Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Intervention trials for adults with bipolar disorder in low-income and lower-middle-income countries: A systematic review.
Arnbjerg, C J; Rurangwa, N U; Musoni-Rwililiza, E; Gishoma, D; Carlsson, J; Kallestrup, P.
Afiliação
  • Arnbjerg CJ; Center for Global Health, Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Denmark; College of Medicine and Health Sciences University of Rwanda, Rwanda. Electronic address: caroline.arnbjerg@ph.au.dk.
  • Rurangwa NU; College of Medicine and Health Sciences University of Rwanda, Rwanda.
  • Musoni-Rwililiza E; Center for Global Health, Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Denmark; College of Medicine and Health Sciences University of Rwanda, Rwanda; Mental Health Department, University Teaching Hospital of Kigali, Rwanda.
  • Gishoma D; College of Medicine and Health Sciences University of Rwanda, Rwanda.
  • Carlsson J; Competence Centre for Transcultural Psychiatry (CTP), Mental Health Centre Ballerup, Denmark; Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
  • Kallestrup P; Center for Global Health, Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Denmark.
J Affect Disord ; 311: 256-266, 2022 08 15.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35605708
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The treatment gap for bipolar disorder is aggravated by economic inequality. Around half of the world's population live in a low-or lower-middle-income country, where research on treatment is scarce. Hence, this review aims to determine the number and types of intervention studies conducted on adults with bipolar disorder in low-income and lower-middle-income countries and analyze the effect of these interventions on symptom severity, medical adherence, and quality of life.

METHODS:

A systematic review was conducted in June and November 2021 using eight databases. Controlled intervention trials on adults with bipolar disorder on data from low-income and lower-middle-income countries at time of publication were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials or The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions assessment tool.

RESULTS:

Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. These were divided into four subtypes based on the intervention; pharmacotherapy (=12), psychosocial (=7), electroconvulsive therapy (=1), and traditional medicine (=1). Three studies were from low-income countries. A high risk of bias characterized the studies; only four studies reported the procedures used for randomization. Most studies, however, identified a beneficial effect on symptom severity, and in addition, medical adherence could be improved with psychosocial interventions.

LIMITATIONS:

Heterogeneity across studies prevented any meaningful pooling of data to meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION:

Data for treatment interventions contextualized to the local setting for bipolar disorder remains sparse, particularly from low-resource settings. Further studies are urgently needed to target the treatment gap for bipolar disorder. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42020170953.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Transtorno Bipolar / Países em Desenvolvimento Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Transtorno Bipolar / Países em Desenvolvimento Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article