4.2 Review

Management of cognitive impairment in bipolar disorder: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Journal

CNS SPECTRUMS
Volume 27, Issue 4, Pages 399-420

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1092852921000092

Keywords

Bipolar disorder; depression; cognition; function; randomized controlled trials

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cognitive impairment is common in bipolar disorder, but currently there is no intervention that has demonstrated significant pro-cognitive effects in adults with bipolar disorder. Future trials may consider targeting interventions to specific cognitive subgroups and utilizing biomarkers of cognitive function.
Cognitive impairment is common in bipolar disorder and is emerging as a therapeutic target to enhance quality of life and function. A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, PsycInfo, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov, and Embase databases for blinded or open-label randomized controlled trials evaluating the pro-cognitive effects of pharmacological, neurostimulation, or psychological interventions for bipolar disorder. Twenty-two trials were identified, evaluating a total of 16 different pro-cognitive interventions. The methodological quality of the identified trials were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Currently, no intervention (i.e., pharmacologic, neurostimulation, cognitive remediation) has demonstrated robust and independent pro-cognitive effects in adults with bipolar disorder. Findings are preliminary and methodological limitations limit the interpretation of results. Methodological considerations including, but not limited to, the enrichment with populations with pre-treatment cognitive impairment, as well as the inclusion of individuals who are in remission are encouraged. Future trials may also consider targeting interventions to specific cognitive subgroups and the use of biomarkers of cognitive function.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available