Efficacy of psychoeducation on symptomatic and functional recovery in bipolar disorder

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of psychoeducation in the symptomatic and functional recovery, and quality of life (QoL) in a sample of patients with bipolar disorder (BD).Method: The sample comprised 55 patients with BD I and II in remission (Young Mania Rating Scale ≤6 and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ≤7). Out‐patients were matched assigned to receive 16 sessions of psychoeducation [experimental group (EG)] or 16 sessions of placebo without psychoeducation [control group (CG)]. Groups were evaluated at study baseline, midpoint, endpoint, and at 6‐ and 12‐month follow‐ups.Results: No significant differences between the groups were found for the variables evaluated (mood symptoms, functioning and QoL), except for overall clinical improvement, subjectively perceived by EG subjects. Both groups showed a trend toward improved clinical global impression and QoL (environmental). No reduction in mood symptoms or improvement in psychosocial functioning was observed. Psychosocial treatment compliance was positively correlated with global functioning, social adjustment, sociability, and global clinical impression.Conclusion: Sixteen session psychoeducation seems to be ineffective to prevent mood episodes or improve functioning in a sample of bipolar patients.

Efficacy of psychoeducational family intervention for bipolar I disorder: A controlled, multicentric, real-world study

“…On the other hand, a systematic review carried out by the Cochrane Collaboration (Justo et al, 2007) concluded that there was a poor and mixed amount of evidence supporting the effectiveness of family oriented approaches for bipolar disorders, making impossible to draw firm conclusions about their role as additional treatment for these disorders. The results of the systematic review were confirmed by de Barros Pellegrinelli et al (2013) who reported that psychoeducation is ineffective in preventing mood episodes or improving functioning in bipolar patients. This apparent inconsistency is probably due to the fact that several different approaches are included under the label of "psychoeducation" (Lucksted et al, 2012), with several changes over the years (Colom, 2014;Fiorillo et al, 2013a).…”

Psychotherapy for Bipolar Disorder in Adults: A Review of the Evidence

“…In contrast to these earlier trials, de Barros Pellegrinelli and colleagues (32) in Brazil found no advantage of the PE group (administered as a 16-rather than 21-session intervention) compared with TAU over a 1-year period. They found that on the HAM-D, both groups had increased depressive symptoms at endpoint (p=0.014) with no differences between groups.…”

“…In all but one trial (27), psychotherapy was administered as an adjunct to pharmacologic treatments. In most cases, the addition of psychotherapy to pharmacotherapy was associated with improved outcomes for bipolar disorder compared with the control condition [but for exceptions, see, Scott et al (28), Meyer and Hautzinger (29), Parikh et al (30), Crowe et al (31), and de Barros Pellegrinelli et al (32)]. Below we briefly describe individual and group models of psychotherapy tested for bipolar disorder and the evidence supporting their efficacy/effectiveness.…”

“…They found that on the HAM-D, both groups had increased depressive symptoms at endpoint (p=0.014) with no differences between groups. Only one subject was hospitalized, and there were no differences between groups on the number of depressive or manic relapses (32). Although the Brazilian trial failed to confirm the positive findings of the Spanish and Italian trials, their sample size was much smaller (N=55 versus 120 and 102, respectively), raising the possibility of type II error (i.e., failure to reject the null hypothesis because of inadequate sample size).…”

Intervenção psicológica em grupo para pacientes com diagnóstico de Transtorno Bipolar: uma revisão da literatura

“…O TB é uma condição psiquiátrica caracterizada por alterações de humor, com episódios maníacos/hipomaníacos e depressivos, sendo subdividido em TB tipo I e TB tipo II (APA, 2013). Esse diagnóstico pode comprometer as atividades do indivíduo, os relacionamentos interpessoais e principalmente a qualidade de vida (Mussi et al, 2013;Pellegrinelli et al, 2013).…”