar diagnosis. Although bipolar disorder is associated with decreased health-related quality of life (HRQOL), it is unclear whether comorbid PTSD interacts to affect HRQOL.

Method

Baseline data from a multi-site study of patients with bipolar disorder were analyzed. Patient surveys ascertained clinical and demographic information, including physical and mental HRQOL based on the SF-12, mood symptoms (PHQ-9, Internal State Scale), and self-reported co-occurring conditions including PTSD.

Results

Overall (N=384), 43.5% of patients self-reported co-occurring PTSD. Patients with PTSD had lower physical and mental HRQOL scores compared to those without PTSD (mean (SD) for those with and without PTSD, respectively): Mental Component Scale score 30.51 (8.22) and 32.86 (8.35); Physical Component Scale score 35.56 (7.77) and 37.21 (7.20). After adjusting for demographic and clinical factors including mood symptoms, multivariable linear regression analyses revealed that PTSD was no longer significantly associated with physical or mental HRQOL; however, depressive symptoms were independently associated with mental HRQOL (Beta −0.63, p<0.01).

Conclusion

Depressive symptoms may explain the association between PTSD and mental HRQOL. Clinicians working with these patients will want to emphasize treatment of depression as important towards improving HRQOL for this group.

Background: Mood disorders represent the most expensive mental disorders for employer-based commercial health plans. Collaborative care models are effective in treating chronic physical and mental illnesses at little to no net healthcare cost, but to date have primarily been implemented by larger healthcare organizations in facility-based models. The majority of practices providing commercially insured care are far too small to implement such models. Health plan-level collaborative care treatment can address this unmet need. The goal of this study is to implement at the national commercial health plan level a collaborative care model to improve outcomes for persons with mood disorders. Methods/Design A randomized controlled trial of a collaborative care model versus usual care will be conducted among beneficiaries of a large national health plan from across the country seen by primary care or behavioral health practices. At discharge 344 patients identified by health plan claims as hospitalized for unipolar depression or bipolar disorder will be randomized to receive collaborative care (patient phone-based self-management support, care management, and guideline dissemination to practices delivered by a plan-level care manager) or usual care from their provider. Primary outcomes are changes in mood symptoms and mental health-related quality of life at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include rehospitalization, receipt of guideline-concordant care, and work productivity. Discussion This study will determine whether a collaborative care model for mood disorders delivered at the national health plan level improves outcomes compared to usual care, and will inform a business case for collaborative care models for these settings that can reach patients wherever they receive treatment. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02041962; registered January 3, 2014.

Background: Several second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) received FDA approval for bipolar disorder in the 2000s. Although efficacious, they have been costly and may cause significant side effects. Little is known about the factors associated with prescribers’ decisions to initiate SGA prescriptions for this condition. Methods: We gathered administrative data from the Department of Veterans Affairs on 170,713 patients with bipolar disorder between fiscal years 2003–2010. Patients without a prior history of taking SGAs were considered eligible for SGA initiation during the study (n =126,556). Generalized estimating equations identified demographic, clinical, and comorbidity variables associated with initiation of an SGA prescription on a month-by-month basis. Results: While the number of patients with bipolar disorder using SGAs nearly doubled between 2003 and 2010, analyses controlling for patient characteristics and the rise in the bipolar population revealed a 1.2% annual decline in SGA initiation during this period. Most medical comorbidities were only modestly associated with overall SGA initiation, although significant differences emerged among individual SGAs. Several markers of patient severity predicted SGA initiation, including previous hospitalizations, psychotic features, and a history of other antimanic prescriptions; these severity markers became less firmly linked to SGA initiation over time. Providers in the South were somewhat more likely to initiate SGA treatment. Conclusions: The number of veterans with bipolar disorder prescribed SGAs is rising steadily, but this increase appears primarily driven by a corresponding increase in the bipolar population. Month-by-month analyses revealed that higher illness severity predicted SGA initiation, but that this association may be weakening over time.

Objectives

The goal of this randomized controlled pilot study was to determine whether Life Goals Collaborative Care (LGCC) compared to enhanced treatment as usual, reduced cardiometabolic factors and improved outcomes for persons with bipolar disorder from community-based practices.

Methods

Persons were randomized to receive LGCC (N=32) or enhanced treatment as usual (N=33). LGCC included four weekly self-management sessions and telephone contacts to encourage provider engagement and measurement-based care; enhanced treatment as usual included wellness mailings. Outcomes were body mass index-BMI, blood pressure, quality of life, functioning, and symptoms.

Results

Compared to enhanced treatment as usual, LGCC was not associated with reduced cardiometabolic risk factors based on 6 and 12-month repeated measures analyses. Among patients with BMI >=30 or systolic blood pressure >=140, LGCC was associated with decreased impaired functioning (respectively beta=−2.2, beta=−3.8;p=.04 for both) and depressive symptom scores (respectively beta=−2.0, beta=−3.5;both p=.04).

Conclusions

LGCC may improve outcomes among patients with elevated baseline cardiometabolic risk from community-based practices.

Objective

We implemented a set of processes of care measures for bipolar disorder that reflect psychosocial, patient preference, and continuum of care approaches to mental health, and examined whether veterans with bipolar disorder receive care concordant with these practices.

Method

Data from medical record reviews were used to assess key processes of care for 433 VA mental health outpatients with bipolar disorder. Both composite and individual processes of care measures were operationalized.

Results

Based on composite measures, 17% had documented assessment of psychiatric symptoms (e.g., psychotic, hallucinatory), 28% had documented patient treatment preferences (e.g., reasons for treatment discontinuation), 56% had documented substance abuse and psychiatric comorbidity assessment, and 62% had documentation of adequate cardiometabolic assessment. No-show visits were followed up 20% of the time and monitoring of weight gain was noted in only 54% of the patient charts. In multivariate analyses, history of homelessness (OR=1.61; 95% CI=1.05-2.46) and nonwhite race (OR=1.74; 95%CI=1.02-2.98) were associated with documentation of psychiatric symptoms and comorbidities, respectively.

Conclusions

Only half of patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder received care in accordance with clinical practice guidelines. High quality treatment of bipolar disorder includes not only adherence to treatment guidelines but also patient-centered care processes.

Objective

This randomized controlled study of 164 outpatients with bipolar disorder in a community mental health center who received standardized psychoeducation (Life Goals Program [LGP]) or treatment as usual sought to determine whether there were differences between the groups in medication adherence attitudes and behaviors.

Methods

Patients were randomly assigned to treatment as usual (N=80) or treatment as usual plus LGP (N=84) and were assessed at baseline and at the three-, six-, and 12-month follow-up. Primary outcomes were change in score from baseline on the Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI) and on self-reported treatment adherence behaviors (SRTAB).

Results

At baseline, there were no significant differences between the two groups. Slightly less than half (N=41, 49%) of the LGP group participated in most or all (four to six) LGP sessions, 14% (N=12) participated in one to three sessions, and 37% (N=31) did not participate in any sessions. At the 12-month follow-up there was improvement among all patients, with no significant differences between the two groups, in DAI scores, SRTAB, symptoms, psychopathology, and functional status. Greater depressive severity at baseline was associated with more negative attitudes toward treatment over time, although this finding was not significant (p=.056). Secondary analysis of persons in the LGP group found that compared with those who did not go to any LGP sessions, those with partial or full participation in LGP sessions had improved attitudes toward medication at the three- and six-month follow-up, but no difference was found between the three LGP subgroups by the 12-month follow-up.

Conclusions

There were no differences between two groups in treatment attitudes at the 12-month follow-up. Low attendance rates mitigated effects on primary outcomes. Effects of LGP may become lost over time without ongoing intervention, and individuals with depression may have reduced response to LGP.

Background

This report describes baseline characteristics and functional outcomes of subjects who have prospectively observed subsyndromal symptoms after a major depressive episode (MDE).

Methods

All subjects were participants in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD). We identified subjects with at least 2 years of observation whose prior or current episode was a MDE, and who were in a stable clinical state of either recovered (no more than 2 moderate symptoms for at least 8 weeks), a MDE by DSM IV criteria, or with continued subsyndromal symptoms. The subsyndromal group was defined a priori as 3 or more moderate affective symptoms but without meeting diagnostic criteria for major depression.

Results

The final cohort included 1094 recovered, 112 subsyndromal, and 310 individuals in a MDE. The average time spent in each clinical status ranged from 120 to 132 days. The subsyndromal group was most similar to those in a MDE, differing only on the intensity of depressive symptoms and the number of work days missed due to ongoing symptoms. Reported sadness, inability to feel and lassitude were each associated with multiple measures of impairment.

Limitations

This study is limited by the cross sectional approach to defining outcomes.

Conclusions

These findings are consistent with studies in unipolar major depression that indicate that functional impairment observed in the context of subsyndromal depressive symptoms is comparable to that of a full episode. This work underscores the need to include subsyndromal symptoms in study outcomes and to target full remission in clinical practice.