4.4 Article

Five-year follow-up of cognitive impairment in older adults with bipolar disorder

Journal

BIPOLAR DISORDERS
Volume 18, Issue 2, Pages 148-154

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bdi.12374

Keywords

bipolar disorder; cognition; old age

Funding

  1. Fonds voor Psychische Gezondheid

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ObjectiveTo date, cognitive impairment has been thought to be an integral part of bipolar disorder. In clinical staging models, cognitive impairment is one of the hallmarks to define the clinical stage and it plays an important role in identifying the risk factors for progression to later stages of the illness. It is important to examine neurocognitive performance over longer periods to test the hypothesis of neuroprogression of bipolar disorder. MethodsA comprehensive neuropsychological test battery was applied at baseline and five years later to 56 euthymic older outpatients with bipolar disorder (mean age = 68.35 years, range: 60-90 years) and to a demographically matched sample of 44 healthy subjects. A group-by-time repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance was performed to measure changes over time for the two groups. The impact of baseline illness characteristics on the intra-individual change in neurocognitive performance within the bipolar disorder group was studied by using logistic regression analysis. ResultsAt baseline and at follow-up, patients with bipolar disorder performed worse on all neurocognitive measures compared to the matched healthy subjects. However, there was no significant group-by-time interaction between the patients with bipolar disorder and the comparison group. ConclusionsAlthough older patients with bipolar disorder had worse cognitive function than healthy subjects, they did not have greater cognitive decline over a five-year period. The change in acquired cognitive impairment of patients with bipolar disorder might parallel the cognitive development as seen in normal aging.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available