David Castle- Work and Mental Illness

Page 1

Work and Mental Illness Professor David Castle Chair of Psychiatry, St. Vincent’s Hospital Melbourne Dept. of Psychiatry, The University of Melbourne Email: david.castle@svhm.org.au


Work exclusion in Schizophrenia Australia “Low Prevalence” study (Jablensky et al,1997)  5.8% males, 6.1% females in full time employment  72% males, 62% females on DSP


Positives of work 

Structured daily activities

Social opportunities

Feeling socially ‘useful’

Enhanced self esteem

Regular income (Mueser et al,1997)


Reasons for work exclusion in schizophrenia 

Symptoms of mental illness

Side effects of psychiatric medications

Lack of access to vocational/educational training

Job design problems (Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission,1993)


“A Psychiatrist’s Perspective…” 

Support and work with other services towards “an integration of vocational and clinical services at the level of service delivery” (Frost et al, 2002)

Optimistic symptom control and reduce side effect burden Examples:  

Manage mood instability in bipolar Ameliorate effects of cognitive dysfunction in schizophrenia


Bipolar Affective Disorder: Psychosocial Treatments Professor David Castle Chair of Psychiatry, St.Vincent’s Hospital Melbourne and the University of Melbourne david.castle@svhm.org.au


Different Types of Bipolar Disorder Mood Profile (Castle & Bassett, 2009)

Type I BPAD

MANIC PHASE

DEPRESSE D PHASE

Type II BPAD

“Cyclothymia” Bipolar Spectrum Disorder

“Normal” Mood Variance


Longitudinal Course of Bipolar (an Example) (Castle & Bassett, 2009)

Presentation with Mania

Treatment Begins

ELEVATE D MOOD

Prodrome

Mania Following Treatment of Depression

DEPRESSE D MOOD

Prodrome

Depressed Phase Following Recovery From Mania

Depression


Walking the Black Dog


The Red Dragon


Prognostic Factors in Bipolar Psychosocial Factors Contribute 24-50% to outcome variables Negative life events Functional impairment Lower social support Conflictual family relationships

Bipolar Illness Variables Higher number of episodes More depressive episodes Psychotic symptoms Subsyndromal symptoms

Worse Prognosis Non- Adherence

Co-morbid Diagnosis

Range non-adherence from 20-66%, mean 41% Attitudes, beliefs important

Substance abuse Personality disorders

Johnson and Miller, J Abnorm Psychol 1997; 106: 449-457 Gitlin MJ , Hammen C Bipolar Disorder Golberg Jf, Harrow M (Eds) 1999 Keck P et al 1996 Jour. Clin. Psych. 1996;57:292-97 Miklowitz DJ. CNS Spectrum 1998;3:48 Post et al J Clin Psych 64:6 June 2003 Scott J, Br J Psychiatry 1995; 167: 581


Treatment Aims Understanding of illness Mood monitoring including early warning signs Control of illness rather than illness exerting control Symptom control Optimal pharmacotherapy Broader psychosocial parameters


What do we know about Psychosocial Interventions? Relapse rates high even if taking meds Different approaches: • Psychoeducation - individual/group (Colom et al, 2003) • • • • •

Family focused therapy

(Miklowitz et al, 2000)

CBT (Lam et al, 2003, 2005; Scott et al, 2006) IPSRT (Frank et al, 1999) Integrated models (Bauer et al, 2006; Simon et al, 2006) Collaborative Therapy (Berk, Berk & Castle, 2005) (Castle et al, 2007, 2010)


(Castle et al, 2007, 2010)

Translating Effective Psychosocial Interventions for Bipolar Disorder into Everyday Clinical Practice Carolynne Holdsworth Cath Bunton Frameworks for Health St.Vincent’s, Melbourne


Study Objectives Primary Goals: 

To develop a group-based intervention and relapse prevention package to assist consumers to manage their bipolar disorder.

To integrate the intervention using the Collaborative Therapy Framework and implement the project in a range of service settings.

To evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention using a RCT.


Study Objectives Challenges:  To develop an intervention that is effective for “real-world” patients  To ensure the intervention is sustainable beyond the life of the research project.


Study Design Stages of Assessment 1. Baseline 2. Post-Group (3 month) 3. 12 month assessment

Phase 1 • Literature review • Focus groups to map needs • Develop treatment package & pilot content Phase 2 • Evaluate “MAPS group program” using a randomised control trial. Intervention

(12 weeks + 3 boosters)

1

2

Phase 3 • Follow-up maintenance (9 months)

3

12 months


MAPS Group Program  The group program aims to: • Provide information and develop skills to assist people to effectively manage bipolar disorder. • Enable people with bipolar disorder to get the most out of life despite the disorder.

 12 x weekly 1 ½ hour sessions + 3 x monthly boosters.  Resources: Personal Workbook, Information Book, Collaborative Treatment Journal (CTJ)


MAPS Session Outline Session

Focus

Content

1-2

Education

Introduction bipolar disorder and triggers commonly associated with bipolar disorder

3-6

Core skills development

Monitoring & assessment of stress/triggers Preventing relapse using coping skills, eg problem solving, stress tolerance and SMART goal setting & medication management

7-9

Depression

Assessing and managing early warning signs of depression Developing relapse prevention plans for depression

10 - 12

Mania

Assessing and managing early warning signs of mania Developing relapse prevention plans for mania

Booster 1-3

Integrating and reinforcing skills

Consolidating skills into daily life


A Real-world Clinical Sample  Sample size:  Total N= 82 (control: n=39, treatment: n=35)

 Gender:  Female 76%, Male 24%

 Age:  mean = 42, SD = 11

 Employment: Part time

37%

Unemployed

32%

Full time

15%

Student

1%


A Real-world Clinical Sample  Diagnosis  Bipolar 1 22%  Bipolar I (with psychotic episode) 8%  Bipolar II 45%

 Co-morbidities  Ave no per person 2.9  most common: anxiety, suicidality, alcohol & substance use, etc


Relapse Type Depression Mania Hypomania Mixed

Treatment 4 0 9 1

Control 14 6 6 1

All relapses: mean time in relapse over 9 months was 11 days for treatment and 27 days for control group, p=0.01


Any Relapse – time to first recurrence Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, by treat Any 1st relapse

Treatment

Control

.75 .5 .25 0

survivor function

1

Any 1st relapse

0

100

200

300 0

100

time (post treatment, days) Treatment Graphs by treat

Control

200

300


Depression Relapse

0.00

survivor function 0.25 0.50 0.75

1.00

Depression

0

100 200 time (post treatment, days) Treatment

Control

300


Mania/Mixed Relapse

0.00

survivor function 0.25 0.50 0.75

1.00

Mania and mixed

0

100 200 time (post treatment, days) Treatment

Control

300


Service Utilisation Mean - Treatment

Mean - Control

Pre

post

Pre

Post

Admissions 1.03

0.39

0.89

0.91

Weeks

2.84

1.32

2.54

1.83

CAT Crisis Visits

1.97

0.00

0.74

0.53

Item


Getting it Out There




Acknowledgements  Project Team Chief Investigators: David Castle, Monica Gilbert, Michael Berk Isaac Schweitzer and Leon Piterman Program Developers: Lesley Berk and Sue Lauder Research Clinicians: Carolynne Holdsworth, Cath Bunton, Terence Chong and Cathy Carman.

 Our project funding partners:

 Our service partners: Pathways Support and Rehabilitation Services Barwon Health Healthscope (The Melbourne & Geelong Clinics) Dr Greg Murray and Swinburne University of Technology


www.moodswings.net.au Ms Sue Lauder Professor Michael Berk Professor David Castle Dr. Seetal Dodd Dr. Andrea Chester This project gratefully acknowledges the funding support of beyondblue the national depression initiative


Cognition in Schizophrenia: Can We Fix It?

Professor David Castle Chair of Psychiatry, St. Vincent’s Hospital Melbourne The University of Melbourne david.castle@svhm.org.au


What are the Cognitive Deficits in Schizophrenia? (Wykes & Castle, 2003)

Mild

Moderate

Severe

Perceptual skills

Distractability

Executive functioning

Delayed recognition memory

Memory and working memory

Verbal fluency

Verbal and full scale IQ

Delayed recall

Motor speed


Do Medications Improve Cognitive Impairment?  optimal treatment of positive symptoms important  some older (typical) antipsychotics seem to make cognition worse  benzodiazepines and anticholinergics can make cognition worse


Do Atypical Antipsychotics Help Cognition?  early studies suggested “yes”, but confounded by effect of halting typicals (EPSE etc.)  clozapine seems to improve attention and verbal fluency but has less effect on working memory


52 Week Trial of Olanzapine vs Risperidone vs Quetiapine (1) (Keefe et al, 2007)

 400 patients < 5 yrs illness  Random assignment to: - Olanzapine (mean 12mg) - Quetiapine (mean 500mg) - Risperidone (mean 2.5mg)  400 patients started; 221 completed assessment at 12 weeks; only 81 completed neuropsychology tests at 52 weeks


52 Week Trial of Olanzapine vs Risperidone vs Quetiapine (2) (Keefe et al, 2007)


52 Week Trial of Olanzapine vs Risperidone vs Quetiapine (3) (Keefe et al, 2007)

 areas of improvement

 verbal fluency (especially Quetiapine)  letter-number sequencing  digit symbol  continuous performance task

 improvements correlated modestly with vocational & social enhancement, but not significant after controlling for symptom improvement


Conclusions (Keefe et al, 2007) (Keefe et al, 2007)

Olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone all produced significant improvements in neurocognition in early psychosis patients. Although cognitive improvements were modest, their clinical importance was suggested by relationships with improvements in functional outcome. BUT  not corrected for multiple comparisons  similar effect size seen due to practice effects alone  massive subject attrition  correlates with functional outcomes very modest & disappear after controlling for symptom change


Conclusions (Michael F Green, 2007) (Michael F Green, 2007)

“meaningful cognitive improvements will probably not come from second-generation antipsychotics”

“there was no clear procognitive effect in this study”

“the findings leave us feeling a little smarter and a lot more humble”


Conclusions (Michael F Green, 2007) (Michael F Green, 2007)

So, Green (2007) suggests: (i)

We need to look at other potential cognitive enhancing drugs; and

(ii) we need to consider “new non-pharmacological interventions that specifically target cognition�


Does Cognitive Remediation Enhance Work Capacity? (McGurk et al, 2007)

 44 people with SMI with past job failures  randomised to:  supported employment alone OR  supported employment plus cognitive training


Does Cognitive Remediation Enhance Work Capacity? (McGurk et al, 2007)

Programme Components

 cognitive assessment & job loss analysis  24 computer-based training sessions over 12wks  review and discussion of gains made and planning regarding future work

 ongoing consultation with an employment specialist


Does Cognitive Remediation Enhance Work Capacity? Intervention Group (n=21)

Control Group (n=23)

16 (70%)

3 (14%)

Total weeks worked

27.0

5.4

Total hours worked

848.6

94.6

Total $’s earned

5320

530

No. who worked


Does Cognitive Remediation Enhance Work Capacity? (McGurk et al, 2007)


Conclusions (McGurk et al, 2007) (McGurk et al, 2007)

 A cognitive enhancement package can assist work capacity in SMI  Not clear what elements of the package help  Still only around 6 months work in a 3 year period


If all else fails ‌.


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.