Background Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) tools appear to be useful interventions for collecting real-time data on patients’ behavior and functioning. However, concerns have been voiced regarding the acceptability of EMA among patients with schizophrenia and the factors influencing EMA acceptability. Objective The aim of this study was to investigate the acceptability of a passive smartphone-based EMA app, evidence-based behavior (eB2), among patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and the putative variables underlying their acceptance. Methods The participants in this study were from an ongoing randomized controlled trial (RCT) of metacognitive training, consisting of outpatients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (F20-29 of 10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems), aged 18-64 years, none of whom received any financial compensation. Those who consented to installation of the eB2 app (users) were compared with those who did not (nonusers) in sociodemographic, clinical, premorbid adjustment, neurocognitive, psychopathological, insight, and metacognitive variables. A multivariable binary logistic regression tested the influence of the above (independent) variables on “being user versus nonuser” (acceptability), which was the main outcome measure. Results Out of the 77 RCT participants, 24 (31%) consented to installing eB2, which remained installed till the end of the study (median follow-up 14.50 weeks) in 14 participants (70%). Users were younger and had a higher education level, better premorbid adjustment, better executive function (according to the Trail Making Test), and higher cognitive insight levels (measured with the Beck Cognitive Insight Scale) than nonusers (univariate analyses) although only age (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-0.99; P=.048) and early adolescence premorbid adjustment (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.93; P=.01) survived the multivariable regression model, thus predicting eB2 acceptability. Conclusions Acceptability of a passive smartphone-based EMA app among participants with schizophrenia spectrum disorders in this RCT where no participant received financial compensation was, as expected, relatively low, and linked with being young and good premorbid adjustment. Further research should examine how to increase EMA acceptability in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, in particular, older participants and those with poor premorbid adjustment. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04104347; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04104347

Introduction Paliperidone palmitate 1-month (PP1M) is a Long-acting injectable antipsychotic formulation, approved for the treatment of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. Recently, paliperidone palmitate 3-months (PP3M) formulation was introduced, which maintains stability while offering a longer dosing interval for the maintenance treatment in patients previously treated with PP1M. Despite of this, many patients are treated with PP1M without transition to PP3M. Objectives To identify variables explaining maintenance of PP1M treatment instead of going to PP3M. We hypothesize that more severe patients are delayed in transition to PP3M because of expectation to complete stabilization. Methods A descriptive analysis of 123 patients, diagnosed with psychotic disorders, on treatment with paliperidone palmitate 1 month or 3 months, was performed. Age, sex, type of paliperidone treatment, hospitalizations after the initiaton of treatment, years since diagnosis, polytherapy and toxic habits were some of the variables measured and compared between both groups (PP1M and PP3M). Results Most of patients (63,41%) were on PP3M. Both groups shared characteristics like male sex predominance, schizophrenia as the most common diagnosis, having a recent onset diagnosis, same frequency of polypharmacy and same pattern of drug consumption. There was a slight difference between both groups regarding severity. PP1M and PP3M showed respectively 33% and 16,7% of admissions after initiation. Conclusions No clear pattern determines less transition to PP3M from PP1M. No statistical difference was found except form the difference found in admission after change of treatment (to PP1M or PP3M), which could reflect influence of severity in treatment. Future research is needed in order to better elucidate this association. Disclosure No significant relationships.

Introduction:The complex interrelationship between personality disorders and bipolar disorders is still a controversial aspect with multiple diagnosis, therapeutic and ethiologic implications.Comorbidity has been defined as the presence of more than one disorder in the same patient at the same time.Methods:We made a literature review between 1995 and 2005 about comorbidity in bipolar and personality disorders.Results:There are different studies that agree the theory that personality disorders are previous forms of bipolar disorders.Besides, it is important to consider the effect that bipolar disorders have over personality.In the last years, different authors have suggested that co-morbid personality disorders predict a worse evolution in the course of the bipolar disorders, finding recurrent and resistant to treatment affective symptoms.The co-occurrence studies of personality and affective disorders have ranged from 3 to 70%.If we take the global n (428) of all the reviewed articles, we see that the percentage of comorbidity between personality disorders and bipolar disorders is almost the 48% of the studied patients. Looking at the most prevalent cluster, cluster A is the 13%, cluster B is near the 39% and cluster C the 35%.Conclusion:Personality traits, dimensions and personality disorders seem to play an important role in the evolution of bipolar disorders.The identification of these specific personality traits and the knowledge of the influence in the evolution of the illness are extremely important in the treatment and prevention of bipolar disorders.

No abstract

BACKGROUND Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) tools collect real-time data on patients’ behaviour and functioning and may be useful interventions. However, concerns have been voiced regarding acceptability of EMA among patients with schizophrenia and what may underlie this remains poorly understood. OBJECTIVE To investigate acceptability of a passive smartphone-based EMA app, the Evidence-Based Behavior (eB2), among patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and putative variables underlying this. METHODS Participants came from an ongoing randomised controlled trial (RCT) of metacognitive training - outpatients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) (F20-29-ICD10 codes), age 18-64 - none of whom received any financial compensation. Those who consented to installation of the eB2 app (users) were compared with those who did not (non-users) in sociodemographic, clinical, premorbid adjustment (Premorbid Adjustment Scale -PAS-), neurocognitive, psychopathological, insight and metacognitive variables. A multivariable binary logistic regression tested the influence of the above (independent) variables on ‘being user vs. non-user’ (acceptability), which was the main outcome measure. RESULTS Out of N=77 RCT participants, n=24 subjects (31%) consented to eB2, which remained installed at the end of the study (median follow-up=14.50 weeks) in n=14 subjects (70%). Users were younger and had a high education level, better premorbid adjustment, better executive function (according to the Trail Making Test) and higher cognitive insight levels (measured with the Beck Cognitive Insight Scale) than non-users (univariate analyses), although only age (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-0.99; P=.048) and early adolescence PAS (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.93; P=.010) survived the multivariable regression model, thus predicting eB2 acceptability. CONCLUSIONS Acceptability of a passive smartphone-based EMA app among SSD participants in this RCT where no participant received financial compensation was, as expected, relatively low, and linked with being young and good premorbid adjustment. Further research should examine how to increase EMA acceptability to SSD patients, particularly older participants and those with poor premorbid adjustment. CLINICALTRIAL This stusy is part of a randmised controlled trial which has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04104347) since the 26/09/2019. URL of registry https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04104347

No abstract