Premium
Six‐month outcomes of customized adherence enhancement (CAE) therapy in bipolar disorder
Author(s) -
Sajatovic Martha,
Levin Jennifer,
Tatsuoka Curtis,
MiculaGondek Weronika,
FuentesCasiano Edna,
Bialko Christopher S,
Cassidy Kristin A
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
bipolar disorders
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.285
H-Index - 129
eISSN - 1399-5618
pISSN - 1398-5647
DOI - 10.1111/j.1399-5618.2012.01010.x
Subject(s) - medicine , psychosocial , bipolar disorder , young mania rating scale , rating scale , depression (economics) , brief psychiatric rating scale , hamilton rating scale for depression , mania , physical therapy , psychological intervention , psychiatry , mood , major depressive disorder , psychology , developmental psychology , psychosis , economics , macroeconomics
Sajatovic M, Levin J, Tatsuoka C, Micula‐Gondek W, Fuentes‐Casiano E, Bialko CS, Cassidy KA. Six‐month outcomes of customized adherence enhancement (CAE) therapy in bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disord 2012: 14: 291–300. © 2012 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Background: There are few psychosocial interventions specifically focused on improved treatment adherence in people with bipolar disorder (BD). Customized adherence enhancement (CAE) is a needs‐based, manualized approach intended to improve medication adherence in individuals with BD. This was a six‐month prospective trial of a CAE among 43 medication non‐adherent individuals with BD who were receiving treatment in a community mental health clinic (CMHC). Methods: CAE was flexibly administered in modules applied as indicated by an initial adherence vulnerabilities screening. Screening identified reasons for non‐adherence and modules were then administered using pre‐set criteria. CAE effects were evaluated at six‐week, three‐month, and six‐month follow‐up. The six‐month follow‐up was our primary time point of interest. The primary outcome was change from baseline in adherence using the Tablets Routine Questionnaire (TRQ) and pill counts. Secondary outcomes included change from baseline in BD symptoms [Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM‐D), Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS)]. Results: Subjects completed 86% of scheduled sessions, with only two individuals (5%) not participating in any sessions. The number of dropouts at six months was 12 (28%). Mean baseline non‐adherence by TRQ was 48% [standard error (SE) 4.8%] missed tablets within the previous week and 51% (4.1%) missed tablets within the previous month. At six‐month follow‐up, mean TRQ non‐adherence improved to 25% (6.8%) missed tablets for the previous week (p = 0.002) and 21% (5.5%) for the previous month (p < 0.001). Symptoms improved, with a change in the baseline mean (SE) BPRS of 43.6 (1.8) versus an endpoint of 36.1 (2.3) (p = 0.001), and baseline mean (SE) HAM‐D of 17.8 (1.1) versus an endpoint of 15.3 (1.6) (p = 0.044). Conclusion: CAE was associated with improvements in adherence, symptoms, and functional status. Controlled trials are needed to confirm these preliminary findings.