P.J.J. Goossens

Family caregiving in bipolar disorder: caregiver consequences, caregiver coping styles, and caregiver distress.

Aims: This study investigated the consequences caregivers of outpatients with bipolar disorder are confronted with, the distress they experience and their coping styles. Methods: Caregivers (n = 115) were asked to complete the Involvement Evaluation Questionnaire (IEQ) to measure caregivers consequences, the Utrecht Coping List (UCL) to measure caregivers coping styles, and the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) to measure caregiver distress. Scale (sub)scores were calculated and relationships between the results were explored. Results: Caregiver consequences were found to be limited, although approximately 30% reported distress. Male caregivers used a more avoiding coping style and undertook activities to provide diversion. Female caregivers used a less active approach and sought less social support. Correlations were found between the IEQ overall score and its subscales `tension and `worrying and the UCL subscales `palliative reaction pattern and `passive reaction pattern. Distress appears to occur more often in caregivers who report more consequences, tend to use a more avoiding coping style, and have a more passive reaction pattern. Conclusions: Clinicians should assess symptoms of caregiver distress. When caregiver distress is noticed, efforts should be undertaken to support the caregiver and teach them skills to cope effectively with the consequences they experience in order to stay well.

Functional versus syndromal recovery in patients with major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVEnMany patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder (BD) experience impairments in daily life. We investigated whether patients with single-episode MDD (MDD-s), recurrent MDD (MDD-r), and BD differ in functional impairments, whether time since last episode (syndromal state, in 4 categories) contributes to impairment, whether this association is moderated by diagnosis, and the role of depressive symptoms.nnnMETHODnData were derived from 1,664 participants in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (MDD-s, n = 483; MDD-r, n = 1,063; BD, n = 118), from 2006 into 2009. In additional analyses, 530 healthy controls were included. DSM-IV-TR diagnosis and information about syndromal state were based on the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Psychosocial impairment was assessed with the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). Adjusted associations between diagnosis, syndromal state, impairment, and depression severity were investigated.nnnRESULTSnSyndromal state not being taken into account, patients with BD experienced more functional impairment than patients with MDD-s or with MDD-r, and in all diagnostic groups, impairments decreased with increasing time since last episode. However, impact of syndromal state on functioning showed a different course between diagnostic groups (mean [SD] WHODAS score: current: MDD-s 30.8 [2.8], MDD-r 32.7 [0.9], BD 37.7 [2.1], P = .07; recently remitted: MDD-s 21.7 [3.5], MDD-r 24.0 [1.2], BD 22.1[3.2], P = .7; remitted: MDD-s 10.6 [3.7], MDD-r 21.6 [1.4], BD 19.2 [4.4], P = .02; remitted > 1 year: MDD-s 13.3 [0.6], MDD-r 14.7 [0.5], BD 17.1 [2.2], P = .8). Depression severity accounted for these differences. Moreover, functioning in all remitted patients remained impaired when compared to that in healthy controls.nnnCONCLUSIONnFunctional recovery may take up to 1 year after syndromal remission in recurrent depressive and bipolar disorder, mainly due to residual depressive symptoms, emphasizing the need for prolonged continuation treatment.

Collaborative care for patients with bipolar disorder: a randomised controlled trial

BackgroundBipolar disorder is a severe mental illness with serious consequences for daily living of patients and their caregivers. Care as usual primarily consists of pharmacotherapy and supportive treatment. However, a substantial number of patients show a suboptimal response to treatment and still suffer from frequent episodes, persistent interepisodic symptoms and poor social functioning. Both psychiatric and somatic comorbid disorders are frequent, especially personality disorders, substance abuse, cardiovascular diseases and diabetes. Multidisciplinary collaboration of professionals is needed to combine all expertise in order to achieve high-quality integrated treatment. Collaborative Care is a treatment method that could meet these needs. Several studies have shown promising effects of these integrated treatment programs for patients with bipolar disorder. In this article we describe a research protocol concerning a study on the effects of Collaborative Care for patients with bipolar disorder in the Netherlands.Methods/designThe study concerns a two-armed cluster randomised clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of Collaborative Care (CC) in comparison with Care as usual (CAU) in outpatient clinics for bipolar disorder or mood disorders in general. Collaborative Care includes individually tailored interventions, aimed at personal goals set by the patient. The patient, his caregiver, the nurse and the psychiatrist all are part of the Collaborative Care team. Elements of the program are: contracting and shared decision making; psycho education; problem solving treatment; systematic relapse prevention; monitoring of outcomes and pharmacotherapy. Nurses coordinate the program. Nurses and psychiatrists in the intervention group will be trained in the intervention. The effects will be measured at baseline, 6 months and 12 months. Primary outcomes are psychosocial functioning, psychiatric symptoms, and quality of life. Caregiver outcomes are burden and satisfaction with care.DiscussionSeveral ways to enhance the quality of this study are described, as well as some limitations caused by the complexities of naturalistic treatment settings where not all influencing factors on an intervention and the outcomes can be controlled.Trial RegistrationThe Netherlands Trial Registry, NTR2600.

“Providing Structure” as a Psychiatric Nursing Intervention: A Review of the Literature

PURPOSEnThe focus is on a nursing intervention called providing structure (PS). This label does not exist in the Nursing Interventions Classification. The following three questions were asked: (a) How is PS defined? (b) What are the goals of PS? and (c) What is the evidence regarding the effectiveness of PS?nnnDESIGN AND METHODnA systematic literature review. Forty articles, predominantly qualitative studies of PS, were selected for review.nnnFINDINGSnRegarding PS, three elements were mentioned: to impose and maintain rules and limits; to assess the condition of the patient; and to interact with the patient. The goals for PS related to patient security, making expectations explicit, and recovering from illness. Major findings were reviewed, but little was found about the effectiveness of PS.

Identifying and describing patients’ learning experiences towards self-management of bipolar disorders: a phenomenological study

ACCESSIBLE SUMMARYnExisting evidence suggest that patient education in promoting self-management strategies of bipolar disorder (BD) is effective. However, results across the full range of service users with BD vary. Learning experiences of service users look to be a crucial factor to take into account when designing, delivering, and evaluating effective interventions that promote self-management in chronic illness. What learning activities service users actually undertake themselves when self-managing BD that might explain varying success rates, and guide future self-management educational programmes has not been examined. Unlike previous studies that suggest that outcomes in self-management depend on individual learning activities, the current study found that learning to self-manage BD takes place in a social network that functions as a learning environment in which it is saved for service users to make mistakes and to learn from these mistakes. Especially, coping with the dormant fear of a recurrent episode and acknowledging the limitations of an individual approach are important factors that facilitate this learning process. Practitioners who provide patient education in order to promote self-management of BD should tailor future interventions that facilitate learning by reflecting on the own experiences of service users. Community psychiatric nurses should keep an open discussion with service users and caregivers, facilitate the use of a network, and re-label problems into learning situations where both play an active role in building mutual trust, thereby enhancing self-management of BD.nnnABSTRACTnExisting evidence suggest that self-management education of bipolar disorder (BD) is effective. However, why outcomes differ across the full range of service users has not been examined. This study describes learning experiences of service users in self-managing BD that provide a possible explanation for this varying effectiveness. We have conducted a phenomenological study via face-to-face, in-depth interviews, guided by a topic list, along service users with BD I or II (n = 16) in three specialised community care clinics across the Netherlands. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim prior to analysis in Atlas.ti 7. Unlike existing studies, which suggest that individual abilities of service users determine outcomes in self-management of BD, the current study found that self-management of BD is a learning process that takes place in a collaborative network. We identified five categories: acknowledgment of having BD, processing the information load, illness management, reflecting on living with BD, and self-management of BD. The success of self-management depends on the acknowledgment of individual limitations in learning to cope with BD and willingness to use a social network as a back-up instead. Especially, the dormant fear of a recurrent episode is a hampering factor in this learning process.

Phase-based treatment of a complex severely mentally ill case involving complex posttraumatic stress disorder and psychosis related to Dandy Walker syndrome.

For patients with comorbid complex posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and psychotic disorder, trauma-focused therapy may be difficult to endure. Phase-based treatment including (a) stabilization, (b) trauma-focused therapy, and (c) integration of personality with recovery of connection appears to be the treatment of choice. Objective: The objective of this article is to describe and evaluate the therapeutic process of a single case from a holistic perspective. Method: We present a case report of a 47-year-old woman treated for severe complex PTSD resulting from repeated sexual and physical abuse in early childhood and moderate psychotic symptoms stemming from Dandy Walker Syndrome with hydrocephalus. Results: The patient was treated with quetiapine (600–1,000 mg) and citalopram (40 mg). Stabilization consisted of intensive psychiatric nursing care in the home and stabilizing group treatment for complex PTSD. After stabilization, the following symptom domains showed improvement: self-regulation, self-esteem, assertiveness, avoidance of social activities, and negative cognitions. However, intrusions and arousal persisted and were therefore subsequently treated with prolonged imaginary exposure that also included narrative writing assignments and a final closing ritual. This intensive multidisciplinary, phase-based approach proved effective: All symptoms of complex PTSD were in full remission. Social integration and recovery were promoted with the reduction of polypharmacy and the provision of social skills training and lifestyle training. Conclusion: The present case shows a phase-based treatment approach with multidisciplinary collaborative care to be effective for the treatment of a case of complex PTSD with comorbid psychotic disorder stemming from severe neurological impairment. Replication of this promising approach is therefore called for.