OBJECTIVE: This pilot study compared Life Goals Collaborative Care (LGCC) with enhanced treatment as usual in reducing cardiometabolic risk factors and improving outcomes for persons with bipolar disorder. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned to LGCC (N=34) or enhanced treatment as usual (N=34). LGCC included four weekly self-management sessions and monthly telephone contacts for six months thereafter. Enhanced treatment as usual included wellness mailings. Outcomes were blood pressure, body mass index (BMI), quality of life, functioning, and symptoms. RESULTS: Compared with enhanced treatment as usual, LGCC was not associated with reductions in cardiometabolic risk factors in 12-month repeated-measures analyses. Among patients with a BMI of ≥30 orsystolic blood pressure of ≥140, LGCC was associated with improvements in functioning (beta=-2.2 and beta=-3.8, respectively, p=.04) and reduced depressive symptoms (beta=-2.0 and -3.5, respectively, p=.04). CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to determine whether LGCC improves outcomes for patients with elevated cardiometabolic risk.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: This pilot study compared Life Goals Collaborative Care (LGCC) with enhanced treatment as usual in reducing cardiometabolic risk factors and improving outcomes for persons with bipolar disorder. METHODS:Participants were randomly assigned to LGCC (N=34) or enhanced treatment as usual (N=34). LGCC included four weekly self-management sessions and monthly telephone contacts for six months thereafter. Enhanced treatment as usual included wellness mailings. Outcomes were blood pressure, body mass index (BMI), quality of life, functioning, and symptoms. RESULTS: Compared with enhanced treatment as usual, LGCC was not associated with reductions in cardiometabolic risk factors in 12-month repeated-measures analyses. Among patients with a BMI of ≥30 or systolic blood pressure of ≥140, LGCC was associated with improvements in functioning (beta=-2.2 and beta=-3.8, respectively, p=.04) and reduced depressive symptoms (beta=-2.0 and -3.5, respectively, p=.04). CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to determine whether LGCC improves outcomes for patients with elevated cardiometabolic risk.
Authors: Benjamin G Druss; Steven C Marcus; Jeannie Campbell; Brian Cuffel; James Harnett; Chuck Ingoglia; Barbara Mauer Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Mark S Bauer; Linda McBride; William O Williford; Henry Glick; Bruce Kinosian; Lori Altshuler; Thomas Beresford; Amy M Kilbourne; Martha Sajatovic Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Shawna N Smith; Daniel Almirall; Katherine Prenovost; Celeste Liebrecht; Julia Kyle; Daniel Eisenberg; Mark S Bauer; Amy M Kilbourne Journal: Med Care Date: 2019-07 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Jeanette Waxmonsky; Amy M Kilbourne; David E Goodrich; Kristina M Nord; Zongshan Lai; Christina Laird; Julia Clogston; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Christopher Miller; Mark S Bauer Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2014-01-01 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Amy M Kilbourne; David E Goodrich; Kristina M Nord; Celeste Van Poppelen; Julia Kyle; Mark S Bauer; Jeanette A Waxmonsky; Zongshan Lai; Hyungjin M Kim; Daniel Eisenberg; Marshall R Thomas Journal: Adm Policy Ment Health Date: 2015-09
Authors: Laura J Damschroder; David E Goodrich; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Robert Holleman; Leah Gillon; Susan Kirsh; Caroline R Richardson; Lesley D Lutes Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Elizabeth A DiNapoli; Christopher Cinna; Karen L Whiteman; Lauren Fox; Cathleen J Appelt; John Kasckow Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2016-07-21 Impact factor: 3.485