OBJECTIVES: Data from the Australian National Study of Low Prevalence (Psychotic) Disorders were used to describe the clinical and sociodemographic profile of individuals with bipolar disorder, their levels of impairment and disability, and use of medication and treatment services. METHODS: A 1-month census of contacts with mental health services, private psychiatric and general practices, as well as contact points in marginalized settings, was conducted in a national catchment of 1.1 million adults. The census yielded 3,800 individuals who screened positive for psychosis, of whom a random sample of 980 were administered a comprehensive semi-structured interview schedule. Results are presented on 112 persons with an ICD-10 diagnosis of bipolar disorder. RESULTS: Overall, 69.6% of the 112 persons who met the ICD-10 criteria for bipolar disorder reported a recurrent episodic illness, 25.0% had a chronic course without clear remissions, and 5.4% had a single episode of mania. Assessed on a lifetime basis, suicidal ideation was common (78.6%) and levels of drug and alcohol abuse/dependence were high (32.1%). The majority (84.8%) had had at least one contact with inpatient, outpatient or emergency services in the previous year. Those with serious impairment had levels of service utilization similar to the rest of the sample, but were more likely to report a poorer quality of life and unmet service needs. While the percentage experiencing social and occupational dysfunction was substantial and similar for both sexes, women appeared to be better integrated socially than men. Comparisons with schizophrenia patients within the same survey sample highlighted less chronic impairment but equal or greater utilization of services by bipolar patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite low levels of chronicity, the burden of social disablement associated with bipolar disorder is high. The data suggest a number of important gaps in the provision of services for this predominantly treated population.
OBJECTIVES: Data from the Australian National Study of Low Prevalence (Psychotic) Disorders were used to describe the clinical and sociodemographic profile of individuals with bipolar disorder, their levels of impairment and disability, and use of medication and treatment services. METHODS: A 1-month census of contacts with mental health services, private psychiatric and general practices, as well as contact points in marginalized settings, was conducted in a national catchment of 1.1 million adults. The census yielded 3,800 individuals who screened positive for psychosis, of whom a random sample of 980 were administered a comprehensive semi-structured interview schedule. Results are presented on 112 persons with an ICD-10 diagnosis of bipolar disorder. RESULTS: Overall, 69.6% of the 112 persons who met the ICD-10 criteria for bipolar disorder reported a recurrent episodic illness, 25.0% had a chronic course without clear remissions, and 5.4% had a single episode of mania. Assessed on a lifetime basis, suicidal ideation was common (78.6%) and levels of drug and alcohol abuse/dependence were high (32.1%). The majority (84.8%) had had at least one contact with inpatient, outpatient or emergency services in the previous year. Those with serious impairment had levels of service utilization similar to the rest of the sample, but were more likely to report a poorer quality of life and unmet service needs. While the percentage experiencing social and occupational dysfunction was substantial and similar for both sexes, women appeared to be better integrated socially than men. Comparisons with schizophreniapatients within the same survey sample highlighted less chronic impairment but equal or greater utilization of services by bipolarpatients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite low levels of chronicity, the burden of social disablement associated with bipolar disorder is high. The data suggest a number of important gaps in the provision of services for this predominantly treated population.
Authors: Ángel Del Rey-Mejías; David Fraguas; Covadonga M Díaz-Caneja; Laura Pina-Camacho; Josefina Castro-Fornieles; Inmaculada Baeza; Ana Espliego; Jessica Merchán-Naranjo; Ana González-Pinto; Elena de la Serna; Beatriz Payá; Montserrat Graell; Celso Arango; Mara Parellada Journal: Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2015-03-01 Impact factor: 4.785
Authors: Andrea Gogos; Luke J Ney; Natasha Seymour; Tamsyn E Van Rheenen; Kim L Felmingham Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2019-03-14 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Kathleen R Merikangas; Robert Jin; Jian-Ping He; Ronald C Kessler; Sing Lee; Nancy A Sampson; Maria Carmen Viana; Laura Helena Andrade; Chiyi Hu; Elie G Karam; Maria Ladea; Maria Elena Medina-Mora; Yutaka Ono; Jose Posada-Villa; Rajesh Sagar; J Elisabeth Wells; Zahari Zarkov Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2011-03
Authors: Francis L Pazini; Mauricio P Cunha; Dayane Azevedo; Julia M Rosa; André Colla; Jade de Oliveira; Ana B Ramos-Hryb; Patricia S Brocardo; Joana Gil-Mohapel; Ana Lúcia S Rodrigues Journal: Mol Neurobiol Date: 2016-10-06 Impact factor: 5.590
Authors: Judith G Proudfoot; Gordon B Parker; Megan Benoit; Vijaya Manicavasagar; Meg Smith; Aimee Gayed Journal: Health Expect Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Berit Kerner; Anna J Jasinska; Joseph DeYoung; Maricel Almonte; Oi-Wa Choi; Nelson B Freimer Journal: Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet Date: 2009-01-05 Impact factor: 3.568
Authors: Denis J David; Benjamin Adam Samuels; Quentin Rainer; Jing-Wen Wang; Douglas Marsteller; Indira Mendez; Michael Drew; Douglas A Craig; Bruno P Guiard; Jean-Philippe Guilloux; Roman P Artymyshyn; Alain M Gardier; Christophe Gerald; Irina A Antonijevic; E David Leonardo; René Hen Journal: Neuron Date: 2009-05-28 Impact factor: 17.173