Search

ObjectivesThe distinction between bipolar I disorder (BD-I) and bipolar II disorder (BD-II) has been a topic of long-lasting debate. This study examined differences between BD-I and BD-II in a large, global sample of OABD, focusing on general functioning, cognition and somatic burden as these domains are often affected in OABD.MethodsCross-sectional analyses were conducted with data from the Global Aging and Geriatric Experiments in Bipolar Disorder (GAGE-BD) database. The sample included 963 participants aged ≥50 years (714 BD-I, 249 BD-II). Sociodemographic and clinical factors were compared between BD subtypes including adjustment for study cohort. Multivariable analyses were conducted with generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) and estimated associations between BD subtype and (1) general functioning (GAF), (2) cognitive performance (g-score) and (3) somatic burden, with study cohort as random intercept.ResultsAfter adjustment for study cohort, BD-II patients more often had a late onset ≥50 years (p = 0.008) and more current severe depression (p = 0.041). BD-I patients were more likely to have a history of psychiatric hospitalization (p

ObjectiveLiterature on older-age bipolar disorder (OABD) is limited. This first-ever analysis of the Global Aging & Geriatric Experiments in Bipolar Disorder Database (GAGE-BD) investigated associations among age, BD symptoms, comorbidity, and functioning.MethodsThis analysis used harmonized, baseline, cross-sectional data from 19 international studies (N = 1377). Standardized measures included the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF).ResultsMean sample age was 60.8 years (standard deviation [SD] 12.2 years), 55% female, 72% BD I. Mood symptom severity was low: mean total YMRS score of 4.3 (SD 5.4) and moderate-to-severe depression in only 22%. Controlled for sample effects, both manic and depressive symptom severity appeared lower among older individuals (p's

Objective: Few studies have addressed medication adherence in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with bipolar disorder (BD). This 6‐month prospective randomized‐controlled trial (RCT) tested customized adherence enhancement for adolescents and young adults (CAE‐AYA), a behavioral intervention for AYAs versus enhanced treatment as usual (ETAU). Methods: Inclusion criteria were AYAs age 13–21 with BD type I or II with suboptimal adherence defined as missing ≥20% of medications. Assessments were conducted at Screening, Baseline, and weeks 8, 12 and 24. Primary outcome was past 7 day self‐reported Tablets Routine Questionnaire (TRQ) validated by electronic pillbox monitoring (SimpleMed). Symptom measures included the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM‐D) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Results: The mean sample age (N = 36) was 19.1 years (SD = 2.0); 66.7% (N = 24) female, BD Type I (81%). The mean missed medication on TRQ for the total sample was 35.4% (SD = 28.8) at screening and 30.4% (SD = 30.5) at baseline. Both CAE‐AYA and ETAU improved on TRQ from screening to baseline. Baseline mean missed medication using SimpleMed was 51.6% (SD = 38.5). Baseline HAM‐D and YMRS means were 7.1 (SD = 4.7) and 6.0 (SD = 7.3), respectively. Attrition rate at week 24 was 36%. Baseline to 24‐week change on TRQ, adjusting for age, gender, educational level, living situation, family history, race, and ethnicity, showed improvement favoring CAE‐AYA versus ETAU of 15%. SimpleMed interpretation was limited due to substantial missing data. There was a significant reduction in depression favoring CAE‐AYA. Conclusions: CAE‐AYA may improve adherence in AYAs with BD, although conclusions need to be made cautiously given study limitations. Clinical Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04348604. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The current literature on employment in older adults with bipolar disorder (OABD) is limited. Using the Global Aging and Geriatric Experiments in Bipolar Disorder Database (GAGE‐BD), we examined the relationship of occupational status in OABD to other demographic and clinical characteristics. Methods: Seven hundred and thirty‐eight participants from 11 international samples with data on educational level and occupational status were included. Employment status was dichotomized as employed versus unemployed. Generalized linear mixed models with random intercepts for the study cohort were used to examine the relationship between baseline characteristics and employment. Predictors in the models included baseline demographics, education, psychiatric symptom severity, psychiatric comorbidity, somatic comorbidity, and prior psychiatric hospitalizations. Results: In the sample, 23.6% (n = 174) were employed, while 76.4% were unemployed (n = 564). In multivariable logistic regression models, less education, older age, a history of both anxiety and substance/alcohol use disorders, more prior psychiatric hospitalizations, and higher levels of BD depression severity were associated with greater odds of unemployment. In the subsample of individuals less than 65 years of age, findings were similar. No significant association between manic symptoms, gender, age of onset, or employment status was observed. Conclusion: Results suggest an association between educational level, age, psychiatric severity and comorbidity in relation to employment in OABD. Implications include the need for management of psychiatric symptoms and comorbidity across the lifespan, as well as improving educational access for people with BD and skills training or other support for those with work‐life breaks to re‐enter employment and optimize the overall outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: By 2030, over 50% of individuals living with bipolar disorder (BD) are expected to be aged ≥50 years. However, older age bipolar disorder (OABD) remains understudied. There are limited large-scale prospectively collected data organized in key dimensions capable of addressing several fundamental questions about BD affecting this subgroup of patients. Methods: We developed initial recommendations for the essential dimensions for OABD data collection, based on (1) a systematic review of measures used in OABD studies, (2) a Delphi consensus of international OABD experts, (3) experience with harmonizing OABD data in the Global Aging & Geriatric Experiments in Bipolar Disorder Database (GAGE-BD, n ≥ 4500 participants), and (4) critical feedback from 34 global experts in geriatric mental health. Results: We identified 15 key dimensions and variables within each that are relevant for the investigation of OABD: (1) demographics, (2) core symptoms of depression and (3) mania, (4) cognition screening and subjective cognitive function, (5) elements for BD diagnosis, (6) descriptors of course of illness, (7) treatment, (8) suicidality, (9) current medication, (10) psychiatric comorbidity, (11) psychotic symptoms, (12) general medical comorbidities, (13) functioning, (14) family history, and (15) other. We also recommend particular instruments for capturing some of the dimensions and variables. Conclusion: The essential data dimensions we present should be of use to guide future international data collection in OABD and clinical practice. In the longer term, we aim to establish a prospective consortium using this core set of dimensions and associated variables to answer research questions relevant to OABD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]