Psychology research and behavior management · 2014
The influence of psychoeducation on regulating biological rhythm in a sample of patients with bipolar II disorder: a randomized clinical trial.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Faria Augusto Duarte, de Mattos Souza Luciano Dias, de Azevedo Cardoso Taiane, Pinheiro Karen Amaral Tavares, Pinheiro Ricardo Tavares, da Silva Ricardo Azevedo, Jansen Karen
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Changes in biological rhythm are among the various characteristics of bipolar disorder, and have long been associated with the functional impairment of the disease. There are only a few viable options of psychosocial interventions that deal with this specific topic; one of them is psychoeducation, a model that, although it has been used by practitioners for some time, only recently have studies shown its efficacy in clinical practice.
AIM: To assess if patients undergoing psychosocial intervention in addition to a pharmacological treatment have better regulation of their biological rhythm than those only using medication.
METHOD: This study is a randomized clinical trial that compares a standard medication intervention to an intervention combined with drugs and psychoeducation. The evaluation of the biological rhythm was made using the Biological Rhythm Interview of Assessment in Neuropsychiatry, an 18-item scale divided in four areas (sleep, activity, social rhythm, and eating pattern). The combined intervention consisted of medication and a short-term psychoeducation model summarized in a protocol of six individual sessions of 1 hour each.
RESULTS: The sample consisted of 61 patients with bipolar II disorder, but during the study, there were 14 losses to follow-up. Therefore, the final sample consisted of 45 individuals (26 for standard intervention and 19 for combined). The results showed that, in this sample and time period evaluated, the combined treatment of medication and psychoeducation had no statistically significant impact on the regulation of biological rhythm when compared to standard pharmacological treatment.
CONCLUSION: Although the changes in biological rhythm were not statistically significant during the time period evaluated in this study, it is noteworthy that the trajectory of the score showed a trend towards improvement, which may indicate a positive impact on treatment, though it may take a longer time than expected.
AIM: To assess if patients undergoing psychosocial intervention in addition to a pharmacological treatment have better regulation of their biological rhythm than those only using medication.
METHOD: This study is a randomized clinical trial that compares a standard medication intervention to an intervention combined with drugs and psychoeducation. The evaluation of the biological rhythm was made using the Biological Rhythm Interview of Assessment in Neuropsychiatry, an 18-item scale divided in four areas (sleep, activity, social rhythm, and eating pattern). The combined intervention consisted of medication and a short-term psychoeducation model summarized in a protocol of six individual sessions of 1 hour each.
RESULTS: The sample consisted of 61 patients with bipolar II disorder, but during the study, there were 14 losses to follow-up. Therefore, the final sample consisted of 45 individuals (26 for standard intervention and 19 for combined). The results showed that, in this sample and time period evaluated, the combined treatment of medication and psychoeducation had no statistically significant impact on the regulation of biological rhythm when compared to standard pharmacological treatment.
CONCLUSION: Although the changes in biological rhythm were not statistically significant during the time period evaluated in this study, it is noteworthy that the trajectory of the score showed a trend towards improvement, which may indicate a positive impact on treatment, though it may take a longer time than expected.