Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to evaluate the feasibility of a screening test for looked after children in order to identify undetected psychiatric disorders.Design/methodology/approachChildren aged four to 16 in care in one London Borough for four consecutive months were eligible for screening. Carers, teachers and children aged over 11 were asked to complete the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Where the SDQ suggested that a psychiatric disorder was "possible" or "probable", participants were then invited to complete the Developmental and Well‐Being Assessment, which was rated by a senior psychiatrist to generate diagnoses if appropriate.FindingsThe paper finds that over one year, 23 children were eligible for screening. A total of 18 underwent the initial stage of screening, and seven were subsequently diagnosed with a formal psychiatric disorder.Originality/valueThis study illustrates the unmet need for mental health interventions among children looked after by the local authority and confirms the feasibility of a simple screening protocol.

Background: despite evidence-based national guidelines for ADHD in the United Kingdom (UK), ADHD is under-identified, under-diagnosed, and under-treated. Many seeking help for ADHD face prejudice, long waiting lists, and patchy or unavailable services, and are turning to service-user support groups and/or private healthcare for help. Methods: a group of UK experts representing clinical and healthcare providers from public and private healthcare, academia, ADHD patient groups, educational, and occupational specialists, met to discuss shortfalls in ADHD service provision in the UK. Discussions explored causes of under-diagnosis, examined biases operating across referral, diagnosis and treatment, together with recommendations for resolving these matters. Results: cultural and structural barriers operate at all levels of the healthcare system, resulting in a de-prioritization of ADHD. Services for ADHD are insufficient in many regions, and problems with service provision have intensified as a result of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Research has established a range of adverse outcomes of untreated ADHD, and associated long-term personal, social, health and economic costs are high. The consensus group called for training of professionals who come into contact with people with ADHD, increased funding, commissioning and monitoring to improve service provision, and streamlined communication between health services to support better outcomes for people with ADHD. Conclusions: evidence-based national clinical guidelines for ADHD are not being met. People with ADHD should have access to healthcare free from discrimination, and in line with their legal rights. UK Governments and clinical and regulatory bodies must act urgently on this important public health issue.

Publisher's version (útgefin grein) ; Background: Despite evidence-based national guidelines for ADHD in the United Kingdom (UK), ADHD is under-identified, under-diagnosed, and under-treated. Many seeking help for ADHD face prejudice, long waiting lists, and patchy or unavailable services, and are turning to service-user support groups and/or private healthcare for help. Methods: A group of UK experts representing clinical and healthcare providers from public and private healthcare, academia, ADHD patient groups, educational, and occupational specialists, met to discuss shortfalls in ADHD service provision in the UK. Discussions explored causes of under-diagnosis, examined biases operating across referral, diagnosis and treatment, together with recommendations for resolving these matters. Young et al. Failure of ADHD Healthcare Provision Results: Cultural and structural barriers operate at all levels of the healthcare system, resulting in a de-prioritization of ADHD. Services for ADHD are insufficient in many regions, and problems with service provision have intensified as a result of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Research has established a range of adverse outcomes of untreated ADHD, and associated long-term personal, social, health and economic costs are high. The consensus group called for training of professionals who come into contact with people with ADHD, increased funding, commissioning and monitoring to improve service provision, and streamlined communication between health services to support better outcomes for people with ADHD. Conclusions: Evidence-based national clinical guidelines for ADHD are not being met. People with ADHD should have access to healthcare free from discrimination, and in line with their legal rights. UK Governments and clinical and regulatory bodies must act urgently on this important public health issue. ; The meeting was jointly funded by the ADHD Foundation, the UK Adult ADHD Network (UKAAN), and the UK ADHD Partnership (UKAP). Other than reimbursement of travel expenses to attend the meeting, none of the authors received any financial compensation for attending the meeting or writing the manuscript, aside from CS who was remunerated for her time. PA was supported by NIHR Biomedical Research Center for Mental Health, NIHR/MRC (14/23/17) and NIHR senior investigator award (NF-SI-0616-10040). TN-D was funded by an NIHR Advanced Fellowship (NIHR300056). The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health and Social Care. ; Peer Reviewed (ritrýnd grein)

The UK's National Health Service (NHS) generates uniquely rich data that should be rapidly deployed for policy and service improvement, yet researchers report difficulties in accessing these data. Paradoxically, these restrictions are occurring at the same time as the open science movement, which encourages data sharing to improve the rigour, transparency, and replicability of research. We describe the urgency of improvements to data access and propose solutions from a mental health research perspective, although the issues discussed extend to all areas in which analysis and linkage of health data support policy and practice. Actions are needed at every level, from data users and data custodians to government (panel).