The effects of psychoeducational family intervention on coping strategies of relatives of patients with bipolar I disorder: results from a controlled, real-world, multicentric study.

Background: Psychoeducational family intervention (PFI) has been proven to be effective in improving the levels of family burden and patients' personal functioning in schizophrenia and bipolar disorders (BDs). Less is known about the impact of PFI on relatives' coping strategies in BD. Methods: A multicenter, controlled, outpatient trial funded by the Italian Ministry of Health and coordinated by the Department of Psychiatry of the University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" has been conducted in patients with bipolar I disorder (BD-I) and their key relatives consecutively recruited in 11 randomly selected Italian community mental health centers. We aim to test the hypothesis that PFI improves problem-oriented coping strategies in relatives of BD-I patients compared to the Treatment As Usual (TAU) group. Results: The final sample was constituted of 123 patients and 139 relatives. At baseline assessment (T0), the vast majority of relatives already adopted problem-oriented coping strategies more frequently than the emotion-focused ones. At the end of the intervention, relatives receiving PFI reported a higher endorsement of adaptive coping strategies, such as "maintenance of social interests" (odds ratio [OR]=0.309, CI=0.04-0.57; p=0.023), "positive communication with the patient" (OR=0.295, CI=0.13-0.46; p=0.001), and "searching for information" (OR=0.443, CI=0.12-0.76; p=0.007), compared to TAU relatives, after controlling for several confounders. As regards the emotion-focused coping strategies, relatives receiving the experimental intervention less frequently reported to adopt "resignation" (OR=-0.380, CI=-0.68 to -0.08; p=0.014) and "coercion" (OR=-0.268, CI=-0.46 to -0.08; p=0.006) strategies, compared to TAU relatives. Conclusion: PFI is effective in improving the adaptive coping strategies of relatives of BD-I patients, but further studies are needed for evaluating the long-term benefits of this intervention.

Improving physical health of patients with severe mental disorders: a critical review of lifestyle psychosocial interventions.

INTRODUCTION: People with severe mental disorders have a mortality rate that is more than two times higher than the general population, with at least a decade of potential years of life lost. People with mental disorders have a significantly higher risk of obesity, hyperglycemia and metabolic syndrome, which are related to modifiable risk factors, such as heavy smoking, poor physical activities, and inappropriate unhealthy diet, which can be improved through lifestyle changes. Areas covered: Lifestyle behaviours are amenable to change through the adoption of specific psychosocial interventions, and several approaches have been promoted. In the present review, the authors aim to: 1) critically analyze studies involving multimodal lifestyle interventions; 2) discuss the way forward to integrate these interventions in clinical routine care. Expert commentary: The psychoeducational approaches developed for the improvement of healthy lifestyle behaviours differ for several aspects: 1) the format (individual vs. group); 2) the setting (outpatient vs. inpatient vs. home-based); 3) the professional characteristics of the staff running the intervention (psychiatrists or nurses or dietitians or psychologists); 4) the active ingredients of the intervention (education only or inclusion of motivational interview or of problem solving); 5) the duration of treatment (ranging from 3 months to 2 years).

Effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in Italy. A randomized controlled trial.

TRIAL DESIGN: This was a multicenter cluster-randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 227 patients ≥18 years old with a new onset of depressive symptoms who screened positive on the first two items of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) were recruited by primary care physicians (PCPs) of eight health districts of three Italian regions from September 2009 to June 2011. INTERVENTION: PCPs of the intervention group received a specific collaborative care program including 2 days of intensive training, implementation of a stepped care protocol, depression management toolkit and scheduled meetings with a dedicated consultant psychiatrist. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to determine whether a collaborative care program for depression management in primary care leads to higher remission rate than usual PCP care. OUTCOMES: Outcome was clinical remission as expressed on PHQ-9 <5 at 3 months. RANDOMIZATION: An independent researcher used computer-generated randomization to assign involved primary care groups to the two alternative arms. BLINDING: PCPs and research personnel were not blinded. RESULTS: The 223 PCPs enrolled recruited 227 patients (128 in collaborative care arm, 99 in the usual care arm). At 3 months (n=210), the proportion of patients who achieved remission was higher, though the difference was not statistically significant, in the collaborative care group. The effect size was of 0.11. When considering only patients with minor/major depression, collaborative care appeared to be more effective than usual care (P=.015). CONCLUSIONS: The present intervention for managing depression in primary care, designed to be applicable to the Italian context, appears to be effective and feasible.