Status of Type II vs. Type I Bipolar Disorder: Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Harvard Review of Psychiatry Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1097/HRP.0000000000000371
Carolina V Hernandorena, Ross J Baldessarini, Leonardo Tondo, Gustavo H Vázquez
{"title":"Status of Type II vs. Type I Bipolar Disorder: Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses.","authors":"Carolina V Hernandorena,&nbsp;Ross J Baldessarini,&nbsp;Leonardo Tondo,&nbsp;Gustavo H Vázquez","doi":"10.1097/HRP.0000000000000371","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Learning objectives after participating in this cme activity, the psychiatrist should be better able to: </strong>• Analyze and compare the different bipolar disorder (BD) types.• Identify markers that distinguish BD types and explain how the DSM-IV defines the disorder.</p><p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Since the status of type II bipolar disorder (BD2) as a separate and distinct form of bipolar disorder (BD) remains controversial, we reviewed studies that directly compare BD2 to type I bipolar disorder (BD1). Systematic literature searching yielded 36 reports with head-to-head comparisons involving 52,631 BD1 and 37,363 BD2 patients (total N = 89,994) observed for 14.6 years, regarding 21 factors (with 12 reports/factor). BD2 subjects had significantly more additional psychiatric diagnoses, depressions/year, rapid cycling, family psychiatric history, female sex, and antidepressant treatment, but less treatment with lithium or antipsychotics, fewer hospitalizations or psychotic features, and lower unemployment rates than BD1 subjects. However, the diagnostic groups did not differ significantly in education, onset age, marital status, [hypo]manias/year, risk of suicide attempts, substance use disorders, medical comorbidities, or access to psychotherapy. Heterogeneity in reported comparisons of BD2 and BD1 limits the firmness of some observations, but study findings indicate that the BD types differ substantially by several descriptive and clinical measures and that BD2 remains diagnostically stable over many years. We conclude that BD2 requires better clinical recognition and significantly more research aimed at optimizing its treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":12915,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Review of Psychiatry","volume":"31 4","pages":"173-182"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard Review of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HRP.0000000000000371","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Learning objectives after participating in this cme activity, the psychiatrist should be better able to: • Analyze and compare the different bipolar disorder (BD) types.• Identify markers that distinguish BD types and explain how the DSM-IV defines the disorder.

Abstract: Since the status of type II bipolar disorder (BD2) as a separate and distinct form of bipolar disorder (BD) remains controversial, we reviewed studies that directly compare BD2 to type I bipolar disorder (BD1). Systematic literature searching yielded 36 reports with head-to-head comparisons involving 52,631 BD1 and 37,363 BD2 patients (total N = 89,994) observed for 14.6 years, regarding 21 factors (with 12 reports/factor). BD2 subjects had significantly more additional psychiatric diagnoses, depressions/year, rapid cycling, family psychiatric history, female sex, and antidepressant treatment, but less treatment with lithium or antipsychotics, fewer hospitalizations or psychotic features, and lower unemployment rates than BD1 subjects. However, the diagnostic groups did not differ significantly in education, onset age, marital status, [hypo]manias/year, risk of suicide attempts, substance use disorders, medical comorbidities, or access to psychotherapy. Heterogeneity in reported comparisons of BD2 and BD1 limits the firmness of some observations, but study findings indicate that the BD types differ substantially by several descriptive and clinical measures and that BD2 remains diagnostically stable over many years. We conclude that BD2 requires better clinical recognition and significantly more research aimed at optimizing its treatment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
II型与I型双相情感障碍的状况:meta分析的系统回顾。
学习目标:在参加此持续学习活动后,精神科医生应该能够更好地分析和比较不同的双相情感障碍(BD)类型。•识别区分双相障碍类型的标记,并解释DSM-IV如何定义该疾病。摘要:由于II型双相情感障碍(BD2)作为一种独立的双相情感障碍(BD)的地位仍然存在争议,我们回顾了直接比较BD2和I型双相情感障碍(BD1)的研究。系统文献检索得到36份报告,涉及52,631例BD1和37,363例BD2患者(总N = 89,994),观察14.6年,涉及21个因素(每因素12份报告)。BD2受试者有更多的附加精神病学诊断、抑郁/年、快速循环、家族精神病史、女性和抗抑郁治疗,但与BD1受试者相比,使用锂或抗精神病药物的治疗更少,住院或精神病特征更少,失业率更低。然而,诊断组在教育程度、发病年龄、婚姻状况、[轻度]躁狂/年、自杀未遂风险、物质使用障碍、医疗合并症或获得心理治疗方面没有显著差异。报告中BD2和BD1比较的异质性限制了一些观察结果的准确性,但研究结果表明,通过一些描述性和临床测量,两种BD类型存在很大差异,BD2在诊断上多年保持稳定。我们的结论是,BD2需要更好的临床识别和更多旨在优化其治疗的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
67
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Harvard Review of Psychiatry is the authoritative source for scholarly reviews and perspectives on important topics in psychiatry. Founded by the Harvard Medical School''s Department of Psychiatry, the Harvard Review of Psychiatry features review papers that summarize and synthesize the key literature in a scholarly and clinically relevant manner. Topics covered include: Schizophrenia and related disorders; Mood disorders; Personality disorders; Substance use disorders; Anxiety; Neuroscience; Psychosocial aspects of psychiatry; Ethics; Psychiatric education; and much more. In addition, a Clinical Challenges section presents a case with discussion from a panel of experts. Brief reviews are presented in topic-specific columns that include Cross-Cultural Psychiatry, History of Psychiatry, Ethics, and others.
期刊最新文献
Borderline Personality Disorder and Loneliness: Broadening the Scope of Treatment for Social Rehabilitation. Chronic Use of Benzodiazepine in Older Adults and Its Relationship with Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Self-Diagnosed Cases of Dissociative Identity Disorder on Social Media: Conceptualization, Assessment, and Treatment. Pain Catastrophizing and Substance Misuse: A Scoping Review of the Literature. Perspectives on Integrating Biological Assessments to Address the Health Effects of Childhood Adversities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1