There is limited data about the impact of mood disorders treatment guidelines on clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of prescribers\' adherence to the 2018 Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) treatment guidelines recommendations on the readmission rates of patients hospitalized for mania.
A retrospective cohort of all individuals admitted due to acute mania to Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, ON, from January 2018 to July 2021 was included in this study. Patient variables and data regarding index admission and subsequent hospitalizations were extracted from medical records up to December 31, 2021. Treatment regimens were classified as first-line, second-line, noncompliant, or no treatment. We explored the associations between treatment regimens and the risk of readmissions using univariate, multivariate, and survival analysis.
We identified 211 hospitalizations related to 165 patients. The mean time-to-readmission was 211.8 days (standard deviation [SD]  =  247.1); the 30-day rehospitalization rate was 13.7%, and any rehospitalization rate was 40.3%. Compared to no treatment, only first-line treatments were associated with a statistically significant decreased risk of 30-day readmission (odds ratio [OR] = 0.209; 95% CI, 0.058 to 0.670). The risk of any readmission was reduced by first-line (OR = 0.387; 95% CI, 0.173 to 0.848) and noncompliant regimens (OR = 0.414; 95% CI, 0.174 to 0.982) compared to no treatment. On survival analysis, no treatment group was associated with shorter time-to-readmission (log-rank test, p  =  0.014) and increased risk of readmission (hazard ratio = 2.27; 95% CI, 1.30 to 3.96) when compared to first-line medications.
Treatment with first-line medications was associated with lower 30-day rehospitalization rates and longer time-to-readmission. Physicians\' adherence to treatments with higher-ranked evidence for efficacy, safety, and tolerability may improve bipolar disorder outcomes.

The Third Argentine Consensus on the management of bipolar disorders (TB) is an initiative of the Argentine Association of Biological Psychiatry (AAPB). As a reference document, this consensus pursues two main objectives: on the one hand, to summarize and systematize the best available evidence on the comprehensive management of this pathology; on the other, to provide a useful, up-to-date instrument for psychiatrists, multidisciplinary teams dedicated to mental health, and government agencies. During a period of approximately six months of work -that is, from May to October 2022- a committee of experts made up of 18 professionals and representatives of the three most important Psychiatry and Mental Health associations in Argentina (that is, the AAPB, the Argentine Association of Psychiatrists, AAP, and the Association of Argentine Psychiatrists, APSA) have focused on updating the information regarding TB. Finally, this document was prepared as a result of an exhaustive review of the bibliography published to date, which was strategically divided into three parts: the first deals with the generalities of TB; the second deals with the comprehensive treatment of the pathology; finally, the third analyzes TB in the context of special situations.
El Tercer Consenso Argentino sobre el manejo de los Trastornos Bipolares (TB) es una iniciativa de la Asociación Argentina de Psiquiatría Biológica (AAPB). Como documento de referencia, este consenso persigue dos objetivos principales: por un lado, resumir y sistematizar la mejor evidencia disponible sobre el manejo integral de esta patología; por el otro, proporcionar un instrumento útil y actualizado a psiquiatras, a equipos multidisciplinarios abocados a la salud mental y a organismos gubernamentales. Durante un período de aproximadamente seis meses de trabajo -desde mayo a octubre de 2022- un comité de expertos integrado por 18 profesionales y por representantes de las tres asociaciones de Psiquiatría y Salud Mental más importantes de la Argentina: la AAPB, la Asociación Argentina de Psiquiatras, (AAP) y la Asociación de Psiquiatras Argentinos (APSA), se abocaron a actualizar la información respecto de los TB. Finalmente, y como resultado de una exhaustiva revisión de la bibliográfica publicada hasta la actualidad, se confeccionó este documento que fue dividido estratégicamente en tres partes: la primera versa acerca de las generalidades del TB; la segunda aborda el  tratamiento integral de la patología; y, por último, la tercera analiza los TB en el contexto de situaciones especiales.

Psychotic episodes occur in a substantial proportion of patients suffering from major mood disorders (both unipolar and bipolar) at some point in their lives. The nature of these episodes is less well understood than the more common, non-psychotic periods of illness and hence their management is also less sophisticated. This is a concern because the risk of suicide is particularly high in this subtype of mood disorder and comorbidity is far more common. In some cases psychotic symptoms may be signs of a comorbid illness but the relationship of psychotic mood to other forms of psychosis and in particular its interactions with schizophrenia is poorly understood. Therefore, our targeted review draws upon extant research and our combined experience to provide clinical context and a framework for the management of these disorders in real-world practice - taking into consideration both biological and psychological interventions.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) are an important tool for implementation of evidence-based clinical care. Despite clinical trials showing lack of efficacy of some agents in bipolar disorder (BD), they are still frequently prescribed in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to systematically review the CPG recommendations on pharmacological interventions with evidence against their use due to lack of efficacy data and/or due to serious safety concerns.
METHODS: A systematic literature search identified 29 guidelines published by national and international organizations during the 1994-2020 period. Information was extracted regarding how the recommendations framed non-use of treatments in particular clinical situations as well as the actual recommendation in the guideline.
RESULTS: Twenty-three guidelines (79%) mentioned at least one non-recommended treatment. The terms used to qualify recommendations varied amongst guidelines and included: \"not recommended\" \"no recommendation\" and \"negative evidence\". Lamotrigine, topiramate and gabapentin were commonly cited as non-recommended treatments for mania and most CPG did not recommend monotherapy with antidepressants, aripiprazole, risperidone, and ziprasidone for treatment of acute bipolar depression. Most guidelines made recommendations about lack of efficacy data or potential harm in treatments for BD but there is a significant variation in the way this information is conveyed to the reader.
CONCLUSIONS: Non-recommended treatments were based on their use for BD episodes or maintenance but specific medications may benefit patients when treating comorbid conditions.
CONCLUSIONS: The absence of a uniform language and recommendations in current guidelines may be an additional complicating factor in the implementation of evidence-based treatments in BD.

Recent longitudinal observations show that human menstrual cycles, sleep-wake cycles and manic-depressive cycles can become synchronized with lunar cycles, but do so in uniquely complex and heterogeneous ways that are unlikely to have been detected by past studies. Past studies\' negative results have given rise to a scientific consensus that human biology and behavior are unaffected by lunar cycles. The recent observations show that synchrony can be temporary, and can occur with more than one type of lunar cycle, more than one phase of a lunar cycle and more than one resonant frequency of a lunar cycle. Given the variability of human responses to lunar cycles, aggregate analyses used in almost all previous studies would likely have cancelled out individuals\' responses and led to false negative results. In light of these observations, the question of lunar influence should be investigated further, with longitudinal observations and case-by-case analyses of individuals\' data.

The 2020 College guidelines for mood disorders banish bipolar II disorder - despite its formal status in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and International Classification of Diseases manuals for more than two decades - and argue that there is no need to partition bipolar disorder into separate sub-types. Their single-entity model is seemingly based on opinion rather than any support from referenced scientific studies. The author challenges the Committee\'s model of there being only one bipolar disorder and argues that it presents several clinical management risks, particularly of \'over-treatment\'.

To provide advice and guidance regarding the management of mood disorders, derived from scientific evidence and supplemented by expert clinical consensus to formulate s that maximise clinical utility.
Articles and information sourced from search engines including PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Google Scholar were supplemented by literature known to the mood disorders committee (e.g. books, book chapters and government reports) and from published depression and bipolar disorder guidelines. Relevant information was appraised and discussed in detail by members of the mood disorders committee, with a view to formulating and developing consensus-based recommendations and clinical guidance. The guidelines were subjected to rigorous consultation and external review involving: expert and clinical advisors, key stakeholders, professional bodies and specialist groups with interest in mood disorders.
The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists mood disorders clinical practice guidelines 2020 (MDcpg2020) provide up-to-date guidance regarding the management of mood disorders that is informed by evidence and clinical experience. The guideline is intended for clinical use by psychiatrists, psychologists, primary care physicians and others with an interest in mental health care.
The MDcpg2020 builds on the previous 2015 guidelines and maintains its joint focus on both depressive and bipolar disorders. It provides up-to-date recommendations and guidance within an evidence-based framework, supplemented by expert clinical consensus.
Gin S Malhi (Chair), Erica Bell, Darryl Bassett, Philip Boyce, Richard Bryant, Philip Hazell, Malcolm Hopwood, Bill Lyndon, Roger Mulder, Richard Porter, Ajeet B Singh and Greg Murray.

The impact of guideline concordance on naturalistic maintenance treatment outcomes in BD is not known. We sought to evaluate the effect of guideline-concordant care on symptomatic, course and functional outcomes in youth with early-stage BD-I.
In this file audit study, we examined the prospective course of 64 clients with first treatment seeking manic episode of BD-I. Eighteen-month outcome measures included Clinical Global Impressions Scale - Bipolar Version (CGI-BP), Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS) and number of relapses. Correlations and hierarchical linear regressions were used to examine the relationships between guideline concordance and outcomes, while controlling for potential confounders.
Although higher guideline-concordant care in the maintenance phase was associated with a higher discharge CGI-BP score and thus worse outcome, baseline CGI-BP and insight were more predictive of illness severity at follow-up than guideline concordance. There was no association with SOFAS and guideline-concordant care at follow-up. Greater concordance with maintenance medication guideline statements was also associated with greater number of relapses even after controlling for sex, medication adherence, duration of care and baseline illness severity.
This study was limited by sample size and its single pool of clients which may limit generalizability.
Contrary to our hypotheses, higher guideline concordance was associated with worse outcomes, although this relationship was moderated by the client\'s illness characteristics, severity and insight. More unwell youth with poor insight, greater severity, and mixed/rapid cycling features may need other interventions or modified guidelines.

BACKGROUND: German S3 guidelines are subject to the highest methodological standards. This includes that they are only valid for a certain time period. Following the first edition in 2012 the first update of the S3 guidelines on bipolar disorder has now been published (2019).
OBJECTIVE: What has changed in the field of pharmacological recommendations comparing the first edition with the update in 2019?
METHODS: Comparison of the 1st edition from 2012 with the update from 2019 of the S3 guidelines for the diagnostics and treatment of bipolar disorders.
RESULTS: The three principle treatment targets of acute treatment of bipolar depression, acute treatment of mania and phase prophylaxis (maintenance treatment) can be distinguished. For acute treatment of bipolar depression, for the first time a medication has received a level A recommendation: quetiapine. For the acute treatment of mania, several drugs are still recommended with the same level of recommendation (B). Asenapine has been added as the tenth substance. Lithium is still the only drug with a level A recommendation for maintenance and prophylactic treatment and is also the only drug approved for this indication without restrictions. A new recommendation is that in the absence of contraindications, phase prophylaxis with a serum level of at least 0.6 mmol/l should be carried out. With a B recommendation, quetiapine has been added to the drugs for phase prophylactic treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: The S3 guidelines make recommendations at the highest scientific level. In view of these findings, lithium is clearly underutilized for maintenance therapy. In the absence of clear contraindications (advanced renal insufficiency), every patient with bipolar disease should be given the chance of lithium prophylaxis for an adequately long period.

Resistant bipolar disorder is a major mental health problem related to significant disability and overall cost. The aim of the current study was to perform a systematic review of the literature concerning (1) the definition of treatment resistance in bipolar disorder, (2) its clinical and (3) neurobiological correlates, and (4) the evidence-based treatment options for treatment-resistant bipolar disorder and for eventually developing guidelines for the treatment of this condition.
The PRISMA method was used to identify all published papers relevant to the definition of treatment resistance in bipolar disorder and the associated evidence-based treatment options. The MEDLINE was searched to April 22, 2018.
Criteria were developed for the identification of resistance in bipolar disorder concerning all phases. The search of the literature identified all published studies concerning treatment options. The data were classified according to strength, and separate guidelines regarding resistant acute mania, acute bipolar depression, and the maintenance phase were developed.
The definition of resistance in bipolar disorder is by itself difficult due to the complexity of the clinical picture, course, and treatment options. The current guidelines are the first, to our knowledge, developed specifically for the treatment of resistant bipolar disorder patients, and they also include an operationalized definition of treatment resistance. They were based on a thorough and deep search of the literature and utilize as much as possible an evidence-based approach.