Search

Background Methods Results Conclusions Functional recovery remains a core clinical objective for patients with bipolar disorder (BD). Sociodemographic, clinical, and neurocognitive variables are associated with long‐term functional impairment, yet the impact of sex differences is unclear. Functional remediation (FR) is a validated intervention aimed at achieving functional recovery in BD. The present study assessed the effect of sex differences of FR on psychosocial functioning at post‐treatment (6‐months) and 12‐month follow‐up (FUP). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to explore the role of sex as a factor in the efficacy of FR.157 participants with BD were randomly assigned to either FR (N = 77) or treatment as usual group (80). Clinical, sociodemographic, neuropsychological, and functional data were obtained using a comprehensive assessment battery. Sex differences were explored via a general linear model (GLM) for repeated measures to compare the effect of sex on the intervention over time (6 months and FUP).Results demonstrated that FR benefits both sexes, males (p = 0.001; d’ = 0.88) and females (p = 0.04; d’ = 0.57), at 6 months suggesting a generalized functional improvement. Conversely, at 12‐month FUP sex differences were observed only in males (p = 0.005; d’ = 0.68).FR is a beneficial intervention for males and females after treatment, suggesting that there are no relevant distinct needs. Females may benefit from ongoing psychosocial functioning booster sessions after the intervention to maintain original improvements. Future research exploring sex differences could help to identify strategies to offer personalized FR intervention approaches in individuals with BD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Short‐term cognitive impairment is associated with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection but the long‐term impact is yet to be examined in detail. We aim to study the evolution of these symptoms in severe COVID‐19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) between April and December 2020 1 year after hospital discharge and to analyze its clinical correlates. Method: A total of 58 patients agreed to participate in the 6 months follow‐up and 30 at 1 year after hospital discharge. Demographic, clinical and laboratory data were collected and a comprehensive neuropsychological battery including validated tests for the main cognitive domains was administered. To test the magnitude of neurocognitive sequelae, two standard deviations below normative group were considered. To compare the neuropsychological performance at 6 and 12 months follow‐up we used repeated measures tests. Finally, regression analyses were performed to test the main effects of medical and psychological factors on multiple cognition. Results: Almost half of the sample continued to have impaired performance on neuropsychological tests at 12 months follow‐up. In comparison with the results obtained at 6 months, significant improvements were found in immediate recall (d = 0.49), delayed recall (d = 0.45), and inhibitory control (d = 0.53). Medical variables predicted cognitive performance at 6 months but not at 12 months follow‐up, while anxiety and depression predicted cognitive deficits in the long‐term. Conclusions: A generalised improvement was observed in severe COVID‐19 patients at follow‐up. This improvement was particularly notable in verbal memory and executive functioning. However, a considerable proportion of the sample continued to present deficits at 1 year follow‐up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Breast cancer is associated with adverse physical and psychological consequences. Although research has identified the various benefits linked to psychosocial interventions, mixed results have been found in relation to peer support. The aim of the present systematic review and meta‐ethnography is to explore the qualitative evidence on the experience of breast cancer survivors in peer support. A systematic search of the literature was conducted until June 2023, and a meta‐ethnographic approach was used to synthesize the included papers. Eleven articles were included, collecting the experience of 345 participants. The following four core areas involved in peer support implementation were identified from the synthesis: Peer support can create understanding and a mutual therapeutic and emotional connection; peer support can facilitate an educational and supportive patient‐centered journey; peer support should monitor group members for unpleasant emotional experiences; peer support should have professional supervision of recruitment and training to prioritize quality. These results can be used as patient‐centered insights by healthcare professionals to provide evidence‐informed peer support programs and address current limitations in the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]