Early specialised treatment for bipolar disorder: Long-term follow-up from the early intervention in affective disorders (EIA) randomised controlled trial

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Early specialised treatment for bipolar disorder : Long-term follow-up from the early intervention in affective disorders (EIA) randomised controlled trial. / Munkholm, Klaus; Kessing, Lars Vedel.

In: Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 2024.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Munkholm, K & Kessing, LV 2024, 'Early specialised treatment for bipolar disorder: Long-term follow-up from the early intervention in affective disorders (EIA) randomised controlled trial', Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. https://doi.org/10.1111/acps.13716

APA

Munkholm, K., & Kessing, L. V. (2024). Early specialised treatment for bipolar disorder: Long-term follow-up from the early intervention in affective disorders (EIA) randomised controlled trial. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. https://doi.org/10.1111/acps.13716

Vancouver

Munkholm K, Kessing LV. Early specialised treatment for bipolar disorder: Long-term follow-up from the early intervention in affective disorders (EIA) randomised controlled trial. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1111/acps.13716

Author

Munkholm, Klaus ; Kessing, Lars Vedel. / Early specialised treatment for bipolar disorder : Long-term follow-up from the early intervention in affective disorders (EIA) randomised controlled trial. In: Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 2024.

Bibtex

@article{cbab2d65bf97456c8378f2f627142baf,
title = "Early specialised treatment for bipolar disorder: Long-term follow-up from the early intervention in affective disorders (EIA) randomised controlled trial",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether treatment early after onset in bipolar disorder may improve the long-term illness course. The early intervention in affective disorders (EIA) randomised controlled trial found that 2-years treatment in a specialised mood disorder clinic combining evidence-based pharmacological treatment with group psychoeducation improved clinical outcomes compared with standard treatment in patients with bipolar disorder discharged after their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd hospital admission. We aimed to assess the 16 years long-term outcomes after randomisation of the participants in the EIA trial.METHODS: Data were obtained by linking nation-wide Danish population-based registers. All 158 participants of the EIA trial (Trial Registration Number NCT00253071) were followed from time of randomisation (2005-2009) to end of study (31 December 2021). The primary outcome was risk of psychiatric readmission. Secondary outcomes were total admissions and costs, medication use, intentional self-harm or suicide attempt or suicide, and socio-economic measures.RESULTS: The absolute mean risk of psychiatric readmission was 49.3% in the intervention group and 59.8% in the control group, with no statistically significant difference between the groups (b = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.26 to 0.047, p = 0.18). Compared with the control group, patients in the intervention group had numerically fewer total admission days (mean (SD) 44 (77) versus 62 (109)), lower total cost of psychiatric hospital admissions and hospital-based outpatient visits (mean (SD) 22,001 (36793) euros versus 29,822 (52671) euros) and higher use of lithium and antipsychotics, but the differences were not statistically significant. Fewer patients in the intervention group had an event of intentional self-harm or suicide attempt or suicide during follow-up (OR 0.25, 95% CI: 0.15-0.40, p < 0.001) compared with the control group and more patients in the intervention group used antiepileptics (OR 2.21, 95% CI: 1.08-4.60, p = 0.031).CONCLUSION: Analyses of very long-term outcomes of the EIA trial may potentially indicate a beneficial effect of the intervention at the long term but were likely underpowered to detect a more subtle effect and for most outcomes the differences between groups were not statistically significant.",
author = "Klaus Munkholm and Kessing, {Lars Vedel}",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2024 The Author(s). Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.",
year = "2024",
doi = "10.1111/acps.13716",
language = "English",
journal = "Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica",
issn = "0001-690X",
publisher = "Wiley",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Early specialised treatment for bipolar disorder

T2 - Long-term follow-up from the early intervention in affective disorders (EIA) randomised controlled trial

AU - Munkholm, Klaus

AU - Kessing, Lars Vedel

N1 - © 2024 The Author(s). Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

PY - 2024

Y1 - 2024

N2 - BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether treatment early after onset in bipolar disorder may improve the long-term illness course. The early intervention in affective disorders (EIA) randomised controlled trial found that 2-years treatment in a specialised mood disorder clinic combining evidence-based pharmacological treatment with group psychoeducation improved clinical outcomes compared with standard treatment in patients with bipolar disorder discharged after their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd hospital admission. We aimed to assess the 16 years long-term outcomes after randomisation of the participants in the EIA trial.METHODS: Data were obtained by linking nation-wide Danish population-based registers. All 158 participants of the EIA trial (Trial Registration Number NCT00253071) were followed from time of randomisation (2005-2009) to end of study (31 December 2021). The primary outcome was risk of psychiatric readmission. Secondary outcomes were total admissions and costs, medication use, intentional self-harm or suicide attempt or suicide, and socio-economic measures.RESULTS: The absolute mean risk of psychiatric readmission was 49.3% in the intervention group and 59.8% in the control group, with no statistically significant difference between the groups (b = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.26 to 0.047, p = 0.18). Compared with the control group, patients in the intervention group had numerically fewer total admission days (mean (SD) 44 (77) versus 62 (109)), lower total cost of psychiatric hospital admissions and hospital-based outpatient visits (mean (SD) 22,001 (36793) euros versus 29,822 (52671) euros) and higher use of lithium and antipsychotics, but the differences were not statistically significant. Fewer patients in the intervention group had an event of intentional self-harm or suicide attempt or suicide during follow-up (OR 0.25, 95% CI: 0.15-0.40, p < 0.001) compared with the control group and more patients in the intervention group used antiepileptics (OR 2.21, 95% CI: 1.08-4.60, p = 0.031).CONCLUSION: Analyses of very long-term outcomes of the EIA trial may potentially indicate a beneficial effect of the intervention at the long term but were likely underpowered to detect a more subtle effect and for most outcomes the differences between groups were not statistically significant.

AB - BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether treatment early after onset in bipolar disorder may improve the long-term illness course. The early intervention in affective disorders (EIA) randomised controlled trial found that 2-years treatment in a specialised mood disorder clinic combining evidence-based pharmacological treatment with group psychoeducation improved clinical outcomes compared with standard treatment in patients with bipolar disorder discharged after their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd hospital admission. We aimed to assess the 16 years long-term outcomes after randomisation of the participants in the EIA trial.METHODS: Data were obtained by linking nation-wide Danish population-based registers. All 158 participants of the EIA trial (Trial Registration Number NCT00253071) were followed from time of randomisation (2005-2009) to end of study (31 December 2021). The primary outcome was risk of psychiatric readmission. Secondary outcomes were total admissions and costs, medication use, intentional self-harm or suicide attempt or suicide, and socio-economic measures.RESULTS: The absolute mean risk of psychiatric readmission was 49.3% in the intervention group and 59.8% in the control group, with no statistically significant difference between the groups (b = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.26 to 0.047, p = 0.18). Compared with the control group, patients in the intervention group had numerically fewer total admission days (mean (SD) 44 (77) versus 62 (109)), lower total cost of psychiatric hospital admissions and hospital-based outpatient visits (mean (SD) 22,001 (36793) euros versus 29,822 (52671) euros) and higher use of lithium and antipsychotics, but the differences were not statistically significant. Fewer patients in the intervention group had an event of intentional self-harm or suicide attempt or suicide during follow-up (OR 0.25, 95% CI: 0.15-0.40, p < 0.001) compared with the control group and more patients in the intervention group used antiepileptics (OR 2.21, 95% CI: 1.08-4.60, p = 0.031).CONCLUSION: Analyses of very long-term outcomes of the EIA trial may potentially indicate a beneficial effect of the intervention at the long term but were likely underpowered to detect a more subtle effect and for most outcomes the differences between groups were not statistically significant.

U2 - 10.1111/acps.13716

DO - 10.1111/acps.13716

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 38825333

JO - Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica

JF - Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica

SN - 0001-690X

ER -

ID: 394335213