Key Takeaways

From the Authors As published in the article
  1. Effective screening can lead to enhanced assessment and improved identification of bipolar I disorder in clinical practice.
  2. The Rapid Mood Screener (RMS) is a self-administered screening tool that was developed to differentiate bipolar I disorder from major depressive disorder in patients with depressive symptoms.
  3. In a nationwide survey of health care providers, three-quarters of respondents reported that the RMS would have a positive impact on their practice, with almost half saying they would screen more patients for bipolar disorder.
Extended Takeaways
  1. Bipolar screening lagged far behind depression screening in this outpatient sample: 82% of HCPs reported using a tool for MDD, but only 32% reported using a tool for bipolar disorder, despite 85% being aware of the MDQ.
  2. Among clinicians not currently screening for bipolar disorder, 60% said they would definitely or likely consider using a bipolar screener in the future, suggesting that workflow-friendly implementation may unlock substantial unmet screening uptake.
  3. Rescreening may be clinically acceptable, not just first-visit screening: 68% of HCPs said they were likely to use the RMS to rescreen current patients with a depression diagnosis, with higher interest in primary care than psychiatry (74% vs 57% [P = .017]).
  4. When choosing between established and newer tools, clinicians strongly favored the RMS over the MDQ (81% vs 19%; P < .05), with the biggest perceived advantages in brevity, practicality, easy scoring, and easy-to-answer questions.
  5. The practical appeal of the RMS aligns with its operating characteristics from the validation study cited here: with 4 or more endorsed items, sensitivity was 88% and specificity was 80%, compared with 86% and 78% for a positive MDQ screen in the same bipolar I analysis population.
  6. Use the RMS as a bipolar I–focused case-finding tool rather than a stand-alone rule-out for the bipolar spectrum; the article notes it has not been validated in bipolar II disorder, so additional diagnostic evaluation and possibly another screener remain appropriate when bipolar II is suspected.
Read full article
Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc. (PPP) makes no warranties about the accuracy or completeness of any information published in The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry or other PPP materials, and disclaims liability for any use or non-use of that information. Clinicians should not rely solely on these materials and should exercise their own professional judgment when making patient care decisions on an individualized basis.

Insightful. Evidence-based. Human-centered.

Listen to the JCP Podcast Now
Figure: Digital illustration shows a human head with neural connections and podcast title over a dark blue patterned background.

Subscribe to read
more articles

Subscribe