Texas Medication Algorithm Project, Phase 3 (TMAP-3): Clinical Results for Patients With a History of Mania
J Clin Psychiatry 2003;64(4):370-382
© Copyright 2016 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.
Purchase This PDF for $40.00
If you are not a paid subscriber, you may purchase the PDF.
(You'll need the free Adobe Acrobat Reader.)
Receive immediate full-text access to JCP. You can subscribe to JCP online-only ($86) or print + online ($156 individual).
With your subscription, receive a free PDF collection of the NCDEU Festschrift articles. Hurry! This offer ends December 31, 2011.
If you are a paid subscriber to JCP and do not yet have a username and password, activate your subscription now.
As a paid subscriber who has activated your subscription, you have access to the HTML and PDF versions of this item.
Click here to login.
Did you forget your password?
Still can't log in? Contact the Circulation Department at 1-800-489-1001 x4 or send email
Background: The Texas Medication Algorithm
Project (TMAP) assessed the clinical and economic impact of
algorithm-driven treatment (ALGO) as compared with
treatment-as-usual (TAU) in patients served in public mental
health centers. This report presents clinical outcomes in
patients with a history of mania (BD), including bipolar I and
schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, during 12 months of
treatment beginning March 1998 and ending with the final active
patient visit in April 2000.
Method: Patients were diagnosed with bipolar I
disorder or schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, according to
DSM-IV criteria. ALGO was comprised of a medication algorithm and
manual to guide treatment decisions. Physicians and clinical
coordinators received training and expert consultation throughout
the project. ALGO also provided a disorder-specific patient and
family education package. TAU clinics had no exposure to the
medication algorithms. Quarterly outcome evaluations were
obtained by independent raters. Hierarchical linear modeling,
based on a declining effects model, was used to assess clinical
outcome of ALGO versus TAU.
Results: ALGO and TAU patients showed
significant initial decreases in symptoms (p = .03 and p <
.001, respectively) measured by the 24-item Brief Psychiatric
Rating Scale (BPRS-24) at the 3-month assessment interval, with
significantly greater effects for the ALGO group. Limited
catch-up by TAU was observed over the remaining 3 quarters.
Differences were also observed in measures of mania and psychosis
but not in depression, side-effect burden, or functioning.
Conclusion: For patients with a history of
mania, relative to TAU, the ALGO intervention package was
associated with greater initial and sustained improvement on the
primary clinical outcome measure, the BPRS-24, and the secondary
outcome measure, the Clinician-Administered Rating Scale for
Mania (CARS-M). Further research is planned to clarify which
elements of the ALGO package contributed to this between-group