Impact of early onset bipolar disorder on family functioning: Adolescents' perceptions of family dynamics, communication, and problems

Page created by Walter Collins
 
CONTINUE READING
Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25–37
                                                                                                           www.elsevier.com / locate / jad

                                                          Research report

    Impact of early onset bipolar disorder on family functioning:
  Adolescents’ perceptions of family dynamics, communication, and
                              problems
                                            a,b ,
             Heather A. Robertson                   *, Stan P. Kutcher a , Diane Bird a,c , Linda Grasswick d
     a
         Department of Psychiatry, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Dalhousie University, Abbie Lane Building, Ste. 4083,
                                                 5909 Jubilee Road, Halifax, N.S., Canada
                               b
                                 IWK-Grace Health Centre, Department of Psychiatry, Halifax, N.S., Canada
                                c
                                  Dalhousie University, Department of Pharmacology, Halifax, N.S., Canada
                                       d
                                         Royal Ottawa Hospital, Forensic Unit, Ottawa, ON, Canada

                                             Received 19 January 2000; accepted 25 July 2000

Abstract

   Objective: This research investigated the impact of adolescent onset bipolar illness on perceived family functioning in
stabilized bipolar I (B) and unipolar (U) probands, and normal controls (C). Method: Sample N 5 119: 44 bipolar 1(17 M,
27 F), 30 unipolar (9 M, 21 F), and 45 controls (19 M, 26 F). Mean ages: 19.9, 18.5 and 18.2 years, respectively.
Instruments: Family Adaptability and Cohesion Scale (FACES II), Parent–Adolescent Communication Scales (PACS),
Social Adjustment Inventory for Children and Adolescents (SAICA). Results: There were no significant group or sex
differences between controls and mood disordered youth – assessed intermorbidly – in ratings of relationship with either
parent. Bipolars acknowledged significantly more minor conflicts with parents than either unipolars or controls. Ratings by
mood disordered subjects were significantly less positive in terms of shared activities and communication with siblings.
Mood disordered youth and controls were not differentiated on the basis of family adaptability, and all family cohesion
scores were within population norms. No significant group differences were observed in communication with parents.
Limitations: This self-report study was conducted intermorbidly, does not include objective measures of family functioning,
nor does it assess the effect of psychiatric illness in other family members on family functioning. Conclusions: Assessed
intermorbidly, bipolar adolescents’ perceptions of family dynamics do not seem to diverge significantly from controls.
Further research is needed to investigate the impact of adolescent bipolar illness on family life during acute phases of the
illness, as well as the effect on family functioning of psychiatric disorders in other family members.  2001 Elsevier
Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Bipolar I; Unipolar; Youth; Perceived family functioning

  *Corresponding author. Tel.: 1 1-902-473-1693; fax: 1 1-902-473-4596.
  E-mail address: robertsh@is.dal.ca (H.A. Robertson).

0165-0327 / 01 / $ – see front matter  2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S0165-0327( 00 )00281-0
26                         H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37

1. Background                                                      of empirical data supporting its efficacy, family
                                                                   therapy is used extensively in the treatment of child
    Bipolar illness is a chronic disorder characterized            and adolescent psychiatric disorders, in part, because
by a relapsing and remitting course. It has been                   of the premise that behavior in youth is strongly
suggested that 30–40% of bipolar adults experience                 determined by family factors (Sargent, 1997). De-
the initial manic episode during adolescence                       spite lack of empirical evidence, family therapy has
(Loranger and Levine, 1978). However, that figure                  been recommended for use in mood disordered
may underestimate substantially the incidence of                   adolescents (Diamond and Siqueland, 1995; Sargent,
adolescent-onset bipolar illness if the initial major              1997) as well as those who are bipolar (Weber et al.,
depressive episode is used as the marker for illness               1988; Scott, 1995; Miklowitz, 1996).
onset (Kutcher et al., 1998; Robertson et al., 1998a,                 The relationship between family functioning and
submitted). Management of bipolar illness in adoles-               mood disorders has been the focus of limited re-
cents may be more challenging than adults because                  search. Miller et al. (1986) assessed families of adult
of the complexity of developmental issues, which                   patients diagnosed with major depression, schizo-
involve an interplay of cognitive, personality, psy-               phrenia, alcoholism, adjustment disorder, and bipolar
chosexual, social and biological factors. Research                 disorder, as well as a group of matched non-psychi-
evidence indicates that the onset of bipolar disorder              atric controls, using the Family Assessment Device
in adolescence may be associated with disrupted                    (FAD). The families of depressed patients demon-
development across multiple spheres of function                    strated significantly more difficulties compared to the
(Strober and Carlson, 1982; Strober et al., 1989;                  control group on each of the FAD scales (problem
Fristad et al., 1992; Kutcher, 1993; Carlson et al.,               solving, communication, roles, affective responsive-
1994; Carlson, 1996; Papatheodorou and Kutcher,                    ness, affective involvement, behavior control, and
1996; Bird et al., 1998a,b; Robertson et al., 1998a–               general functioning), while bipolar and schizophre-
c).                                                                nic families did not differ significantly from controls.
    Compared to adult onset bipolar disorder, the                  Chang et al. (1999) demonstrated that families in
onset of bipolar illness in youth may be associated                which one or both parents had bipolar disorder
with a more severe illness (Carlson et al., 1994;                  reported more conflict, less organization, and less
Kutcher, 1994), poorer recovery from both manic                    cohesion compared to controls, as measured by the
and depressive episodes (Strober, 1994), and high                  Family Environment Scale (FES) (Chang et al.,
rates of relapse despite optimized psychosocial and                1999). These features of family interaction were
psychopharmacologic interventions (Papatheodorou                   associated with the presence of psychopathology in
and Kutcher, 1996). Pharmacological treatment is a                 children although not bipolar illness specifically.
mainstay in the management of bipolar illness re-                     In studies of youth, Puig-Antich et al. (1993)
gardless of age (Kusumakar et al., 1997), and                      evaluated family relationships in a group of de-
psychosocial interventions, including psychoeduca-                 pressed adolescents using the Psychosocial Schedule
tion, have been proposed as an adjunct to medication               for School-Aged Children (PSS), finding that adoles-
in the treatment of bipolar illness (Scott, 1995;                  cents had significant problems in their relationships
Quackenbush et al., 1996; Kusumakar et al., 1997;                  with parents and siblings, relative to controls.
Parikh et al., 1997; Kutcher et al., submitted).                   Kashani et al. (1995) reported that poor family
Involvement of the family in the management of a                   cohesion, not adaptability, distinguished depressed
patient’s psychiatric illness has been proposed to be              from non-depressed children. Stierlin et al. (1986),
an important part of the treatment plan, for both                  using a study design confounded by interviewer bias,
adults and adolescents (Sargent, 1997; Miklowitz                   observed 22 families which contained a young adult
and Goldstein, 1990). However, there is little empiri-             bipolar and 11 families with a young adult diagnosed
cal evidence to support the use of family therapy,                 with schizoaffective disorder. They concluded that
behavioral family management therapy, or group                     bipolar families displayed ‘restrictive complemen-
therapy in bipolar adults or adolescents (Parikh et al.,           tarity’ (a rigid attitudinal pattern in which the parents
1997; Robertson et al., 1997). Regardless of the lack              hold extreme and opposite views towards the pa-
H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37                    27

tient), ‘coalitions’ (in which family members were                 sion / exclusion criteria specified an entry Beck De-
pressured to take sides), and ‘rigidly held beliefs’               pression Inventory score of , 13, and no mood-
(for example that certain emotions can be ‘willed’).               related hospitalizations in the 5 months preceding
   To date, however, insufficient research evidence is             evaluation. All probands were being followed as
available to characterize family functioning in bipo-              outpatients. Mean length of illness, calculated from
lar youth, or to determine if there are specific                   the first reported mood episode to the time of
patterns of family difficulties which may differentiate            participation in this study, was 4.3 years for bipolars
the families of bipolar teens from those of either                 and 3.6 years for unipolars. Normal controls were
normal controls or other adolescent onset mood                     similarly assessed and did not meet any current or
disorders. Specifically, how does bipolar illness                  past DSM IV psychiatric diagnosis. These were
affect teenagers’ relationships with parents and sib-              recruited through study advertisements posted in
lings? What is the subjective impact of adolescent                 high schools, colleges, and community centres. In-
bipolar illness on family functioning, and under what              formation on current living status / situation and
circumstances may family therapy be reasonably                     family history of mental illness was obtained through
recommended? This information is necessary for                     adolescents’ reports.
furthering our understanding of the onset and course
of this illness and for the design and delivery of                 2.2. Instruments
therapeutic interventions designed to optimize out-
come.                                                                 As part of a comprehensive assessment of func-
   The present study was designed to investigate the               tioning, all subjects completed a variety of self-
perceptions of mood-disordered youth, both unipolar                report questionnaires pertaining to family life and
and bipolar, with respect to their relationships with              symptom measurement and were interviewed using a
each parent and with their siblings. This is seen as a             semistructured measure of adaptive social function-
first step in identifying specific areas of functional             ing. A current symptom profile was obtained using
problems within the families of bipolar teenagers                  The Symptom Checklist-58 (Derogatis et al., 1974;
which can then inform the development of treatment                 Kutcher, 1997).
programs for this population.                                         Family functioning was assessed using the Parent–
                                                                   Adolescent Communication Scales (PACS; Barnes
                                                                   and Olson, 1992) which are standardized 20-item
2. Method                                                          Likert format self-report scales, assessing openness,
                                                                   selectivity, strengths, weaknesses, and problematic
2.1. Subjects                                                      issues in the adolescent–mother and adolescent–
                                                                   father dyads, and the Family Adaptability and Cohe-
   The sample was comprised of 44 youth with                       sion Evaluation Scale (FACES II; Olson and Tiesel,
bipolar I disorder (17M:27F, mean age 5 19.9 years,                1992) which is a 30-item Likert format self-report
S.D. 5 2.9 years), 30 unipolar youth (9M:21F, mean                 instrument measuring dimensions of adaptability
age 5 18.5 years, S.D. 5 2.8 years), and 45 normal                 (discipline, negotiation, roles, leadership) and cohe-
controls (19M:26F, mean age 5 18.2 years, S.D. 5                   sion (family boundaries, emotional bonding, time
1.6 years). Clinical probands were recruited from                  spent together). Normative data for this instrument is
specialized mood disorders clinics in academic cen-                based on a stratified random sample of families
tres. Bipolar and unipolar probands all met DSM IV                 across the USA from each stage of the family life
criteria (APA, 1994) for Bipolar I Disorder or                     cycle (from young childless couples at Stage 1
Unipolar Major Depressive Disorder, respectively,                  through to retirees at Stage 7). Additionally, the
determined by clinical interview and the Kiddie                    home life subsection of the Social Adjustment
Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia                 Inventory for Children and Adolescents (SAICA;
(Chambers et al., 1985). All were judged medically                 Biederman et al., 1993; John et al., 1987) was used
and psychiatrically stable at time of assessment, as               to evaluate themes of shared activities, responsibility,
established by their treating clinician. Study inclu-              affection, and communication within families.
28                                   H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37

2.3. Analysis                                                                defined as any psychiatric problem in a first degree
                                                                             relative, for which professional assistance was
   Between-group mean scores were compared for                               sought, and / or for which a formal diagnosis was
the Symptom Checklist-58 (factor subscale scores),                           received. These reports reflect a variety of clinical –
the PACS (‘Problems’ and ‘Openness’ Subscales,                               and subclinical – range symptoms in first-degree
Total Scale Scores), SAICA (‘Home Life’ Subscale)                            relatives, across a variety of comorbid or non-over-
and FACES II (‘Adaptability’ and ‘Cohesion’ Sub-                             lapping conditions (including depression, anxiety,
scales). The effects of group and sex were assessed                          OCD, substance abuse, etc.) These data are summa-
using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and significant                           rized in Table 1.
omnibus F ratios were further assessed using joint                              Analysis of bipolar illness course revealed first
univariate 0.9500 Bonferroni confidence intervals                            onset to be depression in 74% of the sample.
(post-hoc mean comparisons). Two sided alpha                                 Breakdown by sex showed this pattern for depression
levels of P , 0.05 were used to determine statistical                        preceding mania was more predominant in females
significance. Relationship between the two subscale                          than males (Pearson r 5 3.59, Chi square by Fisher
measures of the FACES II was further tested by                               Exact Test P 5 0.07; 84.6% depression at mean age
regression analysis and correlational measures. Pro-                         of 14.6 years vs. 15.4% mania at mean age of 15.0
portional rates of family history of (any) psychiatric                       years). For males the percentages were more evenly
illness were calculated for each study group. Family                         distributed (58.8% depression as first onset at mean
history was examined as a possible covariate in the                          age of 16 years vs. 41.2% mania at mean age of 16.8
determination of significant between-groups differ-                          years). Bipolar females reported earlier onset than
ences in family functioning, using regression tech-                          males for both types of episode (F 5 4.86, P 5
niques.                                                                      0.034* for mania onset; F 5 6.4, 5 0.01** for de-
                                                                             pression onset). For unipolar youth, mean age of
                                                                             onset was similar for both sexes (males at mean age
3. Results                                                                   of 14.2 years and females at mean age of 14.5 years).
                                                                             Age of depression onset was earlier for unipolar than
    Among bipolar youths, 21 / 44 reported a first                           bipolar probands (F 5 4.1, P 5 0.048*).
degree relative with some form of mental illness,                               At assessment, none of the patients or controls met
compared to 20 / 30 unipolar youth reporting, and                            diagnostic criteria for a current episode of depres-
5 / 45 of the controls. Presence of family history was                       sion, mania or hypomania, both bipolar (B) and

Table 1
Adolescent report of psychiatric history in first degree relatives
Youth          Family        Depression           Bipolar      Anxiety /      OCD        Alcoholism       Substance   Other a   . 1 Dx b
               Member                                          Panic                                      abuse
Bipolar        Mother          9                  3            4              –          –                –           1         4
               Father          6                  3            2              1          1                –           –         2
               Sibling         1                  –            2              –          –                –           2         1

Unipolar       Mother        11                   –            2              1          1                1           1         2
               Father         8                   –            1              –          4                2           –         3
               Sibling        3                   –            1              –          –                1           2         1

Control        Mother        –                    –            –              –          1                –           –         –
               Father        –                    –            –              –          2                –           –         –
               Sibling           3                –            1              –          1                1           1         1
     a
   Adolescents cannot specify the psychiatric condition for which professional help sought by relative.
     b
   Dx 5 Number in given row receiving (past / present) treatment of more than one psychiatric disorder (not necessarily overlapping /
comorbid).
H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37                     29

unipolar (U) adolescents presented as symptomatic,                 quality of communication. The majority of 44 bipo-
as measured by the Symptom Checklist-58. Based on                  lar respondents were living at home with parents
a comparison of factor subscale scores, probands                   (80%) and a minority were in other arrangements
(B,U) were more likely than controls (C) to report                 (7% in group home, 9% living alone, and 4% with
being slightly bothered by symptoms relating to:                   friend / or partner). Eighty two percent of unipolar
depression (F 5 11.8, P , 0.001; B, U . C), inter-                 youth were living at home with parents, 10% with
personal sensitivity (F 5 6.67, P 5 0.002; B, U . C)               friends, and the remaining either lived alone or other
and anxiety (F 5 10.38, P , 0.001; B . U . C).                     relatives (4% each, respectively). All study controls
Groups were not differentiated on the basis of                     were currently living in the nuclear family context.
somatic or obsessive–compulsive symptomatology                        Analysis revealed no statistically significant differ-
(Fig. 1). No significant main effects of sex or                    ences between mood-disordered youth and controls
group 3 sex interactions were observed on any SCL-                 with respect to global ratings of: relationship with
58 factor subscale (Fig. 1). Beck Depression Inven-                Mother (P . 0.05) or relationship with Father (P 5
tory (BDI) scores obtained at time of assessment                   0.05, ns Bonferroni), all groups reporting moderate
were consistent with the finding of ongoing subclini-              to very active relationships with parents (Fig. 2). In
cal depressive symptomatology for clinical probands.               terms of reported problems with parents (i.e., refusal
Bipolar and unipolar youth did not differ statistically            to honor restrictions or do chores, irresponsibility
from each other on this index, but their mean scores               around the house, damage to family property),
were significantly elevated relative to normal con-                bipolar youth acknowledged more problems than
trols (F 5 8.78, P , 0.001; B,U . C). In addition, a               either unipolars or controls (F 5 5.84, P 5 0.004,
significant main effect of sex was observed on the                 B . U . C), but for all groups these difficulties were
BDI (F 5 5.03, P 5 0.027, F . M), but the group 3                  minor in nature and infrequent (Fig. 3). For global
sex interaction did not reach statistical significance.            ratings of relationship with siblings, mood disor-
   Assessment of current home behavior (SAICA)                     dered youth (B and U) were significantly less
required subjects to evaluate their relationships with             positive than controls (F 5 5.22, P 5 0.007, B, U ,
each parent – and with siblings – in terms of shared               C) in terms of shared activities, friendliness, and
activities, the amount of affection demonstrated, and              overall communication (Fig. 2). Clinical groups were

                                               Fig. 1. Current symptom profile.
30                        H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37

                                              Fig. 2. Current home behaviour.

                                Fig. 3. Current problems at home with parents and siblings.

more likely than controls to report difficulties with             youth (bipolar and unipolar) were significantly more
their siblings (F 5 3.11, P 5 0.05, B, U . C), al-                likely than controls to describe their families as less
though these were typically minor and involved                    cohesive / less connected as measured by the Cohe-
avoidance and detachment as opposed to directly                   sion Subscale (F 5 5.49, P 5 0.005, B, U , C). The
conflictual behaviors (Fig. 3). No significant effects            three groups were not differentiated on the basis of
of sex or group 3 sex interactions were observed on               their subjective reports of family adaptability (P .
any of the SAICA indices.                                         0.05). Importantly, all FACES II ratings (for both
   Self-report ratings of family cohesion and adapt-              cohesion and adaptability) approximated US national
ability (FACES II) identified that mood-disordered                norms. No significant sex differences or sex by
H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37                   31

                                    Fig. 4. FACES II: Family adaptability and cohesion.

group interactions were found of any of the above                  analysis, observed differences between groups on the
indices of the FACES II (See Fig. 4).                              cohesion index did not covary significantly as a
   A measure of ‘family health’ (the linear relation-              function of reported family history of psychiatric
ship between cohesion and adaptability measures;                   illness. Clinical status was a significant predictor of
Olson et al., 1992) showed that for each group, mean               mean cohesion score (F 5 4.13, P 5 0.02; C . B, U)
scores were in the normative range and these two                   but family history in and of itself did not emerge as a
dimensions of family functioning were significantly                significant covariate (t 5 2 1.46, P 5 0.15) for this
correlated (for bipolars, Pearson correlation coeffi-              study population.
cient r 5 0.8, F 5 74.2, P , 0.0001; for unipolars,                   Youth ratings of communication with mother and
Pearson r 5 0.79, F 5 46.6, P , 0.0001; for controls,              communication with father (PACS), did not reveal
Pearson r 5 0.64, F 5 38.7, P , 0.0001; for full                   any significant group or sex differences, or sex 3
sample, Pearson r 5 0.77, F 5 169.7, P , 0.0001).                  group interactions (by ANOVA, all P . 0.10) All
   As the FACES II cohesion subscale was the only                  scale scores were well within US population norms
index of family functioning on which our study                     for this instrument (Fig. 5).
groups significantly diverged, we examined whether
the presence of any family psychiatric history acted
as a significant covariate in the determination of                 4. Discussion
between-groups differences in cohesion ratings.
Among the bipolar youths 48% reported a first                         The results of this study show that – intermorbidly
degree relative with some form of mental illness,                  – our cohort of stabilized youth with bipolar I
compared to 67% of unipolar youths and 11% of the                  disorder do not report significantly problematic
controls (Pearson Chi-square 5 25.8, P , 0.0001).                  family difficulties, relative to unipolar or normal
This points to an association between clinical status              control comparators. Indeed, taken overall, the multi-
and reporting of family history of psychiatric illness,            ple measures of family functioning assessed in this
with both patient groups reporting higher rates than               study suggest that from the perspective of the
controls (See Table 1). However, in a regression                   adolescent, there are no substantial differences in
32                        H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37

                         Fig. 5. Parent adolescent communication – relationship with mother / father.

intrafamily relationships amongst these groups. Our               special school programs (39% of bipolars, 7% of
findings suggest that clinical lore about the family              unipolars), guidance counselling (89% bipolars, 97%
impact of bipolar illness must be modified by                     unipolars), a variety of individual ‘supportive’ psy-
considerations relating to the phase of this disorder.            chotherapies (77% bipolars, 87% unipolars), and
Family functioning assessed when youths are first                 group therapy (70% bipolars, 30% unipolars). How-
diagnosed and / or are in the acute state may be                  ever, neither clinical group reported having been
different than that found in a stabilized cohort (such            involved in any systematic, structured, or dynamic
as ours) assessed interepisode, a number of years                 family therapies over the course of the illness or
post-illness onset. These results indicate that the               currently (Robertson et al., 1998b; Kutcher et al.,
clinical lore may overestimate the degree of family               submitted). Therefore it would seem unlikely that
dysfunction in stable bipolar teens and fails to                  these encouraging results vis-a-vis perceived family
adequately address aspects of illness course as this              functioning could be attributed to beneficial effects
pertains to family functioning.                                   of extensive family therapy.
    One potential confound in these findings could be                Other authors have highlighted the utility of
the result of family therapy conducted in the patient             adjunctive psychoeducational approaches in this
cohort. It could be considered that if the bipolar                population in order to promote more positive out-
probands had undergone family therapy, the results                comes for mood disordered youth, particularly in
would be due to treatment effects. However, exami-                terms of promoting resilience (coping skills) and
nation of treatment history for our probands revealed             adherence to pharmacologic and psychosocial treat-
little or no evidence of family therapy. Indeed,                  ments, (Parikh et al., 1997). The specialized mood
probands reported only limited direct parental in-                disorder clinics from which our sample was recruited
volvement in their treatment (for example their                   have a strong psychoeducational component avail-
occasional presence at their child’s clinic appoint-              able to both young patients and family members, as
ments). As part of an overall treatment strategy,                 part of the illness management model. The majority
many study probands had also received various short               of bipolar and unipolar youth in the current study
term psychosocial interventions to deal with specific             described psychoeducation – about the illness, medi-
problems – often associated with academic function                cations, and lifestyle management – as very helpful,
and planning or peer relationships. These included                in terms of contributing positively to clinical out-
H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37                   33

come and current well-being (95% of bipolars and                  picture, suggesting that for this sample, adolescent
85% of unipolars) (Robertson et al., 1998b; Kutcher               mood disorder in and of itself does not seem to have
et al., submitted). Psychoeducational strategies                  a consistently and significantly negative impact on
would entail discussion and dissemination to patients             sharing, affection, support, and communication in the
and family of printed information relating to under-              adolescent–parent dyad. There is evidence to suggest
standing the illness, medications (dosage, mode of                that relationships with siblings may be compromised
action, possible side-effects, and interactions),                 for youngsters with bipolar or major depressive
lifestyle modifications, daily rhythms, recognizing               illness. These problems apparently persist despite
prodromal symptoms, knowing when to seek help,                    effective management of the illness, and may be
etc. To the extent that family systems may be altered             complicated by subsyndromal symptomatology or
in beneficial ways as a function of psychoeducation,              other unknown factors not evaluated in the present
(i.e., to promote adherence, reduce family stressors,             study.
and increase coping skills) then – as an active
component of family interventions – these strategies
should be encouraged over family therapies based on               5. Limitations of the current study
purely theoretical foundations and or extrapolated
from adult populations or other forms of psychiatric                 Studies utilizing self-report measures are open to
disorder.                                                         bias. The youth may be under reporting or mini-
   Findings of this study have shown that mood-                   mizing difficulties they may have in communication
disordered youth and their never psychiatrically ill              with their siblings and parents. Miller et al. (1986)
peers were not differentiated on (i) quality of                   noted that their manic subjects (an adult inpatient
communication with parents (openness and problem                  population) tended to minimize family dysfunction
resolution), (ii) perceptions of family adaptability              on the FAD relative to reports by other family
(responsiveness to situational and developmental                  members. Their findings are similar to ours, in that
changes), and (iii) overall satisfaction with their               dysfunctions in the families of bipolar patients were
relationship to either parent (affection and shared               not pervasive or severe enough to distinguish them
activities). The tendency toward lower cohesion                   from controls. These authors also argue that ob-
scores (measured as a global index) in clinical                   served impairments in family functioning may stem
probands may be indicative of some minor difficul-                from disruptions related to hospitalization of a family
ties they experience which relate to connectedness or             member and the stress of an acute episode and as
closeness with other family members. Subscale items               such should not be extrapolated to family functioning
assess emotional bonding (i.e., ‘Family members feel              after remission, when these illness-related stressors
very close to each other’), coalitions (i.e., ‘Members            would be expected to be less acute. It is possible that
pair up rather that do things as a total family’),                our assessments – based on a stabilized outpatient
family boundaries (i.e., ‘It is easier to discuss                 population – might have been less encouraging if
problems with people outside the family.’), time                  obtained during acute episodes. Yet it would remain
(i.e., ‘Family members like to spend their free time              to be established if this was a reflection of over-
together’), space (i.e., ‘Our family gathers together             reporting of dysfunction or an accurate appraisal of a
in the same room’), decision-making (i.e., ‘Members               difficult family situation.
consult other family members on their decisions’),                   It could be argued that perception of family
friends (i.e., ‘Members know each other’s best                    functioning by mood disordered probands was direct-
friends’), and interests / recreation (i.e., ‘We have             ly influenced by their stage of illness, as has been
difficulty thinking of things to do as a family’).                noted in depression (Keitner and Miller, 1990), and
However, observed differences between probands                    that their perception changed with the emergence of
and study controls on this index were not representa-             symptoms, as has been shown in depression in
tive of clinical range problems or behavior outside of            adolescents (Marton and Maharaj, 1993). A potential
normative expectations for this age group.                        confound could therefore be the mental state of the
   Taken as a whole, our findings present a favorable             subject at the time of assessment. In the present
34                         H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37

study, no proband met criteria for a current mood                  of family functioning, the role of diagnostic status
episode, but the clinical sample reported significantly            and symptom severity, and the effect of these on
more mild psychiatric symptoms than did controls.                  reporting of family dysfunction. This might be of use
The effect of these subsyndromal symptoms would,                   in identifying some specific areas of focus for the
however, be expected to negatively impact on the                   development of psychoeducational strategies and
clinical subjects’ self report. That is, both unipolar             behavioral interventions which target areas of proven
and bipolar teens would be expected to ‘over-report’               difficulty for mood disordered youth, including per-
difficulties and this would be expected to produce                 haps family cohesiveness and sibling relationships.
greater discrepancies in observations. That such
discrepancies were not observed in the present study
(lack of statistically significant differences between             6. Clinical relevance
ratings by clinical probands and controls on the
majority of indices) suggests that subsyndromal                       This study has attempted to elucidate the percep-
symptoms may not have a uniformly distorting                       tion of mood-disordered youth about their family
influence on perceived family functioning. If any-                 communication style and interactional pattern with
thing, these findings highlight the need for a more                parents and siblings. Although the results are derived
finely-tuned analysis of the relationship between                  from self-report and semi-structured interview, this
current symptomatology and self-report indices, gen-               population of unipolar and bipolar youth did sig-
erally. Other research reporting potential negative                nificantly not differ from the control group with
biases on the part of depressed patients may reflect               respect to their communication with parents, their
differences in the severity of underlying symptoms                 satisfaction with the relationship with their parents,
for those study samples, as compared to ours.                      or their perception of family adaptability. While
   Mental illness occurring in a family member,                    parental reports of the same variables would be an
particularly a mother, has been shown to influence                 important tool in the overall assessment of the
family functioning (Tamplin et al., 1998). In the                  family, these results appear to moderate previous
present study we obtained – through the adolescents’               observations of bipolar families (Miklowitz et al.,
retrospective self-report only – a report of any                   1988; Miklowitz and Goldstein, 1990; Wuerker,
family history of mental illness (in first-degree                  1996) with respect to negative affective style and
relatives). As stated previously, approximately half               criticism. In the adult literature, family interaction
of the bipolar sample reported a first degree relative             patterns and communication style (for example high
with some form of mental illness, compared to two                  ‘expressed emotion’, negative affective style, inade-
thirds of unipolar youths, and about 10% of controls.              quate communication skills, ineffective coping stra-
Due to the limited nature of our sample – data on                  tegies) have been shown to affect relapse rates in
family psychiatric history – it is not possible to draw            schizophrenia (Brown et al., 1972; Vaughn et al.,
straightforward conclusions about the relationship                 1984), depression (Hooley et al., 1986; Okasha et al.,
between family history and current family func-                    1994), and bipolar disorder (Miklowitz et al., 1988).
tioning as described by these adolescents. However,                However, arguments for the necessity of family
it is encouraging that their recent perceptions of                 therapy in bipolar disorder have not been well
family dynamics remain largely positive and in line                supported, and the research evidence which does
with population norms, despite the existence of a                  exist supports a psychoeducational model of family
family psychiatric history. Furthermore, we found                  intervention. Psychoeducation has been shown to be
that family psychiatric history did not act as a                   an important intervention in the management of
significant covariate in the determination of between-             mood disorders, including bipolar illness in adults
groups differences in cohesion ratings (FACES II).                 and adolescents (Glick et al., 1985, 1994; Parikh et
However, further research is necessary to sys-                     al., 1997). Information about symptoms, etiology,
tematically evaluate the effect of psychiatric illness             course of the illness, and treatment provided to the
(past / current) in family members of young psychiat-              patient and family improves treatment compliance in
ric patients, the impact of this on particular aspects             bipolar illness (Miklowitz, 1996) and depression
H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37                              35

(Kusumakar and Kennedy, 1996). Psychoeducation                     these disorders. Thus, treatment programs employing
has also been combined effectively with other psy-                 family therapies in these clinical groups on an ‘a
chotherapeutic approaches to family intervention                   priori’ or theoretical foundation may not be indi-
(Spurkland and Vandvik, 1989), and group therapy                   cated. Alternatively, evaluation and monitoring of
(Shakir et al., 1979; Volkmar et al., 1981).                       sibling relationship, psychoeducation, and assistance
   As Miklowitz and Goldstein (1990) point out, the                with concrete and specific problems as they arise,
involvement of families in psychosocial interventions              may be of benefit.
is not always necessary, and the mechanisms that                      In conclusion, further research is needed to dif-
mediate efficacy (or lack thereof) have not been                   ferentiate those problems and underlying dynamics
carefully delineated. For example, reports of reduced              which may be unique to families with bipolar
relapse rates following family interventions may be                members, from those issues which may be generic to
directly mediated by changes in intra-familial stress              the early onset mood-disorders (bipolar and unipolar)
or other family dynamic, or be indirectly mediated                 as a group. Decisions concerning the validity of
by changes in patient education, awareness and                     self-report ratings of family functioning and the
compliance, or variation in other illness characteris-             necessity for family-based interventions must be
tics and comorbid conditions. Thus while family                    informed by evidence, which for the bipolar adoles-
therapy has been recommended for bipolar illness,                  cent cohort is to date very limited. This information
there have been few systematic investigations of                   will hopefully contribute to the development of
specific areas of family functioning needing to be                 optimal psychosocial treatment approaches, and will
targeted in therapy. It has been suggested that family             help to elucidate the specific aspects of family
therapy improves the patient’s social support net-                 interventions which reportedly contribute to favor-
work and the emotional environment which in turn                   able outcomes in bipolar and unipolar youth and
may mitigate precipitants of the illness that arise                their families.
from family conflict (Zaretsky and Segal, 1994 /
1995). Psychodynamic formulations often have as
their premise the assumption that families of bipolar              Acknowledgements
and unipolar youth tend to be dysfunctional in their
communication patterns, that they are problematic in                 The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of
a way that families with ‘normal’ teens are not, and               The Canadian Psychiatric Research Foundation, The
are therefore in need of special interventions de-                 Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, The
signed to modify or ‘restore’ intrafamily relation-                Halifax Stanley Centre for the Study of Bipolar
ships. Some support, albeit weak, for this assumption              Disorder, and the Nova Scotia Department of Health
exists for unipolar depression in youth, from our                  Designated Mental Health Research Fund. The au-
finding of a consistent, but nonsignificant, trend                 thors also thank the treatment staff of the Adolescent
toward lower scores for unipolar youth on various                  Unit, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University
indices but not for the bipolar youth. As seen                     of Toronto and the treatment staff of the Mood
through the eyes of the adolescents, the families of               Disorders Clinic, IWK-Grace Health Centre, Halifax,
bipolar youth are not dysfunctional, according to the              Nova Scotia. Thanks also to Ms. Christine Himmel-
self-report and interview indices employed in the                  man for research assistance.
present study.
   While psychosocial variables may play an im-
portant role in the course of bipolar and unipolar
illness in youth, these results suggest that substantial           References
difficulties in family functioning are not present. By
                                                                   American Psychiatric Association, 1994. Diagnostic and Statistical
extrapolation this finding suggests that interventions
                                                                     Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition. American Psychiatric
which are premised on the presence of family                         Association, Washington, DC.
dysfunction (i.e. structural, dynamic, strategic family            Barnes, H., Olson, D.H., 1992. Parent–adolescent communication.
therapies) are unlikely to be of significant benefit in              In: Olson, D.H., McCubbin, H.I., Barnes, H., Larsen, A.,
36                               H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37

   Muxen, M., Wilson, M. (Eds.), Family Inventories: Inventories         Kashani, J., Allan, W.D., Dahlmeier, J.M., Rezvani, M., Reid, J.C.,
   Used in A National Survey of Families Across the Family Life             1995. An examination of family functioning utilizing the
   Cycle, 2nd. Revised Edition. University of Minnesota, St. Paul,          circumplex model in psychiatrically hospitalized children with
   MN, pp. 29–44.                                                           depression. J. Affect. Disord. 35, 65–73.
Biederman, J., Faraone, S.V., Chen, W.J., 1993. Social adjustment        Keitner, G., Miller, I., 1990. Family functioning and major
   inventory for children and adolescents: concurrent validity in           depression: an overview. Am. J. Psychiatry 147, 1128–1137.
   ADHD children. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 325,            Kusumakar, V., Kennedy, S., 1996. Promoting therapeutic alliance
   1059–1064.                                                               and adherence to medication treatment in depression. Can. J.
Bird, D., Robertson, H., Kutcher, S., 1998a. Difficulties in                Diagnosis, 1–9, Suppl. Oct.
   mathematical reasoning for bipolar youth. In: The American            Kusumakar, V., Yatham, L., Parikh, S., Matte, R., Sharma, R.,
   Psychiatric Association, Annual Meeting, June, Toronto, On-              Silverstone, P., Haslam, D., Kennedy, S., Kutcher, S., 1997. In:
   tario, Abstract.
                                                                            Bipolar Disorder: A Summary of Clinical Issues and Treatment
Bird, D., Robertson, H., Kutcher, S., 1998b. Peer relationships as
                                                                            Options. Bipolar Disorder Subcommittee: Canadian Network
   perceived by youth with mood disorders. In: The American
                                                                            for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT Monograph
   Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Annual Meet-
                                                                            1997.04.001).
   ing, October, Anaheim, CA, Abstract.
                                                                         Kutcher, S., 1993. Rapid cycling and mixed mania in adolescent
Brown, G.W., Birley, J.T.L., Wing, J.K., 1972. Influence of family
                                                                            bipolar illness. In: American Academy of Child and Adolescent
   life on the course of schizophrenia disorders: a replication. Br.
                                                                            Psychiatry, October, San Antonio, TX, Abstract.
   J. Psychiatry 121, 241–258.
Carlson, G., 1996. Clinical features and pathogenesis of child and       Kutcher, S., 1994. Bipolar disorder in adolescence: mania through
   adolescent mania. In: Shulman, K., Tohen, S., Kutcher, S.                the life cycle. In: The American Psychiatric Association,
   (Eds.), Mood Disorders Throughout the Life Cycle. Wiley,                 Annual Meeting, May, Philadelphia, PN, Abstract.
   New York, NY, pp. 127–148.                                            Kutcher, S., 1997. Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology.
Carlson, G., Fennig, S., Bromet, E., 1994. The confusion between            W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia.
   bipolar disorder and schizophrenia in youth: where does it            Kutcher, S., Robertson, H., Bird, D., 1998. Premorbid functioning
   stand in the 1990s? J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 33,           in adolescent onset bipolar I disorder: a preliminary report from
   453–460.                                                                 an ongoing study. J. Affect. Disord. 51, 137–144.
Chambers, W.J., Puig-Antich, J., Hirsch, M., Paez, P., Ambrosii,         Kutcher, S., Robertson, H., Bird, D., submitted. Consumer-based
   P., Tabrizi, M.A., Johnson, R., 1985. The schedule for affective         study of factors relevant to clinical outcome and current well-
   disorders and schizophrenia for school-age children: present             being in adolescent onset bipolar I disorder. J. Am. Acad. Child
   episode version. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 42, 696–702.                      Adolesc. Psychiatry.
Chang, K.D., Steiner, H., Ketter, T.A., 1999. Family environment         Loranger, A.W., Levine, P.M., 1978. Age at onset of bipolar
   of children and adolescents with bipolar parents. Bipolar                affective illness. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 35, 1345–1348.
   Disord. 1 (Suppl. 1), 27.                                             Marton, P., Maharaj, S., 1993. Family factors in adolescent
Derogatis, L.R., Lipman, R.S., Rickels, K., Uhlenruth, E.H., Con,           unipolar depression. Can. J. Psychiatry 38, 373–382.
   L., 1974. The Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL): a self                Miklowitz, D.J., 1996. Psychotherapy in combination with drug
   report symptom inventory. Behav. Sci. 19, 1–15.                          treatment for bipolar disorder. J. Clin. Psychopharm. 162,
Diamond, G., Siqueland, L., 1995. Family therapy for the treat-             56S–66S.
   ment of depressed adolescents. Psychotherapy 32, 77–90.               Miklowitz, D.J., Goldstein, M.J., 1990. Behavioral family treat-
Fristad, M.A., Weller, E.B., Weller, R.A., 1992. Bipolar disorder in        ment for patients with bipolar affective disorder. Behav. Modif.
   children and adolescents. Child Adolesc. Psychiatric Chin.               144, 457–489.
   North Am. 1 (1), 13–29.                                               Miklowitz, D.J., Goldstein, M.J., Nuechterlein, K.H., Snyder,
Glick, I., Burti, L., Okonogi, K., Sacks, M., 1994. Effectiveness in        K.S., Mintz, J., 1988. Family factors and the course of bipolar
   psychiatric care. III. Psychoeducation and outcome for patients          affective disorder. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 45, 225–231.
   with major affective disorder and their families. Br. J. Psychi-      Miller, I., Kabacoff, R., Keitner, G., Epstein, N., Bishop, D., 1986.
   atry 164, 104–106.                                                       Family functioning in families of psychiatric patients. Comp.
Glick, I.D., Clarkin, J.F., Spencer, J.H., Haas, G.L., Lewis, A.B.,         Psychiatry 274, 302–312.
   Peyser, J., DeMane, N., Good-Ellis, M., Harris, E., Lestelle, V.,     Okasha, A., El Adabawi, A.S., Wilson, A.K., Youssef, I., Dawla,
   1985. A controlled evaluation of inpatient family intervention.          A.S., 1994. Expressed emotion, perceived criticism, and re-
   I. Preliminary results of the 6-month follow-up. Arch. Gen.              lapse in depression: a replication in an Egyptian community.
   Psychiatry 42, 882–886.                                                  Am. J. Psychiatry 151, 1001–1005.
Hooley, J.M., Orley, J., Teasdale, J.D., 1986. Levels of expressed       Olson, D.H., McCubbin, H.I., Bames, H., Larsen, A., Muxen, M.,
   emotion and relapse in depressed patients. Br. J. Psychiatry             Wilson, M., 1992. Family Inventories: Inventories Used in A
   148, 642–647.                                                            National Survey of Families Across the Family Life Cycle, 2nd
John, K., Gammon, G.D., Prusoff, B.A., Wamer, V., 1987. The                 Revised Edition. University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN.
   Social Adjustment Inventory for Children and Adolescents              Olson, D.H., Tiesel, J.W., 1992. FACES II update: linear scoring
   (SAICA): testing of a new semistructured interview. J. Am.               and interpretation. In: Olson, D.H., McCubbin, H.I., Barnes,
   Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 266, 898–911.                            H., Larsen, A., Muxen, M., Wilson, M. (Eds.), Family Inven-
H. A. Robertson et al. / Journal of Affective Disorders 66 (2001) 25 – 37                                37

   tories: Inventories Used in A National Survey of Families            Sargent, J., 1997. Family therapy in child and adolescent psychi-
   Across the Family Life Cycle, 2nd Revised Edition. University           atry. Child Adolesc. Psychiatric Clinics North Am. 61, 151–
   of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, pp. 12–20.                                  171.
Papatheodorou, G., Kutcher, S., 1996. Treatment of adolescent           Scott, J., 1995. Psychotherapy for bipolar disorder. Br. J. Psychi-
   bipolar disorder. In: Shulman, K., Tohen, M., Kutcher, S.               atry 167, 581–588.
   (Eds.), Mood Disorders Across the Life Span. Wiley-Liss, New         Shakir, S.A., Volkmar, F.R., Bacon, S., Pfefferbaum, A., 1979.
   York, NY, pp. 159–186.                                                  Group psychotherapy as an adjunct to lithium maintenance.
Parikh, S.V., Kusuinakar, V., Haslam, D., Matte, R., Sharma, V.,           Am. J. Psychiatry 1364A, 455–456.
   Yatham, L.N., 1997. Psychosocial interventions as an adjunct         Spurkland, I., Vandvik, I.H., 1989. Rapid cycling depression in
   to pharmacotherpay in bipolar disorder. Can. J. Psychiatry 42,          adolescence: a case treated with family therapy and carbamaz-
   74S–785.                                                                epine. Acta Psychiatrica Scand. 80, 60–63.
Puig-Antich, J., Kaufman, J., Ryan, N.D., Williamson, D.E., Dahl,       Stierlin, H., Weber, G., Schmidt, G., Simon, F.B., 1986. Features
   R.E., Lukens, E., Todak, G., Ambrosii, P., Rabinovich, H.,              of families with major affective disorders. Fam. Process 253,
   Nelson, B., 1993. The psychosocial functioning and family               325–336.
   environment of depressed adolescents. J. Am. Acad. Child             Strober, M., 1994. Juvenile bipolar illness: course and treatment
   Adolesc. Psychiatry 322, 244–253.                                       response. In: Child Psychiatry Day, University of Toronto,
Quackenbush, D., Kutcher, S., Robertson, H., Boulos, C., Chaban,           Toronto, Paper presented.
   P., 1996. Premorbid and postmorbid school functioning in             Strober, M., Carlson, G., 1982. Bipolar illness in adolescents with
   bipolar adolescents: description and suggested interventions.           major depression: clinical, genetic, and psychopharmacologic
   Can. J. Psychiatry 41, 16–22.                                           predictors in a 3- to 4-year prospective follow-up investigation.
Robertson, H., Bird, D., Kutcher, S., 1997. Family issues in               Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 39, 549–555.
   adolescent onset bipolar I disorder: results of a follow-up          Strober, M., Hanna, G., McCracken, J., 1989. Bipolar disorder. In:
   study. In: The American Academy of Child and Adolescent                 Last, C.G., Hersen, M. (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychiatric
   Psychiatry, Annual Meeting, October, Toronto, Canada, Ab-               Diagnosis.. Wiley, New York, NY.
   stract.                                                              Tamplin, A., Goodyer, I., Herbert, J., 1998. Family functioning
Robertson, H., Kutcher, S., Bird, D., 1998a. Cognitive and                 and parent general health in families of adolescents with major
   psychosocial outcomes for bipolar and unipolar youth. In: The           depressive disorder. J. Affect. Disord. 48, 1–13.
   Canadian Psychiatric Association, Annual Meeting, September,         Vaughn, C.D., Snyder, K.S., Jones, S., Freeman, W.B., Falloon,
   Halifax, Nova Scotia, Abstract.                                         I.R.H., 1984. Family factors in schizophrenic relapse: replica-
Robertson, H., Kutcher, S., Bird, D., 1998b. Pharmacological and           tion in California of British research on expressed emotion.
   non-pharmacological treatment of adolescent onset mood disor-           Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 41, 1169–1177.
   der: a consumers perspective of contribution to clinical out-        Volkmar, F.R., Bacon, S., Shakir, S.A., Pfefferbaum, A., 1981.
   come and current well-being. In: Canadian College of Neuro-             Group therapy in the management of manic-depressive illness.
   psychopharmacology, Annual Meeting, June, Montreal,                     Am. J. Psychotherapy 352, 226–234.
   Canada, Abstract.                                                    Weber, G., Simon, F.B., Stierlin, H., Schmidt, G., 1988. Therapies
Robertson, H., Kutcher, S., Bird, D., 1998c. Bipolar and unipolar          for families manifesting manic depressive behavior. Fam.
   youth at school: academic difficulties and psychosocial adjust-         Process 27, 33–49.
   ment. In: Canadian Psychiatric Association, Annual Meeting,          Wuerker, A.M., 1996. Communication patterns and expressed
   September, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Abstract.                              emotion in families of persons with mental disorders. Schiz.
Robertson, H., Kutcher, S., Bird, D., submitted. No evidence of            Bull. 224, 671–690.
   attentional deficits in stabilized bipolar youth relative to         Zaretsky, A.E., Segal, S.V., 1994 / 1995. Psychosocial interventions
   unipolar and control comparators. Bipolar Dis.                          in bipolar disorder. Depression 2, 179–188.
You can also read