Profiles of disability among adults with bipolar spectrum disorders

Developing a profile of activities of daily living for bipolar disorder: a systematic review protocol and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a severe mental health disorder that affects 2% of the adult population. Individuals with this disorder are at a higher risk for morbidity and functional difficulties. They may also experience significant challenges in their activities of daily living (ADLs). This systematic review will identify all available studies that examine subsets of ADLs that impact individuals with BD.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and APA PsycINFO will be searched to identify observational studies that examined functioning, independence or performance across a variety of ADLs. Title and abstract, full-text screening and a risk of bias assessment will be conducted in duplicate. An overarching table that summarises the level of functioning across different ADLs or an 'ADL profile' will be developed, and if there are sufficient data, these will be separated based on the phases of BD, such as manic/hypomanic, depressed and euthymic.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

As this systematic review uses information from previous literature, this review does not require ethics approval. This review will help identify the trends in daily activities that individuals struggle with and can help healthcare practitioners identify specific areas of need for support. We plan to disseminate the results in a peer-reviewed journal and conferences targeting occupational therapists and mental health clinicians.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021255089.

World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0: An international systematic review

PURPOSE

This systematic review examines research and practical applications of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) as a basis for establishing specific criteria for evaluating relevant international scientific literature. The aims were to establish the extent of international dissemination and use of WHODAS 2.0 and analyze psychometric research on its various translations and adaptations. In particular, we wanted to highlight which psychometric features have been investigated, focusing on the factor structure, reliability, and validity of this instrument.

METHOD

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology, we conducted a search for publications focused on "whodas" using the ProQuest, PubMed, and Google Scholar electronic databases.

RESULTS

We identified 810 studies from 94 countries published between 1999 and 2015. WHODAS 2.0 has been translated into 47 languages and dialects and used in 27 areas of research (40% in psychiatry).

CONCLUSIONS

The growing number of studies indicates increasing interest in the WHODAS 2.0 for assessing individual functioning and disability in different settings and individual health conditions. The WHODAS 2.0 shows strong correlations with several other measures of activity limitations; probably due to the fact that it shares the same disability latent variable with them. Implications for Rehabilitation WHODAS 2.0 seems to be a valid, reliable self-report instrument for the assessment of disability. The increasing interest in use of the WHODAS 2.0 extends to rehabilitation and life sciences rather than being limited to psychiatry. WHODAS 2.0 is suitable for assessing health status and disability in a variety of settings and populations. A critical issue for rehabilitation is that a single "minimal clinically important .difference" score for the WHODAS 2.0 has not yet been established.

Characteristics associated with inpatient versus outpatient status in older adults with bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVES

This is an exploratory analysis of ambulatory and inpatient services utilization by older persons with type I bipolar disorder experiencing elevated mood. The association between type of treatment setting and the person's characteristics is explored within a framework that focuses upon predisposing, enhancing, and need characteristics.

METHOD

Baseline assessments were conducted with the first 51 inpatients and 49 outpatients 60 years of age and older, meeting criteria for type I bipolar disorder, manic, hypomanic, or mixed episode enrolled in the geriatric bipolar disorder study (GERI-BD) study. We compared participants recruited from inpatient versus outpatient settings in regard to the patients' predisposing, enabling, and need characteristics.

RESULTS

Being treated in an inpatient rather than an outpatient setting was associated with the predisposing characteristic of being non-Hispanic caucasian (odds ratio [OR]: 0.1; P = .005) and past history of treatment with first-generation antipsychotics (OR: 6.5; P < .001), and the need characteristic reflected in having psychotic symptoms present in the current episode (OR: 126.08; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Ethnicity, past pharmacologic treatment, and current symptom severity are closely associated with treatment in inpatient settings. Clinicians and researchers should investigate whether closer monitoring of persons with well-validated predisposing and need characteristics can lead to their being treated in less costly but equally effective ambulatory rather than inpatient settings.