Ghosal Sutanuka, Mallik Nitu, Acharya Rudraprasad, Dasgupta Gargi, Mondal Dilip Kumar, Pal Arghya
Department of Psychiatry, Institute of Post-Graduate Medical Education & Research, Kolkata, India.
Department of Psychiatry, College of Medicine & JNM Hospital, Kalyani, India.
Int J Psychiatry Med. 2021 Jul 1:912174211030163. doi: 10.1177/00912174211030163.
Medication non-adherence is one important reason behind sub-optimal outcome from treatment of bipolar affective disorder (BPAD). Though various reasons behind medication non-adherence have been identified, little is known about the medication adherence patterns across various predominant polarities (PP) in BPAD.
100 euthymic patients of BPAD were purposively recruited and the PP were determined. Subsequently, Morisky Medication adherence scale (MMAS); Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF); Oslo Social Support Scale and World Health Organization Quality of Life scale- Brief version (WHOQOL-Bref) were administered. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was done to estimate the difference of scores of MMAS after adjusting for any potential confounders.
Overall, 44 patients with manic PP (MPP), 17 with depressive PP (DPP) and 39 with indeterminate PP (IPP) were recruited. It was found that patients who presented with DPP showed significantly higher medication adherence as compared to MPP.
Knowledge of PP of a patient of BPAD can be useful in anticipating medication adherence and treatment outcome. The major limitations included non-probability sampling, cross-sectional design and limited generalizability of the results.
药物治疗依从性不佳是双相情感障碍（BPAD）治疗效果未达最佳的一个重要原因。尽管已确定了药物治疗依从性不佳背后的各种原因，但对于BPAD中不同主要极性（PP）的药物依从模式知之甚少。
有目的地招募了100名BPAD病情稳定的患者，并确定其PP。随后，使用了莫里西药物依从性量表（MMAS）、功能总体评定量表（GAF）、奥斯陆社会支持量表和世界卫生组织生活质量简表（WHOQOL-Bref）。进行协方差分析（ANCOVA）以估计在调整任何潜在混杂因素后MMAS得分的差异。
总体而言，招募了44名具有躁狂PP（MPP）的患者、17名具有抑郁PP（DPP）的患者和39名具有不确定PP（IPP）的患者。发现与MPP患者相比，表现为DPP的患者药物依从性显著更高。
了解BPAD患者的PP有助于预测药物依从性和治疗结果。主要局限性包括非概率抽样、横断面设计以及结果的普遍性有限。
