Validity and Reliability of the Digital Functioning Assessment Short Test (D-FAST) in the Brazilian Sample.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused major disruptions in all aspects of daily functioning, from school and work to interactions with friends and family. The Functioning Assessment Short Test (FAST) is an interviewer-administered scale validated in the psychiatric sample with no previous study assessing its validity and reliability in a digital format. Thus, we aimed to analyse the psychometric properties of the digital version of the FAST and understand the implications of COVID-19 and restrictive measures on functioning. Methods: Data were collected using an online survey. The psychometric properties of the digital FAST were assessed by confirmatory factor analysis, Cronbach's alpha, and discriminant functional by cluster analysis in a community sample. Results: Out of the total sample, 2,543 (84.1%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 34.28 (12.46) years. The digital FAST retained the six factors structure observed in the original version, with Cronbach's alpha above 0.9. In addition, we showed evidence of discriminant validity by differentiating three clusters of psychosocial functioning. Clinical and demographic differences between groups explained, in part, the heterogeneity of functioning, thus providing support for the construct validity of the instrument. Conclusion: The digital FAST is a simple and easy-to-understand instrument that provides a multidimensional assessment of functioning without the need for an interviewer. Furthermore, our findings may help to better understand the psychosocial implications of the pandemic and the importance of planning specific interventions to rehabilitee the affected group.

Identifying cognitive subgroups in bipolar disorder: A cluster analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence has shown heterogeneity of cognitive function among patients with bipolar disorder (BD). Our study aims to replicate recent findings of cognitive subgroups, as well as we assessed subjective cognitive difficulties and functioning in each cluster. METHODS: Hierarchical cluster analysis was conducted to examine whether there were distinct neurocognitive subgroups based on neurocognitive battery. Cognitive Complaints in Bipolar Disorder Rating Assessment (COBRA) and Functioning Assessment Short Test (FAST) were used to assess subjective cognitive difficulties and functional impairment. RESULTS: We found three distinct subgroups: a first cluster with intact cognition (n = 30, 43.5%), a second cluster with selective cognitive impairment (n = 23, 33.3%), and a third cluster with globally cognitive impairment (n = 16, 23.3%). The intact group had more years of education (p < .001) and higher estimated IQ (p < .001) than globally and selectively impaired subgroups. Additionally, they were younger (p = .011), had an earlier age at bipolar diagnosis (p < .037) and earlier age of first hospitalization (p < .035) compared to individuals with globally cognitive impairment. LIMITATIONS: This is a cross-sectional design with a small sample including only patients from a tertiary hospital. CONCLUSION: Our results give support to the existence of a continuum of severity from patients without impairment to those with poor cognitive functioning. Patients in the intact group seem to have higher cognitive reserve than other two groups. However, they also experienced cognitive complaints and some degree of functional impairment. These findings suggest the importance of using a combo of instruments (e.g., objective and subjective cognitive measures plus functioning instruments) for a complete assessment of patients with BD.

Validity and reliability of the Cognitive Complaints in Bipolar Disorder Rating Assessment (COBRA) in Brazilian bipolar patients.

INTRODUCTION: In Brazil, there is no valid instrument to measure subjective cognitive dysfunction in bipolar disorder. The present study analyzed the psychometric properties of the Cognitive Complaints in Bipolar Disorder Rating Assessment (COBRA) in Brazilian bipolar patients. We further investigated the relationship between the COBRA, objective cognitive measures, and illness course variables. METHODS: The total sample (N=150) included 85 bipolar disorder patients and 65 healthy controls. The psychometric properties of the COBRA (e.g., internal consistency, concurrent validity, discriminative validity, factor analyses, ROC curve, and feasibility) were analyzed. RESULTS: The COBRA showed a one-factor structure with very high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.890). Concurrent validity was indicated by a strong correlation with the cognitive domain of the FAST (r=0.811, p<0.001). Bipolar patients experienced greater cognitive complaints (mean=14.69; standard deviation [SD]=10.03) than healthy controls (mean=6.78; SD=5.49; p<0.001), suggesting discriminative validity of the instrument. No significant correlations were found between the COBRA and objective cognitive measures. Furthermore, higher COBRA scores were associated with residual depressive (r=0.448; p<0.001) and manic (r=0.376; p<0.001) symptoms, number of depressive episodes (r=0.306; p=0.011), number of total episodes (r=0.256; p=0.038), and suicide attempts (r=0.356; p=0.003). CONCLUSION: The COBRA is a valid instrument to assess cognitive complaints, and the combined use of subjective-objective cognitive measures enables the correct identification of cognitive dysfunctions in bipolar disorder.

Validity and reliability of the Cognitive Complaints in Bipolar Disorder Rating Assessment (COBRA) in Brazilian bipolar patients / Validade e fidedignidade da Escala de Disfunções Cognitivas no Transtorno Bipolar (COBRA) em pacientes bipolares brasileiros

Abstract Introduction: In Brazil, there is no valid instrument to measure subjective cognitive dysfunction in bipolar disorder. The present study analyzed the psychometric properties of the Cognitive Complaints in Bipolar Disorder Rating Assessment (COBRA) in Brazilian bipolar patients. We further investigated the relationship between the COBRA, objective cognitive measures, and illness course variables. Methods: The total sample (N=150) included 85 bipolar disorder patients and 65 healthy controls. The psychometric properties of the COBRA (e.g., internal consistency, concurrent validity, discriminative validity, factor analyses, ROC curve, and feasibility) were analyzed. Results: The COBRA showed a one-factor structure with very high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.890). Concurrent validity was indicated by a strong correlation with the cognitive domain of the FAST (r=0.811, p<0.001). Bipolar patients experienced greater cognitive complaints (mean=14.69; standard deviation [SD]=10.03) than healthy controls (mean=6.78; SD=5.49; p<0.001), suggesting discriminative validity of the instrument. No significant correlations were found between the COBRA and objective cognitive measures. Furthermore, higher COBRA scores were associated with residual depressive (r=0.448; p<0.001) and manic (r=0.376; p<0.001) symptoms, number of depressive episodes (r=0.306; p=0.011), number of total episodes (r=0.256; p=0.038), and suicide attempts (r=0.356; p=0.003). Conclusion: The COBRA is a valid instrument to assess cognitive complaints, and the combined use of subjective-objective cognitive measures enables the correct identification of cognitive dysfunctions in bipolar disorder.

Resumo Introdução: No Brasil, não existem instrumentos válidos para medir a disfunção cognitiva subjetiva no transtorno bipolar. O presente estudo analisou as propriedades psicométricas da Escala de Disfunções Cognitivas no Transtorno Bipolar (COBRA) em uma amostra brasileira de pacientes bipolares. Adicionalmente, investigamos a relação entre a COBRA, medidas cognitivas objetivas e curso da doença. Métodos: A amostra total (n=150) incluiu 85 pacientes com transtorno bipolar e 65 controles saudáveis. As propriedades psicométricas da COBRA (consistência interna, validade concorrente, validade discriminativa, análise fatorial, curva ROC e fidedignidade) foram analisadas. Resultados: A COBRA apresentou estrutura de um fator com alta consistência interna (alfa de Cronbach=0,890). A validade concorrente ficou demonstrada pela forte correlação com o domínio cognitivo da FAST (r=0,811, p<0,001). Pacientes bipolares tiveram mais queixas cognitivas [média=14,69; desvio padrão (DP)=10,03] que os controles (média=6,78; DP=5,49; p<0,001), sugerindo a validade discriminativa do instrumento. Não houve correlação significativa entre a COBRA e medidas cognitivas objetivas. Além disso, escores mais altos na COBRA estiveram associados com sintomas residuais depressivos (r=0,448; p<0,001) e maníacos (r=0,376; p<0,001), número de episódios depressivos (r=0,306; p=0,011), número de episódios totais (r=0.256; p=0.038) e tentativas de suicídio (r=0,356; p=0,003). Conclusão: A COBRA é um instrumento válido para avaliar queixas cognitivas, e o uso combinado das medidas cognitivas subjetivas-objetivas possibilita a correta identificação das disfunções cognitivas no transtorno bipolar.