ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Research has often been viewed as a passive process by which participants enroll in studies developed by researchers. It is becoming clearer that to understand the nuances of mood episodes and how to prevent them, we need to conduct large clinical trials that have the power to investigate moderators and mediators, or catalysts and mechanisms of change. MoodNetwork, the first online, patient-centered research community for individuals with mood disorders, aims to change the way that traditional research has been conducted by involving patients, their caregivers, and advocates in the process of research. The aim of this report is to share lessons learned from developing MoodNetwork. METHODS: Participants enroll by completing a demographic survey and consent form. Once enrolled, participants are encouraged to complete optional surveys about their mood disorders and areas of research priority. Stakeholder and advocacy partners developed the website, web-based surveys, and recruitment materials. RESULTS: MoodNetwork has enrolled 4103 participants to date. Of this sample, 96.9% report experiencing depression and 79.7% endorse symptoms of mania or hypomania. Participants rated reducing stigma and alleviating symptoms as their 2 largest research priorities. Recruitment has been slower than expected. Recruiting a diverse sample has been challenging, and this impacts the Network's ability to conduct comparative effectiveness research studies. DISCUSSION: We discuss lessons learned from recruiting individuals with mood disorders to MoodNetwork, an innovative approach to conducting clinical trials. We identify and review 5 strategies for increasing enrollment as well as future directions.
Subject(s)
Comparative Effectiveness Research/organization & administration , Mood Disorders/therapy , Patient Outcome Assessment , Patient Participation/statistics & numerical data , Patient-Centered Care/organization & administration , Social Networking , Community-Institutional Relations , Humans , Mood Disorders/psychology , Research Design , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite ongoing advances in the treatment of mood disorders, a substantial proportion of people diagnosed with major depression or bipolar disorder remain symptomatic over time. Yoga, which has been shown to reduce stress and depressive symptoms, as well as to improve overall quality of life, shows promise as an adjunctive treatment. However, dissemination of yoga for clinical populations remains challenging. The purpose of this pilot study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of an online yoga intervention for individuals with mood disorders. METHODS: In total, 56 adults who reported being diagnosed with a mood disorder (bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, cyclothymia, or schizoaffective disorder) were recruited from MoodNetwork, an online community of individuals with mood disorders. A feedback survey and a measure of positive and negative affect were administered before and after a 30-minute online Hatha yoga class. RESULTS: In total, 44 individuals (78.6%) completed all components of the yoga class. The mean score on a 10-point Likert scale rating how much participants liked the online yoga class was 7.24 (SD=2.40). Most participants (67.9%) reported that they would be "somewhat likely" or "very likely" to participate in an online yoga program again. There was a statistically significant decrease in negative affect after completing the class (t=-6.05; P<0.001), but positive affect did not change (P>0.10). DISCUSSION: These preliminary data support the utility of online yoga tailored specifically for people with mood disorders as a possible adjunctive intervention that warrants further investigation.
Subject(s)
Mood Disorders/therapy , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Yoga , Adult , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Pilot ProjectsABSTRACT
Despite research supporting measurement-based care grounded in standardized progress measures, such measures are underutilized by clinicians. Individualized measures of client-specific targets present an alternative, but little is known about their acceptability or use. We compared attitudes toward and use of standardized and individualized progress measures in a national sample of 504 clinicians. Clinicians reported neutral to positive attitudes toward both types of measures, but strongly preferred and were more likely to use individualized measures. Clinician attitudes, theoretical orientation, and work setting predicted assessment preferences and practices. Implications for dissemination and implementation of measurement-based care are discussed.
