Rationale

Little is known about the specific experience people living with bipolar disorder in rural, low resource settings, where conditions that disrupt normal social interactions are often highly stigmatized and evidence-based treatments are rare.

Objective

To explore illness experience, coping strategies, help-seeking practices, and consequences of illness among people with bipolar disorder (PBD) and their family members in rural Ethiopia as an initial step for developing psychosocial intervention grounded by the experiences of PBD.

Method

A qualitative methods using in-depth interviews were carried out with 27 individuals (15 PBD and 12 caregivers). The participants were identified on the basis of previous community-based research among people with severe mental illness. Interviews were carried out in Amharic, audio-recorded, transcribed, and translated into English. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Our approach was informed by phenomenological theory.

Result

Three major themes emerged: expressions and experiences of illness, managing self and living with otherness, and the costs of affliction. PBD and caregivers were concerned by different forewarnings of illness. Stigma and social exclusion were entwined in a vicious cycle that shaped both illness experience and the economic health and social life of the household. Nonetheless, PBD and caregivers learned from their experiences, developed coping strategies, and sought relief from trusted relationships, spirituality, and medication.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that psychosocial intervention could be used to strengthen existing resources, in order to improve the lives of PBD and their family members. However, pervasive stigma may be a barrier to group and peer support approaches.

Background

Adjunctive psychological interventions for bipolar disorder have demonstrated better efficacy in preventing or delaying relapse and improving outcomes compared with pharmacotherapy alone.

Aims

To evaluate the efficacy of psychological interventions for bipolar disorder in low- and middle-income countries.

Method

A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, PsycINFO, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane database for systematic review, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Latin America and Caribbean Center on Health Science Literature and African Journals Online databases with no restriction of language or year of publication. Methodological heterogeneity of studies precluded meta-analysis.

Results

A total of 18 adjunctive studies were identified: psychoeducation (n = 14), family intervention (n = 1), group cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) (n = 2) and group mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) (n = 1). In total, 16 of the 18 studies were from upper-middle-income countries and none from low-income countries. All used mental health specialists or experienced therapists to deliver the intervention. Most of the studies have moderately high risk of bias. Psychoeducation improved treatment adherence, knowledge of and attitudes towards bipolar disorder and quality of life, and led to decreased relapse rates and hospital admissions. Family psychoeducation prevented relapse, decreased hospital admissions and improved medication adherence. CBT reduced both depressive and manic symptoms. MBCT reduced emotional dysregulation.

Conclusions

Adjunctive psychological interventions alongside pharmacotherapy appear to improve the clinical outcome and quality of life of people with bipolar disorder in middle-income countries. Further studies are required to investigate contextual adaptation and the role of non-specialists in the provision of psychological interventions to ensure scalability and the efficacy of these interventions in low-income country settings.

Declaration of interest

None.