This study examined whether sleep disturbance predicted or moderated responses to psychotherapy in participants who participated in STEP-BD, a national, multisite study that examined the effectiveness of different treatment combinations for bipolar disorder. Participants received either a brief psychosocial intervention called collaborative care (CC; n = 130) or intensive psychotherapy (IP; n = 163), with study-based pharmacotherapy. Participants (N = 243) were defined as current (past week) short sleepers (<6 hours/night), normal sleepers (6.5-8.5 hours/night), and long sleepers (≥9 hours/night), according to reported average nightly sleep duration the week before randomization. Sleep disturbances did not predict the likelihood of recovery nor time until recovery from a depressive episode. There was no difference in recovery rates between IP versus CC for normal sleepers, and medium effect sizes were observed for differences in short and long sleepers. In this study, sleep did not play a major role in predicting or moderating response to psychotherapy in bipolar disorder.

Background

We sought to address how predictors and moderators of psychotherapy for bipolar depression - identified individually in prior analyses - can inform the development of a metric for prospectively classifying treatment outcome in intensive psychotherapy (IP) versus collaborative care (CC) adjunctive to pharmacotherapy in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program (STEP-BD) study.

Methods

We conducted post-hoc analyses on 135 STEP-BD participants using cluster analysis to identify subsets of participants with similar clinical profiles and investigated this combined metric as a moderator and predictor of response to IP. We used agglomerative hierarchical cluster analyses and k-means clustering to determine the content of the clinical profiles. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate whether the resulting clusters predicted or moderated likelihood of recovery or time until recovery.

Results

The cluster analysis yielded a two-cluster solution: 1) "less-recurrent/severe" and 2) "chronic/recurrent." Rates of recovery in IP were similar for less-recurrent/severe and chronic/recurrent participants. Less-recurrent/severe patients were more likely than chronic/recurrent patients to achieve recovery in CC (p=.040, OR=4.56). IP yielded a faster recovery for chronic/recurrent participants, whereas CC led to recovery sooner in the less-recurrent/severe cluster (p=.034, OR=2.62).

Limitations

Cluster analyses require list-wise deletion of cases with missing data so we were unable to conduct analyses on all STEP-BD participants.

Conclusions

A well-powered, parametric approach can distinguish patients based on illness history and provide clinicians with symptom profiles of patients that confer differential prognosis in CC vs. IP.

Objective

Up to 60% of patients with bipolar disorder develop a substance use disorder during their lifetime. The purpose of this paper was to assess the impact of substance use disorders on depression recovery among bipolar patients randomly assigned to different psychotropic medications and psychosocial interventions. We hypothesized that patients with a comorbid substance use disorder would benefit less from psychotherapy regardless of treatment intensity/length compared to patients without a comorbid substance use disorder.

Method

We conducted post hoc analyses among bipolar disorder patients ( n = 270) with and without comorbid substance use disorders enrolled in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder randomized psychosocial intervention trial. All patients entered during or shortly after the onset of a bipolar depressive episode. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess whether current or past substance use disorders moderated the response of patients to intensive psychosocial intervention or brief psychoeducation with collaborative care, operationalized as full recovery from an episode of bipolar depression.

Results

Current comorbid substance use disorders significantly predicted likelihood of recovery (odds ratio = 2.25, p = 0.025) and time to recovery (odds ratio = 1.71, p = 0.006) from bipolar depression. We found that 74.5% of patients with a current substance use disorder, compared to 56.5% without a current substance use disorder, recovered from bipolar depression. Past substance use disorders did not predict likelihood of recovery or time to recovery. Current substance use disorders did not significantly moderate response to intensive psychotherapy versus collaborative care.

Conclusion

Contrary to our hypotheses, bipolar disorder participants with a current comorbid substance use disorder were more likely to recover from psychosocial treatment for bipolar depression than patients without a current comorbid substance use disorder. If this finding is replicated, it has implications for the ordering of treatment for patients with comorbid bipolar disorder and substance use disorders.