The epidemiology of bipolar disorder: sociodemographic, disability and service utilization data from the Australian National Study of Low Prevalence (Psychotic) Disorders

2005 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 326-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vera A Morgan ◽  
Philip B Mitchell ◽  
Assen V Jablensky
2006 ◽  
Vol 40 (8) ◽  
pp. 683-690 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vera Morgan ◽  
Ailsa Korten ◽  
Assen Jablensky

Objective: Relatively little has been published on dynamic, that is, modifiable, as opposed to static risk factors for hospitalization in the research literature on risk factors for hospitalization in serious mental illness. The aim of this study was to develop a model to determine modifiable predictors of hospitalization using data from the Australian National Study of Low Prevalence (Psychotic) Disorders. Method: The Study of Low Prevalence Disorders used a two-phase design to estimate the prevalence of psychoses and identify characteristics of people with psychotic illness. This paper compares people hospitalized at the time of census and those using outpatient services. Logistic regression was used to examine the relative impact of dynamic characteristics including service utilization, symptom profile and risky behaviours on a base model for risk of hospitalization. Results: In the base model, course of disorder and age but not type of psychosis were significantly associated with hospitalization. Among symptoms, delusions (but not hallucinations) and negative symptoms significantly increased the odds of hospitalization. Service utilization, especially case management, reduced the odds significantly and substantially. Results for risky behaviours (e.g. substance abuse, offending) were ambiguous. Conclusions: The results highlight the impact of dynamic factors, particularly case management, over and above static factors in reducing the risk of hospitalization in psychosis, and point to a potential for targeted interventions to avert some of the burden, both emotional and financial, associated with the hospitalization of people with psychotic disorders. These findings have important clinical and policy implications.


2000 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 792-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Rosenman ◽  
Ailsa Korten ◽  
Jo Medway ◽  
Mandy Evans

Objective: This study examines the factorial structure of symptoms and signs in psychosis in data from the Study on Low Prevalence (psychotic) Disorders which is part of the National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing, Australia 1997–1998. Method: The present study examined a wide variety of symptoms taken from the Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry items and the substance use items in the Diagnostic Interview for Psychosis, an instrument specially constructed for the national study. The instrument was applied to 980 community and hospital subjects with a wide range of psychotic illness diagnoses. The data were factor analysed and scales of ‘domains of psychopathology’ derived. Results: The data were best fitted by five principal factors (‘domains’) which can be approximately labelled dysphoria, positive symptoms, substance use, mania and negative symptoms/incoherence. These factors together explained 55.4% of variance in symptoms. Solutions with more numerous factors did not improve the representation. Conclusion: The five domains successfully characterise a large part of the variance in psychopathology found in the present study of low prevalence (psychotic) disorders. The approach allows sufferer's symptom range and severity to be well expressed without multiple comorbid diagnoses or the limits imposed by categorical diagnosis. Knowledge of alternative dimensional representations of psychopathology may usefully complement our use of categories, enhance awareness of symptoms and ensure that important psychopathology is heeded in practice and research.


1988 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 159-169
Author(s):  
H.G. Pope ◽  
B.M. Cohen ◽  
J.F. Lipinski ◽  
D. Yurgelun-Todd

SummaryWe performed a blind family interview study of 226 first-degree relatives of 63 probands meeting DSM-III criteria for schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder, as diagnosed by the National Institute ot Mental Health Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS). A small test-retest reliability study demonstrated good agreement between the proband interviewer and the principal family interviewer for the major diagnostic categories of psychotic disorders. Excellent compliance was obtained, with 85% of living relatives interviewed personally.Three principal findings emerged front the study. First, as expected, bipolar disorder, as defined by DSM-III, displayed a strong familial comportent, comparable to that found by many studies using criteria other than those of DSM-III. Second, patients meeting DSM-III criteria for schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder displayed a low familial prevalence of schizophrenia. Although initially suprising, this finding is in agreement with the results of several other recent lantily studies of schizophrenia. Upon comparing our results with those of other recent family studies of schizophrenia, it appears that the familial component in schizophrenia tnay be less than was estimated by earlier studies using older and “broader” definitions of schizophrenia.Third, we found that patients meeting DSM-III criteria for schizophrenia appeared genetically heterogeneous. Those who had displayed a superimposed full affective syndrome at some tinte in the course of their illness, together with those probands meeting DSM-III criteria for schizoaffective disorder, displayed a high familial prevalence of major affective disorder, similar to that found in the families of the bipolar probands. On the other hand, “pure” DSM-III schizophrenie probands, who had never experienced a superimposed full affective syndrome, displayed a low familial prevalence of major affective disorder, similar to that found in the general population. These findings favor the possibility that probands meeting DSM-III criteria for schizophrenia, but displaying a superimposed full affective syndrome, may in sonie cases have a disorder genetically relatcd to major affective disorder.Further prospective family interview studies, using DSM-III criteria and larger samples, will be necessary to test these preliminary impressions.


2014 ◽  
Vol 65 (11) ◽  
pp. 1392-1395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana Rose Garfin ◽  
Vanessa Juth ◽  
Roxane Cohen Silver ◽  
Francisco Javier Ugalde ◽  
Heiko Linn ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vaughan J. Carr ◽  
Amanda L. Neil ◽  
Sean A. Halpin ◽  
Scott Holmes ◽  
Terry J. Lewin

Objective: To estimate the costs associated with the treatment and care of persons with psychosis in Australia based on data from the Low Prevalence Disorders Study (LPDS), and to identify areas where there is potential for more efficient use of existing health care resources. Method: The LPDS was a one-month census-based survey of people with psychotic disorders in contact with mental health services, which was conducted in four metropolitan regions in 1997–1998. Mental health and service utilization data from 980 interviews were used to estimate the economic costs associated with psychotic disorders. A prevalencebased, ‘bottom-up’ approach was adopted to calculate the government and societal costs associated with psychosis, including treatment and non-treatment related costs. Results: Annual societal costs for the average patient with psychosis are of the order of $46 200, comprising $27 500 in lost productivity, $13 800 in inpatient mental health care costs and $4900 in other mental health and community services costs. Psychosis costs the Australian government at least $1.45 billion per annum, while societal costs are at least $2.25 billion per annum (including $1.44 billion for schizophrenia). We also report relationships between societal costs and demographic factors, diagnosis, disability and participation in employment. Conclusions: Current expenditure on psychosis in Australia is probably inefficient. There may be substantial opportunity costs in not delivering effective treatments in sufficient volume to people with psychotic disorders, not intervening early, and not improving access to rehabilitation and supported accommodation.


2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s779-s779
Author(s):  
L. Mehl-Madrona ◽  
B. Mainguy

IntroductionThere is ongoing debate about about both the value of psychotherapy in psychotic disorders and the best type of psychotherapy to use if necessary.MethodsWe conducted narrative psychotherapy with 18 adults, all diagnosed as having bipolar disorder with psychotic features and/or schizo-affective disorder. Outcome data consisted of the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale, the Clinical Global Impressions Scale, the Young Mania Rating Scale, the Hamilton Anxiety and Depression Scales, the My Medical Outcome Profile, Version 2(MYMOP2), and the Outcome Rating Scales of Duncan and Miller. We compare the outcomes of our patients to those of a matched comparison group receiving conventional psycho-education and cognitive behavioural therapy. Patients were seen for a minimum of 16 weeks over an average of 22 weeks. Average age was 31.5 years with a standard deviation of 8.1 years.ResultsThe narrative therapy group showed statistically significant reductions in all outcome measures compared to the conventional treatment group. They continued treatment significantly longer and had fewer re-hospitalizations. They were less distressed by voices.ConclusionsA narrative psychotherapy approach using dialogical theory and therapy ideas is a reasonable approach for the psychotherapy of psychosis. Review of psychotherapy notes showed that narrative approaches allowed the therapist to align with the patient as collaborator in considering the story presented and was therefore less productive of defensiveness and self-criticism than conventional approaches. The therapy included techniques for negotiating changes in illness narratives, identity narratives, and treatment narratives that were more conducive of well-being and recovery.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.


Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jayakumar Sreenivasan ◽  
Mohammad S Khan ◽  
Safi U Khan ◽  
Wilbert S Aronow ◽  
Julio A Panza ◽  
...  

Background: Mental and behavioral health disorders (MBD) are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and with worse long-term outcomes after myocardial infarction (MI). Hypothesis: We hypothesized the prevalence of MBD among patients with acute MI is rising over time. Methods: Using National Inpatient Sample Database, we assessed temporal trends in the prevalence of MBD and in-hospital outcomes among patients hospitalized for acute MI in the US from 2008-2017. We used multiple logistic regression for in-hospital outcomes and examined yearly trends and estimated annual percent change (APC) in odds of MBD among MI patients. Results: We included a total of 6,117,804 patients with MI (ST elevation MI 30.4%) with a mean age of 67.2±0.04 and 39% females. Psychoactive substance use disorder (PSD) (24.9%) was the most common behavioral health disorder, and major depression (6.2%) and anxiety disorders (6.0%) were the most common mental health disorders, followed by bipolar disorder (0.9%), schizophrenia/psychotic disorders (0.8%) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (0.3%). Between 2008 to 2018, the prevalence of PSD (23.7-25.0%, APC +0.6%), major depression (4.7-7.4%, APC +6.2%), anxiety disorders (3.2-8.9%, APC +13.5%), PTSD (0.2-0.6%, +12.5%) and bipolar disorder (0.7-1.0%, APC +4.0%) significantly increased over the time period. Major depression, bipolar disorder or schizophrenia/psychotic disorders were associated with a lower likelihood of coronary revascularization, although a co-diagnosis of MBD was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality. Conclusion: MBD are common among patients with acute MI and there was a concerning increase in the prevalence of PSD, major depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorders and PTSD. Focused mental and behavioral health interventions and health care policy changes are warranted to address the increasing burden of comorbid MBD among acute MI.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 1581
Author(s):  
Alexis E. Whitton ◽  
Kathryn E. Lewandowski ◽  
Mei-Hua Hall

Motivational and perceptual disturbances co-occur in psychosis and have been linked to aberrations in reward learning and sensory gating, respectively. Although traditionally studied independently, when viewed through a predictive coding framework, these processes can both be linked to dysfunction in striatal dopaminergic prediction error signaling. This study examined whether reward learning and sensory gating are correlated in individuals with psychotic disorders, and whether nicotine—a psychostimulant that amplifies phasic striatal dopamine firing—is a common modulator of these two processes. We recruited 183 patients with psychotic disorders (79 schizophrenia, 104 psychotic bipolar disorder) and 129 controls and assessed reward learning (behavioral probabilistic reward task), sensory gating (P50 event-related potential), and smoking history. Reward learning and sensory gating were correlated across the sample. Smoking influenced reward learning and sensory gating in both patient groups; however, the effects were in opposite directions. Specifically, smoking was associated with improved performance in individuals with schizophrenia but impaired performance in individuals with psychotic bipolar disorder. These findings suggest that reward learning and sensory gating are linked and modulated by smoking. However, disorder-specific associations with smoking suggest that nicotine may expose pathophysiological differences in the architecture and function of prediction error circuitry in these overlapping yet distinct psychotic disorders.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document