Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) 2016 Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Adults with Major Depressive Disorder: Section 2. Psychological Treatments.

BACKGROUND: The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) has revised its 2009 guidelines for the management of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults by updating the evidence and recommendations. The target audiences for these 2016 guidelines are psychiatrists and other mental health professionals. METHODS: Using the question-answer format, we conducted a systematic literature search focusing on systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Evidence was graded using CANMAT-defined criteria for level of evidence. Recommendations for lines of treatment were based on the quality of evidence and clinical expert consensus. "Psychological Treatments" is the second of six sections of the 2016 guidelines. RESULTS: Evidence-informed responses were developed for 25 questions under 5 broad categories: 1) patient characteristics relevant to using psychological interventions; 2) therapist and health system characteristics associated with optimizing outcomes; 3) descriptions of major psychotherapies and their efficacy; 4) additional psychological interventions, such as peer interventions and computer- and technology-delivered interventions; and 5) combining and/or sequencing psychological and pharmacological interventions. CONCLUSIONS: First-line psychological treatment recommendations for acute MDD include cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT), interpersonal therapy (IPT), and behavioural activation (BA). Second-line recommendations include computer-based and telephone-delivered psychotherapy. Where feasible, combining psychological treatment (CBT or IPT) with antidepressant treatment is recommended because combined treatment is superior to either treatment alone. First-line psychological treatments for maintenance include CBT and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT). Patient preference, in combination with evidence-based treatments and clinician/system capacity, will yield the optimal treatment strategies for improving individual outcomes in MDD.

Combined treatment: impact of optimal psychotherapy and medication in bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVES: The current study investigated the longitudinal course of symptoms in bipolar disorder among individuals receiving optimal treatment combining pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy, as well as predictors of the course of illness. METHODS: A total of 160 participants with bipolar disorder (bipolar I disorder: n = 115; bipolar II disorder: n = 45) received regular pharmacological treatment, complemented by a manualized, evidence-based psychosocial treatment - that is, cognitive behavioral therapy or psychoeducation. Participants were assessed at baseline and prospectively for 72 weeks using the Longitudinal Interval Follow-up Evaluation (LIFE) scale scores for mania/hypomania and depression, as well as comparison measures (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00188838). RESULTS: Over a 72-week period, patients spent a clear majority (about 65%) of time euthymic. Symptoms were experienced more than 50% of the time by only a quarter of the sample. Depressive symptoms strongly dominated over (hypo)manic symptoms, while subsyndromal symptoms were more common than full diagnosable episodes for both polarities. Mixed symptoms were rare, but present for a minority of participants. Individuals experienced approximately six significant mood changes per year, with a full relapse on average every 7.5 months. Participants who had fewer depressive symptoms at intake, a later age at onset, and no history of psychotic symptoms spent more weeks well over the course of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Combined pharmacological and adjunctive psychosocial treatments appeared to provide an improved course of illness compared to the results of previous studies. Efforts to further improve the course of illness beyond that provided by current optimal treatment regimens will require a substantial focus on both subsyndromal and syndromal depressive symptoms.

The association between moderate alcohol use and illness severity in bipolar disorder: a preliminary report.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of alcohol consumption with symptoms, illness course, and health care utilization among non-alcoholic patients with bipolar disorder. METHOD: Subjects were 148 patients with bipolar I or II disorder enrolled in a longitudinal study of cognitive-behavioral therapy versus psychoeducation. Subjects were 18 to 60 years old, in full or partial remission, and non-heavy drinkers with no history of substance use disorders. At least 4 weeks of consistent naturalistic treatment with mood stabilizer was required for enrollment. Measures included the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, the Clinician-Administered Rating Scale for Mania, and the Khavari Alcohol Test. Data were gathered from July 2002 to December 2004. RESULTS: Mean weekly alcoholic beverage consumption was minimal among both men (3.8 standard drinks, SD = 8.9) and women (1.2 standard drinks, SD = 1.9). Nonetheless, total alcohol consumption among men was associated with lifetime manic episodes (F = 10.2, df = 1, p = .003) and emergency department visits (F = 4.3, df = 1, p = .046). Spirits consumption among men was strongly associated with lifetime manic episodes (F = 81.8, df = 1, p < .001) and emergency department visits (F = 14.0, df = 1, p < .001). Among women, the frequency of alcohol consumption was associated with lifetime episodes of depression (F = 15.5, df = 1, p < .001) and hypomania (F = 4.8, df = 1, p < .03). Wine consumption among women was associated with lifetime hypomanic episodes (F = 13.6, df = 1, p < .001) and current manic symptoms (F = 4.0, df = 1, p < .05). CONCLUSION: Despite low volumes of consumption, alcohol was associated with measures of illness severity in bipolar disorder among both men and women. The adverse effects of alcohol on bipolar disorder may occur over a range of consumption, rather than being confined to heavy drinkers.

Bipolar disorder with comorbid anxiety disorders: impact of comorbidity on treatment outcome in cognitive-behavioral therapy and psychoeducation.

BACKGROUND: Comorbid anxiety disorders are extremely prevalent in bipolar disorder (BD) and have substantial impact on the course of illness. Limited evidence regarding treatment factors has led to a renewal of research efforts examining both the impact of treatments on comorbid anxiety and the impact of comorbid anxiety on treatments. The current study examines the impact of comorbid anxiety disorders on response to two psychosocial interventions for BD. METHODS: A sample of 204 patients with BD took part in the study. Of them, 41.7% had a comorbid anxiety disorder. All participants received either individual cognitive-behavioral therapy or group psychoeducation for BD. Evaluations included complete pretreatment and 18-month follow-up assessments of mood and anxiety symptoms, functioning, medication compliance, dysfunctional attitudes, and coping style. Outcome was compared based on the presence or absence of a comorbid anxiety disorder. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The participants with comorbid anxiety disorders ranked more severe than those without on several measures. Despite more severe illness characteristics, the magnitude of their treatment gains was equivalent or superior to that of the participants without anxiety disorders on a variety of outcome measures. Although the treatments did not specifically target the anxiety disorder, the participants made significant improvements in anxiety symptoms. Despite greater illness severity, patients with comorbid anxiety disorders can make substantial gains from psychosocial interventions targeting BD. Even in the presence of an anxiety disorder, they are able to attend to the content of the psychosocial treatments and apply it to better manage their condition. The presence of a comorbid anxiety disorder should not be considered a deterrent to offering BD-focused psychosocial treatments.

Psychosocial interventions for bipolar disorder and coping style modification: similar clinical outcomes, similar mechanisms?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate changes in the use of coping styles in response to early symptoms of mania in cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT), compared with psychoeducation, for bipolar disorder. METHOD: Data were drawn from a randomized controlled trial comparing CBT and psychoeducation. A subsample of 119 participants completed the Coping Inventory for the Prodromes of Mania and symptom assessments before treatment and 72 weeks later. RESULTS: Both CBT and psychoeducation were associated with similar improvements in symptom burden. Both treatments also produced equivalent improvements in stimulation reduction and problem-directed coping styles, but no statistically significant change on the endorsement of help-seeking behaviours. A treatment interaction showed that a reduction in denial and blame was present only in the CBT treatment condition. CONCLUSIONS: CBT and psychoeducation have similar impacts on coping styles for the prodromes of mania. The exception to this is denial and blame, which is positively impacted only by CBT but which does not translate into improved outcome. Given the similar change in coping styles and mood burden, teaching patients about how to cope in adaptive ways with the symptoms of mania may be a shared mechanism of change for CBT and psychoeducation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00188838.

Objectif : Rechercher les changements d'utilisation des styles d'adaptation en réponse aux premiers symptômes de manie dans la thérapie cognitivo-comportementale (TCC), comparativement à la psychoéducation, pour le trouble bipolaire. Méthode : Les données ont été tirées d'un essai randomisé contrôlé comparant la TCC avec la psychoéducation. Un sous-échantillon de 119 participants a rempli l'inventaire d'adaptation aux prodromes de manie et les évaluations de symptômes avant le traitement, et 72 semaines plus tard. Résultats : La TCC et la psychoéducation étaient associées à des améliorations semblables du fardeau des symptômes. Les deux traitements produisaient aussi des améliorations équivalentes de la réduction de stimulation et des styles d'adaptation axée sur les problèmes, mais aucun changement statistiquement significatif de l'acceptation de comportements de recherche d'aide. Une interaction des traitements a montré qu'une réduction du déni et du blâme n'était présente que dans le traitement par TCC. Conclusions : La TCC et la psychoéducation ont des effets semblables sur les styles d'adaptation pour les prodromes de la manie. Font exception le déni et le blâme, qui ne répondent positivement qu'à la TCC, ce qui ne se traduit pas par un meilleur résultat. Étant donné le changement semblable des styles d'adaptation et du fardeau de l'humeur, enseigner aux patients comment adopter des moyens de s'adapter aux symptômes de manie peut être un mécanisme de changement partagé par la TCC et la psychoéducation. Numéro d'enregistrement de l'essai clinique : NCT00188838.

A randomized controlled trial of psychoeducation or cognitive-behavioral therapy in bipolar disorder: a Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety treatments (CANMAT) study [CME].

OBJECTIVE: Bipolar disorder is insufficiently controlled by medication, so several adjunctive psychosocial interventions have been tested. Few studies have compared these psychosocial treatments, all of which are lengthy, expensive, and difficult to disseminate. We compared the relative effectiveness of a brief psychoeducation group intervention to a more comprehensive and longer individual cognitive-behavioral therapy intervention, measuring longitudinal outcome in mood burden in bipolar disorder. METHOD: This single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted between June 2002 and September 2006. A total of 204 participants (ages 18-64 years) with DSM-IV bipolar disorder type I or II participated from 4 Canadian academic centers. Subjects were recruited via advertisements or physician referral when well or minimally symptomatic, with few exclusionary criteria to enhance generalizability. Participants were assigned to receive either 20 individual sessions of cognitive-behavioral therapy or 6 sessions of group psychoeducation. The primary outcome of symptom course and morbidity was assessed prospectively over 72 weeks using the Longitudinal Interval Follow-up Evaluation, which yields depression and mania symptom burden scores for each week. RESULTS: Both treatments had similar outcomes with respect to reduction of symptom burden and the likelihood of relapse. Eight percent of subjects dropped out prior to receiving psychoeducation, while 64% were treatment completers; rates were similar for cognitive-behavioral therapy (6% and 66%, respectively). Psychoeducation cost $180 per subject compared to cognitive-behavioral therapy at $1,200 per subject. CONCLUSIONS: Despite longer treatment duration and individualized treatment, cognitive-behavioral therapy did not show a significantly greater clinical benefit compared to group psychoeducation. Psychoeducation is less expensive to provide and requires less clinician training to deliver, suggesting its comparative attractiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00188838.

Coping styles in prodromes of bipolar mania.

OBJECTIVES: Psychological studies have identified that different coping strategies affect outcome in bipolar disorder (BD), with the possibility of preventing mania by effective coping with prodromes. This study seeks to examine coping mechanisms using a recently developed scale to clarify the relationship of coping styles to clinical and demographic characteristics, and to identify coping differences between bipolar I and II subjects. METHODS: The Coping Inventory for Prodromes of Mania (CIPM) was completed by 203 bipolar patients, along with other diagnostic and clinical measures. The CIPM is organized into four factors of coping including: stimulation reduction (SR), problem-oriented coping (PR), seeking professional help (SPH), denial and blame (DB). CIPM psychometric properties and its relationship to demographic and clinical factors, dysfunctional attitudes, and mood symptoms were examined. Coping profiles were generated by BD subtype (I versus II). RESULTS: The CIPM displayed psychometric properties consistent with the single previous study with this instrument. Neither demographic/clinical characteristics nor mood symptoms showed any particular relationship with the CIPM. Clear differences in coping also emerged between BD I and BD II subjects. BD I tended to use a wider range of coping strategies and scored highly on the SPH factor as compared to BD II subjects. BD II participants preferred to use DB and PR, but were less likely to use SPH and SR. CONCLUSIONS: The CIPM appears to be a valid measure of coping. Coping style preferences appear to differ according to bipolar subtype.