Perceived loneliness and social support in bipolar disorder: relation to suicidal ideation and attempts.

BACKGROUND: The suicide rate in bipolar disorder (BD) is among the highest across all psychiatric disorders. Identifying modifiable variables that relate to suicidal thoughts and behaviors (STBs) in BD may inform prevention strategies. Social connectedness is a modifiable variable found to relate to STBs in the general population, but differences exist across subgroups of the general population and findings specifically in BD have been equivocal. We aimed to clarify how perceived social connectedness relates to STBs in BD. METHOD: 146 adults (86 BD, 60 healthy controls) completed clinical interviews (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5) and self-report measures of loneliness (UCLA Loneliness Scale) and social support (Interpersonal Support Evaluation List). Analyses explored differences in indicators of social connectedness (loneliness and social support) between BD participants and healthy controls, and explored relationships between STBs (lifetime suicide attempts and current suicidal ideation) and indicators of social connectedness in BD participants. RESULTS: BD participants reported significantly higher loneliness and lower social support than healthy controls. In BD participants, perceived social support was significantly related to both ever having attempted suicide and number of lifetime attempts. Interestingly, perceived loneliness, but not social support, was significantly associated with current suicidal ideation. CONCLUSIONS: Findings expand the evidence base supporting a relationship between perceived social connectedness and STBs in BD. They suggest that this modifiable variable could be a fruitful treatment target for preventing STBs in BD.

The engagement problem: A review of engagement with digital mental health interventions and recommendations for a path forward.

Purpose of the review: Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) are an effective and accessible means of addressing the unprecedented levels of mental illness worldwide. Currently, however, patient engagement with DMHIs in real-world settings is often insufficient to see clinical benefit. In order to realize the potential of DMHIs, there is a need to better understand what drives patient engagement. Recent findings: We discuss takeaways from the existing literature related to patient engagement with DMHIs and highlight gaps to be addressed through further research. Findings suggest that engagement is influenced by patient-, intervention- and systems-level factors. At the patient-level, variables such as sex, education, personality traits, race, ethnicity, age and symptom severity appear to be associated with engagement. At the intervention-level, integrating human support, gamification, financial incentives and persuasive technology features may improve engagement. Finally, although systems-level factors have not been widely explored, the existing evidence suggests that achieving engagement will require addressing organizational and social barriers and drawing on the field of implementation science. Summary: Future research clarifying the patient-, intervention- and systems-level factors that drive engagement will be essential. Additionally, to facilitate improved understanding of DMHI engagement, we propose the following: (a) widespread adoption of a minimum necessary 5-element engagement reporting framework; (b) broader application of alternative clinical trial designs; and (c) directed efforts to build upon an initial parsimonious conceptual model of DMHI engagement.