共 80 条
Measurement tools for assessment of older age bipolar disorder: A systematic review of the recent global literature
被引:7
作者:
Rej, Soham
[1
]
Quayle, William
[2
]
Forester, Brent P.
[2
]
Dols, Annemiek
[3
]
Gatchel, Jennifer
[2
]
Chen, Peijun
[4
,5
,6
]
Gough, Sarah
[7
]
Fox, Rebecca
[1
]
Sajatovic, Martha
[4
,5
]
Strejilevich, Sergio A.
[8
]
Eyler, Lisa T.
[7
,9
]
机构:
[1] McGill Univ, Jewish Gen Hosp, Div Geriatr Psychiat, GeriPARTy Grp, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[2] Harvard Med Sch, McLean Hosp, Div Geriatr Psychiat, Boston, MA USA
[3] Vrije Univ Amsterdam Med Ctr, EMGO Inst Care & Hlth Res, Dept Old Age Psychiat, GGZ InGeest, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[4] Case Western Reserve Univ, Sch Med, Dept Psychiat, Univ Hosp Case Med Ctr, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[5] Case Western Reserve Univ, Sch Med, Dept Neurol, Univ Hosp Case Med Ctr, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[6] Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Med Ctr, Psychiat Serv, Cleveland, OH USA
[7] Univ Calif San Diego, Dept Psychiat, San Diego, CA 92103 USA
[8] Favaloro Univ, Inst Neurosci, Bipolar Disorder Program, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[9] VA San Diego Healthcare Syst, Desert Pacific Mental Illness Res Educ & Clin Ctr, San Diego, CA USA
基金:
加拿大健康研究院;
关键词:
assessment;
bipolar disorders;
measurement tools;
older age;
systematic review;
NEUROPSYCHIATRIC INTERVIEW MINI;
STRUCTURED CLINICAL INTERVIEW;
SEVERE MENTAL-ILLNESS;
COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT;
ELDERLY-PATIENTS;
HEALTH-CARE;
TREATMENT RESPONSE;
NIH TOOLBOX;
DSM-IV;
ADULTS;
D O I:
10.1111/bdi.12566
中图分类号:
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号:
摘要:
ObjectivesMore than 50% of people with bipolar disorder will be age 60 years or older by 2030. There is a need for more data to guide assessment and treatment in older age bipolar disorder (OABD); however, interpretation of findings from small, single-site studies may not be generalizable and there are few large trials. As a step in the direction of coordinated large-scale OABD data collection, it is critical to identify which measurements are currently used and identify potential gaps in domains typically assessed. MethodsAn international group of OABD experts performed a systematic literature review to identify studies examining OABD in the past 6years. Relevant articles were assessed to categorize the types of clinical, cognitive, biomarker, and neuroimaging OABD tools routinely used in OABD studies. ResultsA total of 53 papers were identified, with a broad range of assessments. Most studies evaluated demographic and clinical domains, with fewer studies assessing cognition. There are relatively few biomarker and neuroimaging data, and data collection methods were less comprehensively covered. ConclusionAssessment tools used in the recent OABD literature may help to identify both a minimum and a comprehensive dataset that should be evaluated in OABD. Our review also highlights gaps where key clinical outcomes have not been routinely assessed. Biomarker and neuroimaging assessment could be further developed and standardized. Clinical data could be combined with neuroimaging, genetic, and other biomarkers in large-scale coordinated data collection to further improve our understanding of OABD phenomenology and biology, thereby contributing to research that advances care.
引用
收藏
页码:359 / 369
页数:11
相关论文