Common and Specific Elements of Psychosocial Treatments for Bipolar Disorder: A Survey of Clinicians Participating in Randomized Trials

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Common and Specific Elements of Psychosocial Treatments for Bipolar Disorder: A Survey of Clinicians Participating in Randomized Trials

Citable link to this page

 

 
Title: Common and Specific Elements of Psychosocial Treatments for Bipolar Disorder: A Survey of Clinicians Participating in Randomized Trials
Author: Miklowitz, David J.; Goodwin, Guy M.; Bauer, Mark S; Geddes, John R.

Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.

Citation: Miklowitz, David J., Guy M. Goodwin, Mark S. Bauer, and John R. Geddes. 2008. “Common and Specific Elements of Psychosocial Treatments for Bipolar Disorder: A Survey of Clinicians Participating in Randomized Trials.” Journal of Psychiatric Practice 14 (2) (March): 77–85. doi:10.1097/01.pra.0000314314.94791.c9.
Full Text & Related Files:
Abstract: Background

There are 14 randomized trials that indicate the benefits of various adjunctive psychosocial interventions for bipolar disorder. Efficient planning of future interventions requires identification of the common, putatively active components of these treatments. We investigated whether different forms of psychotherapy consisted of overlapping versus modality-specific ingredients.

Methods

We identified five categories of active psychosocial treatment in 14 trials: cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT; 4 studies), family psychoeducation (5 studies), interpersonal and social rhythm therapy (IPSRT; 2 studies), individual psychoeducation (3 studies), and group psychoeducation (5 studies). In this study, 31 investigators and therapists who participated in these trials completed a questionnaire in which they rated the frequency of 17 treatment strategies in their active and treatment-as-usual (TAU) conditions. A content analysis of the results of this questionnaire was then done, in which the active treatments were compared with each other and with TAU on the frequency of use of each strategy.

Results

The active modalities were distinguished from TAU by more frequent use of problem-solving and interventions to enhance patients’ ability to cope with the stigma of mental illness. With regard to specific approaches, CBT made frequent use of cognitive restructuring and self-rated mood charts. The signature features of IPSRT—regulation of sleep/wake cycles and daily routines—were also regular features in the CBT and group psychoeducation interventions. Communication skills training was a distinctive feature of family treatments.

Conclusions

Whereas active psychosocial interventions for bipolar disorder have common ingredients, they can also be distinguished from each other and from TAU by the degree to which specific strategies are emphasized. Future research should compare the treatment ingredients identified in this study in terms of their ability to bring about clinical change.
Published Version: doi:10.1097/01.pra.0000314314.94791.c9
Other Sources: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2603054/
Terms of Use: This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of-use#LAA
Citable link to this page: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:27115553
Downloads of this work:

Show full Dublin Core record

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters