Suppr超能文献

老年双相情感障碍的疾病进展:探讨双相情感障碍两种分期模型在老年人群中的适用性、离散性、一致性及相关临床标志物。

Illness progression in older-age bipolar disorder: Exploring the applicability, dispersion, concordance, and associated clinical markers of two staging models for bipolar disorder in an older population.

作者信息

van der Markt Afra, Beunders Alexandra J M, Korten Nicole C M, Schouws Sigfried N T M, Beekman Aartjan T F, Kupka Ralph W, Klumpers Ursula, Dols Annemiek

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

GGZ In Geest Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2022 Nov;37(11). doi: 10.1002/gps.5816.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The validity and applicability of two existing staging models reflecting illness progression have been studied in bipolar disorder (BD) in adults, but not in older adult populations. Staging model A is primarily defined by the number and recurrence of mood episodes, model B is defined by the level of inter-episodic functioning. This study aimed to explore the applicability, dispersion, and concordance of, and associations with clinical markers in these two staging models in older-age bipolar disorder (OABD).

METHODS

Using cross-sectional data from the Dutch Older Bipolars study, OABD outpatients (N = 126, ≥50 years) were staged using models A and B. Dispersion over the stages and concordance between the models were assessed. Associations were explored between model stages and clinical markers (familial loading, childhood abuse, illness duration, episode density, treatment resistance, Mini-Mental State Examination, and composite cognitive score).

RESULTS

Ninety subjects could be assigned to model A, 111 to model B, 80 cases to both. The majority (61%) had multiple relapses (model A, stage 3C) but were living independently (model B, stage I-III). Concordance between models was low. For model A, the markers childhood abuse, illness duration, and episode density significantly increased over subsequent stages. Model B was not associated with a significant change in any marker.

CONCLUSIONS

Assigning stages to OABD subjects was possible for both models, with age-related adjustments for model B. Model B as currently operationalized may be less suitable for OABD or may measure different aspects of illness progression, reflected by its low correspondence with model A and lack of associated clinical markers.

摘要

目的

已对反映疾病进展的两种现有分期模型在成年双相情感障碍(BD)中的有效性和适用性进行了研究,但尚未在老年人群中进行研究。分期模型A主要由情绪发作的次数和复发情况定义,模型B由发作间期功能水平定义。本研究旨在探讨这两种分期模型在老年双相情感障碍(OABD)中的适用性、离散度、一致性以及与临床标志物的关联。

方法

使用荷兰老年双相情感障碍研究的横断面数据,采用模型A和模型B对OABD门诊患者(N = 126,≥50岁)进行分期。评估各阶段的离散度以及模型之间的一致性。探讨模型阶段与临床标志物(家族负荷、童年期虐待、病程、发作密度、治疗抵抗、简易精神状态检查和综合认知评分)之间的关联。

结果

90名受试者可归入模型A,111名可归入模型B,80例可同时归入两个模型。大多数(61%)有多次复发(模型A,3C期),但生活能够自理(模型B,I - III期)。模型之间的一致性较低。对于模型A,童年期虐待、病程和发作密度等标志物在后续阶段显著增加。模型B与任何标志物的显著变化均无关联。

结论

两种模型都可以为OABD受试者进行分期,模型B需进行与年龄相关的调整。目前实施的模型B可能不太适用于OABD,或者可能测量的是疾病进展的不同方面,这体现在其与模型A的低对应性以及缺乏相关临床标志物上。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验