Systematic Reviews
Copyright
©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Psychiatr. Dec 19, 2021; 11(12): 1407-1424
Published online Dec 19, 2021. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v11.i12.1407
Table 1 Newcastle–Ottawa scale evaluation for studies that assessed psychoeducation in bipolar disorder patients
Ref. Representativeness of the exposed cohort Selection of the non-exposed cohort Ascertainment of exposure Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study Comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design or analysis Assessment of outcome Follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur Adequacy of follow up of cohorts Total Zhang et al [14 ], 2019 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 Wiener et al [15 ], 2017 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Cardoso et al [16 ], 2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Cardoso et al [17 ], 2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Faria et al [18 ], 2014 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 Kurdal et al [19 ], 2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Javadpour et al [20 ], 2013 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 de Barros Pellegrinelli et al [21 ], 2013 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 Candini et al [22 ], 2013 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Colom et al [11 ], 2009 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 1 8 Colom et al [23 ], 2003 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 10 Colom et al [24 ], 2003 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 Dalum et al [25 ], 2018 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 6 Depp et al [26 ], 2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Lauder et al [27 ], 2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Torrent et al [28 ], 2013 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 Smith et al [29 ], 2011 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 Sylvia et al [30 ], 2011 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 6 D'Souza et al [31 ], 2010 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 Castle et al [32 ], 2010 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 1 8 So et al [46 ], 2021 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 7 Sajatovic et al [33 ], 2009 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 Miklowitz et al [34 ], 2007 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 7 Miklowitz et al [35 ], 2007 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 González Isasi et al [36 ], 2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Parikh et al [37 ], 2012 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 Zaretsky et al [38 ], 2008 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Proudfoot et al [39 ], 2012 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Aubry et al [40 ], 2012 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 6 Gonzalez et al [41 ], 2007 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 8 Miklowitz et al [42 ], 2003 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Petzold et al [45 ], 2019 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Pakpour et al [43 ], 2017 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Morris et al [7 ], 2016 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Kessing et al [44 ], 2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Gumus et al [47 ], 2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Eker et al [48 ], 2012 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 6 Perry et al [49 ], 1999 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9
Table 2 Extracted data from studies that evaluated psychoeducation in patients with bipolar disorder
Ref. BD Sample size, N (P × C) Age in years (P × C) Female frequency (%) (P × C) Intervention Applied scales/parameters Results Zhang et al [14 ], 2019 I e II 35 × 39 34.2 × 34.6 57.1 × 46.2 SCIT YMRS P = 0.21HDRS P = 0.11FAST P < 0.001TMTA P = 0.77SDMT P = 0.09HVLT-R P = 0.09SCWT P = 0.054Wiener et al [15 ], 2017 ND 32 × 29 24 × 23.81 83.3 × 76.2 PMBD HDRS P = 0.028YMRS P = 0.879Cardoso et al [16 ], 2015 ND 32 × 29 24.09 × 24.03 65.6 × 72.4 PMBD BRIAN P = 0.88HARS P = 0.175YMRS P = 0.576HDRS P = 0.074Cardodo et al [17 ], 2014 ND 32 × 29 24.09 × 24.03 65.6 × 72.4 PMBD HDRS P = 0.001YMRS P = 0.102Faria et al [18 ], 2014 II 32 × 29 24.09 × 24.03 72.4 × 65.6 PMBD BRIAN P = 0.01Depressive symptoms P = 0.001Kurdal et al [19 ], 2014 ND 40 × 40 37.17 × 33.9 35 × 40 PMBD BDFQ P > 0.005Javadpour et al [20 ], 2013 I e II 45 × 41 24.4/23.2 23 × 21 PMBD WHOQOL-BREF P < 0.001MARS P = 0.008Hospitalizations P < 0.001de Barros Pellegrinelli et al [21 ], 2013 I e II 32 × 23 43.43 × 43.74 23 × 15 PMBD HDRS P = 0.820YMRS P = 0.716SAS P = 0.114GAF P = 0.586CGI P = 0.026Candini et al [22 ], 2013 I e II 57 × 45 41.5 × 44.8 52.6 × 48.9 PMBD Hospitalizations P = 0.001Number of days of hospitalization P = 0.001Colom et al [11 ], 2009 I e II 60 × 60 34.03 × 34.26 63.3 × 63.3 PMBD New mood episode P = 0.002Hospitalizations P = 0.023Number of days of hospitalization P = 0.047Colom et al [23 ], 2003 I 25 × 25 35.36 × 34.48 64 × 60 PMBD Mood episodes in the treatment phase P = 0.003Mood episodes after 2 yr P = 0.008Depressive episodes P = 0.004Hospitalizations P = 0.001Colom et al [24 ], 2003 I e II 60 × 60 23.25 × 22.26 63.3 × 63.3 PMBD New mood episode P = 0.001Hospitalizations P = 0.05Number of days of hospitalization P = 0.05Dalum et al [25 ], 2018 ND 23 × 24 41 × 45 46 × 44 IMR IMRS-P P = 0.14IMRS-S P = 0.76Depp et al [26 ], 2015 I e II 51 × 63 46.9 × 48.1 53.7 × 63.4 PRISM YMRS P = 0.004MADRS P = 0.036IIS P = 0.636Lauder et al [27 ], 2015 I e II 71 × 59 39.87 × 41.35 73 × 76 MS–PLUS ASRMS P = 0.02MADRS P = 0.003MOS-SSS P = 0.003MARS P = 0.001GPF P = 0.003Torrent et al [28 ], 2013 I e II 159 × 80 40.59 × 40.47 57.1 × 57.5 FR FAST P = 0.002HDRS P > 0.05YMRS P > 0.05Hospitalizations P > 0.05Smith et al [29 ], 2011 I e II 24 × 26 42.7 × 44.7 54.2 × 69.2 BBO FAST P = 0.15GAF P = 0.21SAI P = 0.44WHOQOL-BREF P = 0.25Sylvia et al [30 ], 2011 I e II 4 × 6 60 × 50.2 75 × 33 NEW TX MADRS P = 0.10LIFE-RIFT P = 0.014D'Souza et al [31 ], 2010 I 27 × 31 40.7 × 39.5 51.85 × 51.61 SIMSEP-BD ARS P = 0.001New mood episode P = 0.015Time between mood episodes P = 0.001Castle et al [32 ], 2010 I e II 42 × 42 41.6 × 42.6 79 × 26 MAPS Mood episode P = 0.003Depressive symptoms P = 0.003Knowledge about illness P > 0.05ESM-PA P = 0.024ESM-NA P = 0.001So et et al [46 ], 2021 I e II 38 × 26 35.8 × 43.1 78.9 × 73.1 LGP Medication adherence P > 0.05Sajatovic et al [33 ], 2009 I e II 80 × 80 41.13 × 40 73.75 × 87.5 LGP DAI P = 0.366SRTAB P = 0.577GAS P = 0.382Miklowitz et al [34 ], 2007 I e II 163 × 130 40.1 × 40 ND IPI Remission of symptoms 1 yr P = 0.001Miklowitz et al [35 ], 2007 I e II 84 × 68 ND 59 × 59 IPI LIFE-RIFT P = 0.006González Isasi et al [36 ], 2014 I 20 × 20 43.35 × 39.25 45 × 50 CBT STAI-S P = 0.062YMRS P = 0.009BDI P = 0.131IS P = 0.001Parikh et al [37 ], 2012 I e II 109 × 95 40.9 × 40.9 53.2 × 63.2 CBT LIFE P > 0.05CARS-M P = 0.089HDRS P = 0.089Zaretsky et al [38 ], 2008 I e II 40 × 39 ND ND CBT CARS-M P = 0.001HDRS P = 0.001Proudfoot et al [39 ], 2012 ND 139 × 134 35.3 × 40.9 66.9 × 69.4 BEP GADS P > 0.05WSAS P > 0.05SWLS P > 0.05BRIEF IPQ P = 0.001Aubry et al [40 ], 2012 I e II 50 × 35 46 × 52 66 × 62.9 LGP Hospitalizations P = 0.001Number of hospitalizations P = 0.009Gonzalez et al [41 ], 2007 I e II 11 × 11 40.5 × 41.0 45.45 × 45.45 IOM GAF P = 0.65CGI-BD P = 0.06Depressive symptoms P = 0.005Miklowitz et al [42 ], 2003 I 31 × 70 35.6 × 36.6 58 × 66 FFT SADS-C P = 0.001New mood episode P = 0.001MTS P = 0.001Pakpour et al [43 ], 2017 I e II 134 × 136 41.8 × 41.2 55.2 × 50.7 GP MARS P = 0.001YMRS P = 0.001CGI P = 0.001QoL.BD P = 0.001Petzold et al [45 ], 2019 I e II 39 × 34 44.32 × 42.69 43.6 × 47.1 GP New mood episode P = 0.175YMRS P = 0.241HDRS P = 0.58SF-36 P = 0.359Morriss et al [7 ], 2016 I e II 153 × 151 44.2 × 46·5 60 × 56 GP Time between mood episodes P = 0.012SOFAS P > 0.05SAS P > 0.05Kessing et al [44 ], 2014 I 72 × 86 64.1 × 63 61.1 × 48.8 GP Time between mood episodes P = 0.014Hospitalizations P = 0.064Gumus et al [47 ], 2015 I e II 41 × 41 38.7 × 40.05 40.5 × 56.1 GP Number of mood episodes P = 0.208Eker et al [48 ], 2012 ND 35 × 36 34.57 × 36.54 54.3 × 52.8 GP ANT P < 0.005MARS P < 0.005Perry et al [49 ], 1999 I 34 × 35 44.1 × 45 68 × 69 GP Time between manic episodes P = 0.008Time between depressive episodes P = 0.19
Table 3 Newcastle–Ottawa scale evaluation for studies that evaluated psychoeducation in relatives of patients with bipolar disorder
Ref. Representativeness of the exposed cohort Selection of the non-exposed cohort Ascertainment of exposure Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study Comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design or analysis Assessment of outcome Follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur Adequacy of follow up of cohorts Total Hubbard et al [50 ], 2016 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 7 Fiorillo et al [51 ], 2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 7 Madigan et al [52 ], 2012 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Reinares et al [53 ], 2008 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Solomon et al [54 ], 2008 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 6 Reinares et al [55 ], 2004 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 7 Van Gent et al [56 ], 1991 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 6 Miklowitz et al [57 ], 2000 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 7 Simoneau et al [58 ], 1999 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 6
Table 4 Extracted data from studies that evaluated psychoeducation in relatives of patients with bipolar disorder
Ref. BD Psychoeducation group Group control Applied scales/parameters Results Psychoeducation strategy n (%) Intervention strategy n (%) Hubbard et al [50 ], 2016 ND GCPBD 18 8 Partner; 10 Parents WL 14 3 Partner; 8 Parents; 1 Sibling; 2 Friend DASS- 21 P = 0.52BAS P = 0.91KBDS P > 0.05BDSS P > 0.05Fiorillo et al [51 ], 2015 BD I PFI 85 21 Parents; 44 Partner; 10 Son; 9 Sibling; 1 Other WI 70 23 Parents; 31 Partner; 11 Son; 3 Sibling; 2 Other Subjective burden P = 0.001Professional help P = 0.001Help in emergencies P = 0.01Madigan et al [52 ], 2012 ND MFGP; SFGP 18; 19 ND WI 10 ND Caregiver knowledge P = 0.404IEQ P = 0.795GHQ12 P = 0.723WHOQOL Bref P = 0.355GAF P = 0.617Reinares et al [53 ], 2008 BD I e II PFI 57 35 Parents; 20 Partner; 2 Offspring/siblings WI 56 27 Parents; 25 Partner; 4 Offspring/siblings Amount of daily contact between the patient and the caregiver P = 0.757Manic/hypomanic recurrence time P = 0.015Medication adherence P = 0.611Solomon et al [54 ], 2008 BD I MFGP; IFT 21; 16 ND WI 16 ND New mood episode P = 0.47Hospitalization frequency P = 0.04BRMS P = 0.44HAM-D P = 0.12Reinares et al [55 ], 2004 BD I e II PFI 30 17 Parents; 12 Partner; 1 Sibiling WI 15 6 Parents; 6 Partner; 2 Son; 1 Sibiling HAM–D P > 0.05YMRS P > 0.05Subjective burden of the caregiver P = 0.48FES P = 0.22Knowledge about the disorder P = 0.001Van Gent et al [56 ], 1991 ND GT 14 14 Partner WI 12 12 Partner IPSQ P > 0.05IPP P > 0.05SCL-90 P > 0.05Miklowitz et al [57 ], 2000 BD I FFT 31 ND CMNF 70 ND New mood episode P = 0.042Depressive symptoms P = 0.06Manic symptoms P = 0.59Simoneau et al [58 ], 1999 ND FFT 22 ND CMNF 22 ND KPI P > 0.05