Cargando…

Functional outcome assessment in bipolar disorder: A systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES: Functional impairment is an important driver of disability in patients with bipolar disorder (BD) and can persist even when symptomatic remission has been achieved. The objectives of this systematic literature review were to identify studies that assessed functioning in patients with BD...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Maxine, Fitzgerald, Heather M., Madera, Jessica J., Tohen, Mauricio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6593429/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30887632
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bdi.12775
_version_ 1783430043780775936
author Chen, Maxine
Fitzgerald, Heather M.
Madera, Jessica J.
Tohen, Mauricio
author_facet Chen, Maxine
Fitzgerald, Heather M.
Madera, Jessica J.
Tohen, Mauricio
author_sort Chen, Maxine
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Functional impairment is an important driver of disability in patients with bipolar disorder (BD) and can persist even when symptomatic remission has been achieved. The objectives of this systematic literature review were to identify studies that assessed functioning in patients with BD and describe the functional scales used and their implementation. METHODS: A systematic literature review of English‐language articles published between 2000 and 2017 reporting peer‐reviewed, original research related to functional assessment in patients with BD was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 40 articles met inclusion criteria. Twenty‐four different functional scales were identified, including 13 clinician‐rated scales, 7 self‐reported scales, and 4 indices based on residential and vocational data. The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) and the Functional Assessment Short Test (FAST) were the most commonly used global and domain‐specific scales, respectively. All other scales were used in ≤2 studies. Most studies used ≥1 domain‐specific scale. The most common applications of functional scales in these studies were evaluations of the relationships between global or domain‐specific psychosocial functioning and cognitive functioning (eg, executive function, attention, language, learning, memory) or clinical variables (eg, symptoms, duration of illness, number of hospitalizations, number of episodes). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review show growing interest in the assessment of functioning in patients with BD, with an emphasis on specific domains such as work/educational, social, family, and cognitive functioning and high utilization of the GAF and FAST scales in published literature.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6593429
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65934292019-07-10 Functional outcome assessment in bipolar disorder: A systematic literature review Chen, Maxine Fitzgerald, Heather M. Madera, Jessica J. Tohen, Mauricio Bipolar Disord Research Articles OBJECTIVES: Functional impairment is an important driver of disability in patients with bipolar disorder (BD) and can persist even when symptomatic remission has been achieved. The objectives of this systematic literature review were to identify studies that assessed functioning in patients with BD and describe the functional scales used and their implementation. METHODS: A systematic literature review of English‐language articles published between 2000 and 2017 reporting peer‐reviewed, original research related to functional assessment in patients with BD was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 40 articles met inclusion criteria. Twenty‐four different functional scales were identified, including 13 clinician‐rated scales, 7 self‐reported scales, and 4 indices based on residential and vocational data. The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) and the Functional Assessment Short Test (FAST) were the most commonly used global and domain‐specific scales, respectively. All other scales were used in ≤2 studies. Most studies used ≥1 domain‐specific scale. The most common applications of functional scales in these studies were evaluations of the relationships between global or domain‐specific psychosocial functioning and cognitive functioning (eg, executive function, attention, language, learning, memory) or clinical variables (eg, symptoms, duration of illness, number of hospitalizations, number of episodes). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review show growing interest in the assessment of functioning in patients with BD, with an emphasis on specific domains such as work/educational, social, family, and cognitive functioning and high utilization of the GAF and FAST scales in published literature. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-04-14 2019-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6593429/ /pubmed/30887632 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bdi.12775 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Bipolar Disorders Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Chen, Maxine
Fitzgerald, Heather M.
Madera, Jessica J.
Tohen, Mauricio
Functional outcome assessment in bipolar disorder: A systematic literature review
title Functional outcome assessment in bipolar disorder: A systematic literature review
title_full Functional outcome assessment in bipolar disorder: A systematic literature review
title_fullStr Functional outcome assessment in bipolar disorder: A systematic literature review
title_full_unstemmed Functional outcome assessment in bipolar disorder: A systematic literature review
title_short Functional outcome assessment in bipolar disorder: A systematic literature review
title_sort functional outcome assessment in bipolar disorder: a systematic literature review
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6593429/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30887632
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bdi.12775
work_keys_str_mv AT chenmaxine functionaloutcomeassessmentinbipolardisorderasystematicliteraturereview
AT fitzgeraldheatherm functionaloutcomeassessmentinbipolardisorderasystematicliteraturereview
AT maderajessicaj functionaloutcomeassessmentinbipolardisorderasystematicliteraturereview
AT tohenmauricio functionaloutcomeassessmentinbipolardisorderasystematicliteraturereview