Treatment and outcomes of an Australian cohort of outpatients with bipolar I or schizoaffective disorder over twenty-four months: implications for clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: The Bipolar Comprehensive Outcomes Study (BCOS) is a 2-year, prospective, non-interventional, observational study designed to explore the clinical and functional outcomes associated with 'real-world' treatment of participants with bipolar I or schizoaffective disorder. All participants received treatment as usual. There was no study medication. METHODS: Participants prescribed either conventional mood stabilizers (CMS; n = 155) alone, or olanzapine with, or without, CMS (olanzapine ± CMS; n = 84) were assessed every 3 months using several measures, including the Young Mania Rating Scale, 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Clinical Global Impressions Scale - Bipolar Version, and the EuroQol Instrument. This paper reports 24-month longitudinal clinical, pharmacological, functional, and socioeconomic data. RESULTS: On average, participants were 42 (range 18 to 79) years of age, 58%; were female, and 73%; had a diagnosis of bipolar I. Polypharmacy was the usual approach to pharmacological treatment; participants took a median of 5 different psychotropic medications over the course of the study, and spent a median proportion of time of 100%; of the study on mood stabilizers, 90%; on antipsychotics, 9%; on antidepressants, and 5%; on benzodiazepines/hypnotics. By 24 months, the majority of participants had achieved both symptomatic and syndromal remission of both mania and depression. Symptomatic relapse rates were similar for both the CMS alone (65%;) and the olanzapine ± CMS (61%;) cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Participants with bipolar I or schizoaffective disorder in this study were receiving complex medication treatments that were often discordant with recommendations made in contemporary major treatment guidelines. The majority of study participants demonstrated some clinical and functional improvements, but not all achieved remission of symptoms or syndrome.

Comparison of patients undergoing switching versus augmentation of antipsychotic medications during treatment for schizophrenia.

It is often difficult to determine whether a patient may best benefit by augmenting their current medication or switching them to another. This post-hoc analysis compares patients' clinical and functional profiles at the time their antipsychotic medications were either switched or augmented. Adult outpatients receiving oral antipsychotic treatment for schizophrenia were assessed during a 12-month international observational study. Clinical and functional measures were assessed at the time of first treatment switch/augmentation (0-14 days prior) and compared between Switched and Augmented patient groups. Due to low numbers of patients providing such data, interpretations are based on effect sizes. Data at the time of change were available for 87 patients: 53 Switched and 34 Augmented. Inadequate response was the primary reason for treatment change in both groups, whereas lack of adherence was more prevalent in the Switched group (26.4% vs 8.8%). Changes in clinical severity from study initiation to medication change were similar, as indicated by Clinical Global Impressions-Severity scores. However, physical and mental component scores of the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey improved in the Augmented group, but worsened in the Switched group. These findings suggest that the patient's worsening or lack of meaningful improvement prompts clinicians to switch antipsychotic medications, whereas when patients show some improvement, clinicians may be more likely to try bolstering the improvements through augmentation. Current findings are consistent with physicians' stated reasons for switching versus augmenting antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia. Confirmation of these findings requires further research.

A prospective study of the impact of smoking on outcomes in bipolar and schizoaffective disorder.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoking is more prevalent among people with mental illnesses, including bipolar disorder, than in the general community. Most data are cross-sectional, and there are no prospective trials examining the relationship of smoking to outcome in bipolar disorder. The impact of tobacco smoking on mental health outcomes was investigated in a 24-month, naturalistic, longitudinal study of 240 people with bipolar disorder or schizoaffective disorder. METHOD: Participants were interviewed and data recorded by trained study clinicians at 9 interviews during the study period. RESULTS: Comparisons were made between participants who smoked daily (n = 122) and the remaining study participants (n = 117). During the 24-month study period, the daily smokers had poorer scores on the Clinical Global Impressions-Depression (P = .034) and Clinical Global Impressions-Overall Bipolar (P = .026) scales and had lengthier stays in hospital (P = .012), compared with nonsmokers. LIMITATIONS: Smoking status was determined by self-report. Nicotine dependence was not measured. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that smoking is associated with poorer mental health outcomes in bipolar and schizoaffective disorder.