Cited by 62Bipolar Disorder and TreatmentMedication Adherence and CompliancePsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Association Between Therapeutic Alliance, Care Satisfaction, and Pharmacological Adherence in Bipolar Disorder

Open access
Sylvia, Louisa G., Hay, Aleena, Ostacher, Michael J., Miklowitz, David J., Nierenberg, Andrew A., Thase, Michael E., Sachs, Gary S., Deckersbach, Thilo +1 more·2013·Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We sought to understand the association of specific aspects of care satisfaction, such as patients' perceived relationship with their psychiatrist and access to their psychiatrist and staff, and therapeutic alliance with participants' likelihood to adhere to their medication regimens among patients with bipolar disorder. METHODS: We examined data from the multicenter Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder, an effectiveness study investigating the course and treatment of bipolar disorder. We expected that participants (n = 3037) with positive perceptions of their relationship with their psychiatrist and quality of psychopharmacologic care, as assessed by the Helping Alliance Questionnaire and Care Satisfaction Questionnaire, would be associated with better medication adherence. We utilized logistic regression models controlling for already established factors associated with poor adherence. RESULTS: Patients' perceptions of collaboration, empathy, and accessibility were significantly associated with adherence to treatment in individuals with bipolar disorder completing at least 1 assessment. Patients' perceptions of their psychiatrists' experience, as well as of their degree of discussing medication risks and benefits, were not associated with medication adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' perceived therapeutic alliance and treatment environment impact their adherence to pharmacotherapy recommendations. This study may enable psychopharmacologists' practices to be structured to maximize features associated with greater medication adherence.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/jcp.0b013e3182900c6f

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sylvia, L. G., Hay, A., Ostacher, M. J., Miklowitz, D. J., Nierenberg, A. A., Thase, M. E., Sachs, G. S., Deckersbach, T., & Perlis, R. H.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
  • Sylvia, Louisa G.
  • Nierenberg, Andrew A.
  • Sachs, Gary S.
  • Deckersbach, Thilo
Venue
Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology
Published
2013-06
Volume
33
Issue
3
Pages
343-350
ISSN
0271-0749 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2093507687
Cited by
62
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3
FWCI
4.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (n01mh80001-12-0-0)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH093676, N01 MH080001)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
bipolar disorder, therapeutic relationship, care satisfaction, medication adherence, physician-patient relationship, empathy, collaboration
MeSH terms
Adult, Bipolar Disorder, Empathy, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Patient Participation, Physician-Patient Relations, Prospective Studies, Quality of Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Logistic Models, Patient Satisfaction, Medication Adherence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review