Factors associated with the discrepancy between objective and subjective cognitive impairment in bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the discrepancy between objective cognitive measures and cognitive subjective complaints in a sample of euthymic patients with bipolar disorder (BD). METHODS: One hundred and sixteen participants (83 euthymic patients with BD and 33 healthy controls) were enrolled for this study. Patients were assessed with a comprehensive neuropsychological battery and they also reported their subjective cognitive complaints with the Cognitive Complaints in Bipolar Disorder Rating Scale (COBRA). The discrepancy between objective and subjective data was calculated using a novel methodology proposed in a previous study (Miskowiak, 2016). Statistical analyses included Pearson correlations and multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Higher number of previous depressive episodes was identified as one variable associated with the global sensitivity composite score (Beta = 0.25; t = 2.1; p = 0.04) and with the verbal learning and memory sensitivity score (Beta = 0.26; t = 2.16; p = 0.03). That is, patients with more previous depressive episodes tend to over-report cognitive complaints. In contrast, higher number of previous hospitalizations was associated with stoicism in the global total score (Beta = -0.27; t = -2.24: p = 0.029) and in the domain of attention/processing speed (Beta = -0.34; t = -2.52; p = 0.016), indicating patients with more hospitalizations tend to report less cognitive complaints. DISCUSSION: Our study identified some factors that might help to explain the discrepancy between objective and subjective cognitive measures in BD, including number of previous depressive episodes and number of previous hospitalizations. This highlights the need of the combined use of both types of cognitive measures to make an accurate assessment of cognitive dysfunctions and their effective treatment.

Mixed states in bipolar and major depressive disorders: systematic review and quality appraisal of guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review provided a critical synthesis and a comprehensive overview of guidelines on the treatment of mixed states. METHOD: The MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE databases were systematically searched from inception to March 21st, 2018. International guidelines covering the treatment of mixed episodes, manic/hypomanic, or depressive episodes with mixed features were considered for inclusion. A methodological quality assessment was conducted with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-AGREE II. RESULTS: The final selection yielded six articles. Despite their heterogeneity, all guidelines agreed in interrupting an antidepressant monotherapy or adding mood-stabilizing medications. Olanzapine seemed to have the best evidence for acute mixed hypo/manic/depressive states and maintenance treatment. Aripiprazole and paliperidone were possible alternatives for acute hypo/manic mixed states. Lurasidone and ziprasidone were useful in acute mixed depression. Valproate was recommended for the prevention of new mixed episodes while lithium and quetiapine in preventing affective episodes of all polarities. Clozapine and electroconvulsive therapy were effective in refractory mixed episodes. The AGREE II overall assessment rate ranged between 42% and 92%, indicating different quality level of included guidelines. CONCLUSION: The unmet needs for the mixed symptoms treatment were associated with diagnostic issues and limitations of previous research, particularly for maintenance treatment.

Psychometric properties of the well-being index (WHO-5) spanish version in a sample of euthymic patients with bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: The concept of well-being which focuses on positive emotions has received increased research attention. However, a consensus definition of this term is lacking. The Well-Being Index scale (WHO-5) is a generic, self-report scale that contains five Likert-type items to evaluate psychological well-being. This construct may provide a relevant outcome in bipolar disorder (BD) research and care beyond the rating of mood symptoms. Thus, in the current study, the psychometric properties of the WHO-5 Spanish version were assessed in a sample of euthymic patients with BD. METHODS: Patients with BD- I and BD-II and healthy controls completed the Well-Being Index (WHO-5) together with an assessment of depressive (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17; HAM-D) and manic symptoms (Young Mania Rating Scale; YMRS); and a measure of psychosocial functioning (Functioning Assessment Short Test; FAST). Internal consistency reliability was measured through Cronbach's alpha. Test-retest reliability was calculated comparing the WHO-5 total score at baseline and after 10 days of the first administration. To assess the structure of the scale, a principal component analysis (PCA) was carried out. Correlations between the WHO-5, HAM-D, YMRS and FAST were calculated. Finally, a t-test for independent samples was applied to compare the WHO-5 total score in the patient and control groups. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients with BD and 40 healthy controls were included in this study. A Chronbach's alpha of 0.83 indicated acceptable internal consistency. A paired sample t-test revealed no significant differences between WHO-5 total score at baseline and at follow-up (tn = - 0.72; df = 15; p = 0.48). The PCA provided a single factor solution that accounted for 59.74% of the variation in WHO-5. Test-retest reliability was high (r = 0.83; p < 0.001). Moderate negative correlations were observed between the WHO-5 total score, the FAST (r = - 0.46.; p < 0.001) and the HAM-D (r = - 0.68; p < 0.001), but not with the YMRS (r = - 0.07; p = 0.42). Finally, significant differences were found when comparing the WHO-5 total score between patient and healthy controls (t = 5.1; df = 147; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: some limitations include the lack of a comparator scale to test for validity construct and the small sample size in the test-retest reliability CONCLUSIONS: The WHO-5 shows an acceptable reliability index and measures a unitary construct in a Spanish population of euthymic patients with BD.

Treatment of neurocognitive symptoms in unipolar depression: A systematic review and future perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive symptoms in Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) are persistent and commonly entail neurocognitive impairment and a decline in quality of life. This systematic review gathers the current scientific evidence on therapeutic strategies for neuropsychological impairment in MDD. METHOD: A systematic search on PubMed, PsycINFO and Clinicaltrials.gov was carried out on December 2016 according to PRISMA using Boolean terms to identify interventions for the treatment of cognitive dysfunction in MDD. Only English-written articles providing original data and focusing in adults with MDD were included with no time restrictions. RESULTS: A total of 95 studies reporting data on 40 pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions were included. Interventions were grouped into the following categories: 1) Pharmacological Therapies (antidepressants, stimulants, compounds acting on NMDA receptors, compounds acting on the cholinergic system, compounds showing anti-inflammatory or antioxidant properties, other mechanisms of action), 2) Physical Therapies and 3) Psychological Therapies, 4) Exercise. There are some promising compounds showing a positive impact on cognitive symptoms including vortioxetine, lisdexamfetamine or erythropoietin. LIMITATIONS: The studies included showed significant methodological differences in heterogeneous samples. The lack of a standardized neuropsychological battery makes comparisons between studies difficult. CONCLUSION: Current evidence is not sufficient to widely recommend the use of procognitive treatments in MDD although promising results are coming to light.

Course of residual symptoms according to the duration of euthymia in remitted bipolar patients.

OBJECTIVE: Although many studies showed the negative impact of residual symptoms on the course of bipolar disorder (BD), there is a need to examine potential differences in residual symptoms according to the duration of euthymia in remitted BD patients. METHOD: This was a large cross-sectional study of 525 euthymic BD out-patients. A multivariate analysis of covariance was conducted to compare depressive and manic residual symptoms, sleep disturbances and cognitive complaints among three patient groups on the basis of duration of euthymia (A. 6 months to <1 year; B. 1 year to <3 years; C. 3 years to ≤5 years). RESULTS: A significant difference between the three groups was found in residual symptoms [Pillai's Trace: F(8942) = 4.659, P < 0.001]. Tukey post hoc analysis indicated that patients from Group C presented lower residual depressive symptoms, higher sleep quality and better perceived cognitive performance compared with Group A. Group B also presented better sleep and cognitive outcomes than Group A. In addition, Group C showed the lowest incidence of functional impairment. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the intensity of residual symptoms and functional impairment in remitted BD patients is negatively related to the duration of euthymia.

The role of family interventions in bipolar disorder: A systematic review.

The reciprocal relationship between bipolar disorder (BD) and the family system highlights the importance of adjunctive family intervention. However, its implementation in clinical practice is not widespread. To update the knowledge in this field and identify areas of uncertainty this manuscript present a comprehensive overview of the bidirectional relationship between BD and family variables, and a systematic review of the evidence-based studies published up to March 2015 on the efficacy of adjunctive family intervention in BD. Findings show that not only specific family's attitudes/interactions affect the course of BD but that equally the illness itself has a strong impact on family functioning, caregivers' burden and health. Regarding family intervention, there are methodological differences between studies and variability in the sample characteristics and the intervention used. Most evidence-based studies support the efficacy of adjunctive family treatment in the illness outcomes, both in youth and adult population, as well as benefits for caregivers. The results emphasize the need to involve caregivers in the therapeutic management of BD through tailored interventions based on patients' characteristics and family needs.

Asenapine prescribing patterns in the treatment of manic in- and outpatients: Results from the MANACOR study.

BACKGROUND: Asenapine is the most recent compound that has been FDA- and EMA-approved for treatment of mania. Its efficacy and safety have been assessed in placebo-controlled trials, but little is known about its performance in routine clinical conditions. In this study, we compared features of patients treated with adjunctive asenapine or other adjunctive antipsychotics and the costs of the treatment. METHODS: A combined prospective and retrospective data collection and analysis was conducted from January 2011 to December 2013 following a clinical interview and assessment of manic and depressive symptoms (YMRS, HDRS-17), clinical state (CGI-BP-M), psychosocial functioning (FAST), sexual dysfunction (PRSexDQ) and health resource costs associated with treatment with adjunctive asenapine versus other adjunctive antipsychotics. RESULTS: Hundred and fifty-two patients from different university hospitals were included. Fifty-three patients received adjunctive asenapine and 99 received other adjunctive antipsychotics concomitantly to mood stabilizers. Considering inpatients, those treated with adjunctive asenapine presented a significantly less severe manic episode (P=0.001), less psychotic symptoms (P=0.030) and more comorbid personality disorder (P=0.002). Regarding outpatients, those treated with adjunctive asenapine showed significantly less severe manic episode (P=0.046), more previous mixed episodes (P=0.013) and more sexual dysfunction at baseline (P=0.036). No significant differences were found in mean total costs per day. CONCLUSION: Clinicians tended to use adjunctive asenapine in patients with less severe manic symptoms but more complex clinical profile, including more mixed episodes in the past, concomitant personality disorder, and sexual problems. Treatment with adjunctive asenapine was not associated with higher costs when compared to other options.