: Emotion dysregulation (ED) is characterized by rigid and frequent use of maladaptive emotion regulation (ER) strategies. Conceptualized as a transdiagnostic feature, ED may occur in both clinical and non-clinical populations, including people diagnosed with bipolar disorder (BD) and their first-degree relatives (FDRs), though expected to manifest with differential clinical features. To this end, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature comparing people with BD to healthy controls (HCs) or FDRs, from inception up to November 25, 2021, across major databases. Random-effects meta-analyses considered twenty-eight studies assessing ER/ED with a validated scale. Patients with BD differed from HCs in adopting more maladaptive ER strategies, such as rumination, risk-taking behaviors, negative focus, and less adaptive ones. Unaffected FDRs differed from people with BD, yet to a lower extent, suggesting that ED may span a continuum. ED in BD should be widely explored to better understand its course and management, with specific interventions aimed at reducing its burden on both high-risk and full-threshold populations.
Defining clinical characteristics of emotion dysregulation in bipolar disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis / De Prisco, Michele; Oliva, Vincenzo; Fico, Giovanna; Fornaro, Michele; de Bartolomeis, Andrea; Serretti, Alessandro; Vieta, Eduard; Murru, Andrea. - In: NEUROSCIENCE AND BIOBEHAVIORAL REVIEWS. - ISSN 0149-7634. - 142:(2022), p. 104914. [10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104914]
Defining clinical characteristics of emotion dysregulation in bipolar disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis
De Prisco, Michele;Fornaro, Michele;de Bartolomeis, Andrea;
2022
Abstract
: Emotion dysregulation (ED) is characterized by rigid and frequent use of maladaptive emotion regulation (ER) strategies. Conceptualized as a transdiagnostic feature, ED may occur in both clinical and non-clinical populations, including people diagnosed with bipolar disorder (BD) and their first-degree relatives (FDRs), though expected to manifest with differential clinical features. To this end, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature comparing people with BD to healthy controls (HCs) or FDRs, from inception up to November 25, 2021, across major databases. Random-effects meta-analyses considered twenty-eight studies assessing ER/ED with a validated scale. Patients with BD differed from HCs in adopting more maladaptive ER strategies, such as rumination, risk-taking behaviors, negative focus, and less adaptive ones. Unaffected FDRs differed from people with BD, yet to a lower extent, suggesting that ED may span a continuum. ED in BD should be widely explored to better understand its course and management, with specific interventions aimed at reducing its burden on both high-risk and full-threshold populations.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
