Experiences that matter in bipolar disorder: a qualitative study using the capability, comfort and calm framework.

BACKGROUND: When assessing the value of an intervention in bipolar disorder, researchers and clinicians often focus on metrics that quantify improvements to core diagnostic symptoms (e.g., mania). Providers often overlook or misunderstand the impact of treatment on life quality and function. We wanted to better characterize the shared experiences and obstacles of bipolar disorder within the United States from the patient's perspective. METHODS: We recruited 24 individuals diagnosed with bipolar disorder and six caretakers supporting someone with the condition. Participants were involved in treatment or support services for bipolar disorder in central Texas. As part of this qualitative study, participants discussed their everyday successes and obstacles related to living with bipolar disorder during personalized, open-ended interviews. Audio files were transcribed, and Nvivo software processed an initial thematic analysis. We then categorized themes into bipolar disorder-related obstacles that limit the patient's capability (i.e., function), comfort (i.e., relief from suffering) and calm (i.e., life disruption) (Liu et al., FebClin Orthop 475:315-317, 2017; Teisberg et al., MayAcad Med 95:682-685, 2020). We then discuss themes and suggest practical strategies that might improve the value of care for patients and their families. RESULTS: Issues regarding capability included the struggle to maintain identity, disruptions to meaningful employment, relationship loss and the unpredictable nature of bipolar disorder. Comfort related themes included the personal perception of diagnosis, social stigma and medication issues. Calm themes included managing dismissive doctors, finding the right psychotherapist and navigating financial burdens. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative data from patients with bipolar disorder helps identify gaps in care or practical limitations to treatment. When we listen to these individuals, it is clear that treatments must also address the unmet psychosocial impacts of the condition to improve patient care, capability and calm.

Making competition in health care work.

Health care reform in the United States is on a collision course with economic reality. Most proposals focus on measures that will produce one-time cost savings by eliminating waste and inefficiency. But the right question to ask is how to achieve dramatic and sustained cost reductions over time. What will it take to foster entirely new approaches to disease prevention and treatment, whole new ways to deliver services, and more cost-effective facilities? The answer lies in the powerful lessons business has learned over the past two decades about the imperatives of competition. In industry after industry, the underlying dynamic is the same: competition compels companies to deliver constantly increasing value to customers. The fundamental driver of this continuous quality improvement and cost reduction is innovation. Without incentives to sustain innovation in health care, short-term cost savings will soon be overwhelmed by the desire to widen access, the growing health needs of an aging population, and the unwillingness of Americans to settle for anything less than the best treatments available. The misguided assumption underlying much of the debate about health care is that technology is the enemy. By assuming that technology drives up costs, reformers neglect the central importance of innovation or, worse yet, attempt to slow its pace. In fact, innovation, driven by rigorous competition, is the key to successful reform.