Skip to content
Review Open access

Adjunctive psychosocial interventions for children and adolescents with bipolar spectrum disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Oct 2026 · European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · 0 citations · 70 references
Medicine

Abstract

Identifying effective treatments is essential for improving long-term outcomes in children and adolescents (C&A) with bipolar spectrum disorder (BSD), for whom evidence-based psychosocial interventions remain limited. This PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42024552462) synthesized the evidence on psychosocial interventions for C&A with BSD. Databases were searched until July 1, 2025, including studies with or without control groups. Data extraction was conducted independently. RoB 2 was used for RCTs and ROBINS-I for non-randomized studies. Twenty-eight studies from 16 independent samples were included (mean age = 15.02 ± 1.76 years; 59.13% females), encompassing interventions focused on psychoeducation, cognitive-behavioral strategies, skills training, and family involvement. Evidence varied across intervention types, developmental stages, treatment durations, and study designs. In pre-post analyses, significant reductions were observed in depressive (Hedges' g = 0.586, 95% CI = 0.282-0.889) and manic symptoms (Hedges' g = 0.485, 95% CI = 0.293-0.678). In mixed-design controlled analyses, CBT-based multicomponent intervention showed preliminary evidence of greater reductions in depressive (Hedges' g = 0.390, 95% CI = 0.114-0.666; K = 3, N = 117) and manic symptoms (Hedges' g = 0.718, 95% CI = 0.303-1.133; K = 3, N = 117) compared with control conditions. Among RCT publications, 1 (5.9%) was judged to be at low risk of bias and 16 (94.1%) as having some concerns; all 11 non-randomized studies were judged to be at serious risk of bias. Overall, adjunctive psychosocial interventions may improve mood symptoms, but controlled estimates from three studies, including one small non-randomized study, are preliminary, potentially unstable, and sensitive to its inclusion. The limited number of high-quality randomized trials highlights the need for rigorous research to clarify intervention components and inform clinical care.

Read PDF

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.