Suchergebnisse

Background: Participant safety is an important concern in mental-health-oriented research. Investigators conducting studies in the United States that include potentially suicidal individuals are often required to develop written suicide risk management (SRM) protocols. But little is known about these protocols. It is possible that such protocols could serve as templates for suicide risk management in clinical settings. Aims: To elucidate common (best) practices from mental health intervention researchers. Methods: We conducted a systematic descriptive analysis of written SRM protocols. A convenience sample of studies funded by the United States' National Institute of Mental Health in 2005 were scanned to discover projects in which investigators were likely to identify and take responsibility for suicide risk in their participant pool. Qualitative methodology was used to create a checklist of tasks perceived to be operationally significant for insuring the safety of suicidal participants. The checklist was applied to all protocols to determine the variability of patient safety tasks across protocols. Results: We identified 45 candidate studies, whereof 38 investigators were contacted, resulting in the review of 21 SRM protocols. Three main categories emerged: overview, entry/exit, and process. Overall, 19 specific tasks were identified. Task frequency varied from 7% to 95% across protocols. Conclusions: The SRM checklist provides a framework for comparing the content of SRM protocols. This checklist may assist in developing SRM protocols in a wide range of settings. Developing guidelines and standard methodologies is an important step to further development of suicide prevention strategies. More research is necessary to determine the impact of SRM protocols on participant safety.

An integrated, collaborative model for more comprehensive patient care Creating Effective Mental and Primary Health Care Teams provides the practical information, skills, and clinical approaches needed to implement an integrated collaborative care program and support the members of the care team as they learn this new, evidence-based, legislatively mandated care delivery system. Unique in presenting information specifically designed to be used in an integrated, collaborative care workflow, this book provides specific guidance for each member of the team. Care managers, consulting psychiatrists, primary care providers, and administrators alike can finally get on the same page in regard to patient care by referring to the same resource and employing a common framework. Written by recognized experts with broad research, clinical, implementation, and training experience, this book provides a complete solution to the problem of fragmented care. Escalating costs and federal legislation expanding access to healthcare are forcing the industry to transition to a new model of health care delivery. This book provides guidance on navigating the changes as a team to provide the best possible patient care.-Integrate physical and behavioral care -Use evidence-based treatments for both -Exploit leading-edge technology for patient management -Support each member of the collaborative care team Strong evidence has demonstrated the efficacy of a collaborative care approach for delivering mental health care to patients in a primary care setting. The field is rapidly growing, but few resources are available and working models are limited. This book provides a roadmap for transitioning from traditional methods of health care to the new integrated model. Providers ready to move to the next level of care will find Creating Effective Mental and Primary Health Care Teams an invaluable resource

Abstract. Background: Suicide rates in older men are higher than in the general population, yet their utilization of mental health services is lower. Aims: This study aimed to describe: (a) what primary care providers (PCPs) can do to prevent late-life suicide, and (b) older men's attitudes toward discussing suicide with a PCP. Method: Thematic analysis of interviews focused on depression and suicide with 77 depressed, low-socioeconomic status, older men of Mexican origin, or US-born non-Hispanic whites recruited from primary care. Results: Several themes inhibiting suicide emerged: it is a problematic solution, due to religious prohibition, conflicts with self-image, the impact on others; and, lack of means/capacity. Three approaches to preventing suicide emerged: talking with them about depression, talking about the impact of their suicide on others, and encouraging them to be active. The vast majority, 98%, were open to such conversations. An unexpected theme spontaneously arose: "What prevents men from acting on suicidal thoughts?" Conclusion: Suicide is rarely discussed in primary care encounters in the context of depression treatment. Our study suggests that older men are likely to be open to discussing suicide with their PCP. We have identified several pragmatic approaches to assist clinicians in reducing older men's distress and preventing suicide.

The collaborative care model is an evidence-based intervention for behavioral and other chronic conditions that has the potential to address the large burden of mental illness globally. Using the World Health Organization Health Systems Framework, the authors present challenges in implementing this model in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and discuss strategies to address these challenges based on experiences with three large-scale programs: an implementation research study in a district- level government hospital in rural Nepal, one clinical trial in 50 primary health centers in rural India, and one study in four diabetes clinics in India. Several strategies can be utilized to address implementation challenges and enhance scalability in LMICs, including mobilizing community resources, engaging in advocacy, and strengthening the overall health care delivery system.

Purpose: Veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) lose less weight in the Veterans Affairs (VA) weight management program (MOVE!), so we developed MOVE!+UP. Design: Single-arm pre–post pilot to iteratively develop MOVE!+UP (2015-2018). Setting: Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Participants: Overweight Veterans with PTSD (5 cohorts of n = 5-11 [N = 44]; n = 39 received ≥1 MOVE+UP session, with cohorts 1-4 [n = 31] = "Development" and cohort 5 [n = 8] = "Final" MOVE!+UP). Intervention: MOVE!+UP weight management for Veterans with PTSD modified after each cohort. Final MOVE!+UP was coled by a licensed clinical psychologist and Veteran peer counselor in 16 two-hour in-person group sessions and 2 individual dietician visits. Sessions included general weight loss support (eg, behavioral monitoring with facilitator feedback, weekly weighing), cognitive-behavioral skills to address PTSD-specific barriers, and a 30-minute walk to a nearby park. Measures: To inform post-cohort modifications, we assessed weight, PTSD, and treatment targets (eg, physical activity, diet), and conducted qualitative interviews. Analysis: Baseline to 16-week paired t tests and template analysis. Results: Development cohorts suggested improvements (eg, additional sessions and weight loss information, professional involvement) and did not lose weight (mean [ M] = 1.8 lbs (standard deviation [SD] = 8.2); P = .29. Conversely, the final cohort reported high satisfaction and showed meaningful weight ( M = −14 pounds [SD = 3.7] and 71% lost ≥5% baseline weight) and PTSD ( M = −17.9 [SD = 12.2]) improvements, P < .05. Conclusions: The comprehensive, 16-week, in-person, cofacilitated Final MOVE!+UP was acceptable and may improve the health of people with PTSD. Iterative development likely produced a patient-centered intervention, needing further testing.

Funding for the mhGAP Programme, under which the work reported in this manuscript was done, was provided by the following: American Psychiatric Foundation, USA; Association of Aichi Psychiatric Hospitals, Japan; Autism Speaks, USA; CBM; Government of Italy; Government of Japan; Government of The Netherlands; International Bureau for Epilepsy; International League Against Epilepsy; Medical Research Council, UK; National Institute of Mental Health, USA; Public Health Agency of Canada, Canada; Rockefeller Foundation, USA; Shirley Foundation, UK; Syngenta, Switzerland; United Nations Population Fund;World Psychiatric Association