Background: There are few effective treatments for bipolar depression, a common and debilitating illness.Aims: We aimed to examine the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a four-week, telephone-delivered positive psychology (PP) intervention for patients with bipolar depression. Methods:Twenty-five patients hospitalized for bipolar depression were randomized to receive a PP (n = 14) or control condition (CC; n = 11) intervention. Following discharge, participants completed weekly exercises and phone calls with a study trainer. PP intervention feasibility was assessed by the number of exercises completed, and acceptability was examined on five-point Likert-type scales of ease and utility. Between-group differences on psychological constructs at 4 and 8 weeks post-enrollment were assessed using mixed effects regression models. Results: Participants in the PP group completed an average of three out of four PP exercises and found PP exercises to be subjectively helpful, though neither easy nor difficult. Compared to CC, the PP intervention led to trends towards greater improvements in positive affect and optimism at follow-up, with large effect sizes (modified Cohen's d = 0.95-1.24). PP had variable, non-significant effects on negative psychological constructs.Conclusions: Larger, randomized trials are needed to further evaluate the efficacy of this intervention in this high-risk population.
RCT Entities:
Background: There are few effective treatments for bipolar depression, a common and debilitating illness.Aims: We aimed to examine the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a four-week, telephone-delivered positive psychology (PP) intervention for patients with bipolar depression. Methods: Twenty-five patients hospitalized for bipolar depression were randomized to receive a PP (n = 14) or control condition (CC; n = 11) intervention. Following discharge, participants completed weekly exercises and phone calls with a study trainer. PP intervention feasibility was assessed by the number of exercises completed, and acceptability was examined on five-point Likert-type scales of ease and utility. Between-group differences on psychological constructs at 4 and 8 weeks post-enrollment were assessed using mixed effects regression models. Results:Participants in the PP group completed an average of three out of four PP exercises and found PP exercises to be subjectively helpful, though neither easy nor difficult. Compared to CC, the PP intervention led to trends towards greater improvements in positive affect and optimism at follow-up, with large effect sizes (modified Cohen's d = 0.95-1.24). PP had variable, non-significant effects on negative psychological constructs.Conclusions: Larger, randomized trials are needed to further evaluate the efficacy of this intervention in this high-risk population.
Authors: Jeff C Huffman; Rachel A Millstein; Carol A Mastromauro; Shannon V Moore; Christopher M Celano; C Andres Bedoya; Laura Suarez; Julia K Boehm; James L Januzzi Journal: J Happiness Stud Date: 2015-10-19
Authors: Madhukar H Trivedi; Stephen R Wisniewski; David W Morris; Maurizio Fava; Jackie K Gollan; Diane Warden; Andrew A Nierenberg; Bradley N Gaynes; Mustafa M Husain; James F Luther; Sidney Zisook; A John Rush Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Jeffery C Huffman; Ariana M Albanese; Kirsti A Campbell; Christopher M Celano; Rachel A Millstein; Carol A Mastromauro; Brian C Healy; Wei-Jean Chung; James L Januzzi; Linda M Collins; Elyse R Park Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Hanga Galfalvy; Maria A Oquendo; Juan J Carballo; Leo Sher; Michael F Grunebaum; Ainsley Burke; J John Mann Journal: Bipolar Disord Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 6.744
Authors: Jeff C Huffman; Christina M DuBois; Brian C Healy; Julia K Boehm; Todd B Kashdan; Christopher M Celano; John W Denninger; Sonja Lyubomirsky Journal: Gen Hosp Psychiatry Date: 2013-10-14 Impact factor: 3.238
Authors: Maria A Oquendo; Hanga Galfalvy; Stefani Russo; Steven P Ellis; Michael F Grunebaum; Ainsley Burke; J John Mann Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Jeff C Huffman; Eleanor E Beale; Christopher M Celano; Scott R Beach; Arianna M Belcher; Shannon V Moore; Laura Suarez; Shweta R Motiwala; Parul U Gandhi; Hanna K Gaggin; James L Januzzi Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2015-12-08
Authors: Joep van Agteren; Matthew Iasiello; Laura Lo; Jonathan Bartholomaeus; Zoe Kopsaftis; Marissa Carey; Michael Kyrios Journal: Nat Hum Behav Date: 2021-04-19
Authors: Janelle M Painter; Jasmine Mote; Andrew D Peckham; Erica H Lee; Timothy R Campellone; Jennifer G Pearlstein; Stefana Morgan; Ann M Kring; Sheri L Johnson; Judith T Moskowitz Journal: Gen Hosp Psychiatry Date: 2019-07-23 Impact factor: 3.238
Authors: Hermioni L Amonoo; Areej El-Jawahri; Emma C Deary; Lara N Traeger; Corey S Cutler; Joseph A Antin; Jeff C Huffman; Stephanie J Lee Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2022-04-04 Impact factor: 50.717
Authors: Jing Yu; Risë B Goldstein; Denise L Haynie; Jeremy W Luk; Brian J Fairman; Reeya A Patel; Pablo Vidal-Ribas; Katherine Maultsby; Mahad Gudal; Stephen E Gilman Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2021-01-09 Impact factor: 7.830
Authors: Ka Yan Ho; Katherine Ka Wai Lam; Daniel Thomas Bressington; Jessie Lin; Yim Wah Mak; Cynthia Wu; William H C Li Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-08-17 Impact factor: 3.006