Screening for postpartum depression and risk of suicidality with obstetrical patients: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy is a vulnerable time where the physical and social stress of the COVID-19 pandemic affects psychological health, including postpartum depression (PPD). This study is designed to estimate the prevalence and correlates of PPD and risk of suicidality among individuals who gave birth during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We surveyed individuals who gave birth at The Ottawa Hospital and were ≥ 20 days postpartum, between March 17 and June 16, 2020. A PPD screen consisted of a score ≥ 13 using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. A score of 1, 2, or 3 on item 10 ("The thought of harming myself has occurred to me") indicates risk of suicidality. If a participant scores greater than ≥ 13 or ≥ 1 on item 10 they were flagged for PPD, the Principal Investigator (DEC) was notified within 24 h of survey completion for a chart review and to assure follow-up. Modified Poisson multivariable regression models were used to identify factors associated with PPD and risk of suicidality using adjusted risk ratios (aRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Of the 216 respondents, 64 (30%) screened positive for PPD and 17 (8%) screened positive for risk of suicidality. The maternal median age of the total sample was 33 years (IQR: 30-36) and the infant median age at the time of the survey was 76 days (IQR: 66-90). Most participants reported some form of positive coping strategies during the pandemic (97%) (e.g. connecting with friends and family, exercising, getting professional help) and 139 (64%) reported negative coping patterns (e.g. over/under eating, sleep problems). In total, 47 (22%) had pre-pregnancy anxiety and/or depression. Negative coping (aRR:2.90, 95% CI: 1.56-5.37) and pre-existing anxiety/depression (aRR:2.03, 95% CI:1.32-3.11) were associated with PPD. Pre-existing anxiety/depression (aRR:3.16, 95% CI:1.28-7.81) was associated with risk of suicidality. CONCLUSIONS: Almost a third of participants in this study screened positive for PPD and 8% for risk of suicidality. Mental health screening and techniques to foster positive coping skills/strategies are important areas to optimize postpartum mental health.

Primary care for individuals with serious mental illness (PriSMI): protocol for a convergent mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: People with serious mental illness (SMI) have poor health outcomes, in part because of inequitable access to quality health services. Primary care is well suited to coordinate and manage care for this population; however, providers may feel ill-equipped to do so and patients may not have the support and resources required to coordinate their care. We lack a strong understanding of prevention and management of chronic disease in primary care among people with SMI as well as the context-specific barriers that exist at the patient, provider and system levels. This mixed methods study will answer three research questions: (1) How do primary care services received by people living with SMI differ from those received by the general population? (2) What are the experiences of people with SMI in accessing and receiving chronic disease prevention and management in primary care? (3) What are the experiences of primary care providers in caring for individuals with SMI? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a concurrent mixed methods study in Ontario and British Columbia, Canada, including quantitative analyses of linked administrative data and in-depth qualitative interviews with people living with SMI and primary care providers. By comparing across two provinces, each with varying degrees of mental health service investment and different primary care models, results will shed light on individual and system-level factors that facilitate or impede quality preventive and chronic disease care for people with SMI in the primary care setting. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the University of Ottawa Research Ethics Board and partner institutions. An integrated knowledge translation approach brings together researchers, providers, policymakers, decision-makers, patient and caregiver partners and knowledge users. Working with this team, we will develop policy-relevant recommendations for improvements to primary care systems that will better support providers and reduce health inequities.

Enhancing COVID Rehabilitation with Technology (ECORT): protocol for an open-label, single-site randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of electronic case management for individuals with persistent COVID-19 symptoms.

BACKGROUND: As of May 2022, Ontario has seen more than 1.3 million cases of COVID-19. While the majority of individuals will recover from infection within 4 weeks, a significant subset experience persistent and often debilitating symptoms, known as "post-COVID syndrome" or "Long COVID." Those with Long COVID experience a wide array of symptoms, with variable severity, including fatigue, cognitive impairment, and shortness of breath. Further, the prevalence and duration of Long COVID is not clear, nor is there evidence on the best course of rehabilitation for individuals to return to their desired level of function. Previous work with chronic conditions has suggested that the addition of electronic case management (ECM) may help to improve outcomes. These platforms provide enhanced connection with care providers, detailed symptom tracking and goal setting, and access to relevant resources. In this study, our primary aim is to determine if the addition of ECM with health coaching improves Long COVID outcomes at 3 months compared to health coaching alone. METHODS: The trial is an open-label, single-site, randomized controlled trial of ECM with health coaching (ECM+) compared to health coaching alone (HC). Both groups will continue to receive usual care. Participants will be randomized equally to receive health coaching (± ECM) for a period of 8 weeks and a 12-week follow-up. Our primary outcome is the WHO Disability Assessment Scale (WHODAS), 36-item self-report total score. Participants will also complete measures of cognition, fatigue, breathlessness, and mental health. Participants and care providers will be asked to complete a brief qualitative interview at the end of the study to evaluate acceptability and implementation of the intervention. DISCUSSION: There is currently little evidence about the optimal treatment of Long COVID patients or the use of digital health platforms in this population. The results of this trial could result in rapid, scalable, and personalized care for people with Long COVID which will decrease morbidity after an acute infection. Results from this study will also inform decision making in Long COVID and treatment guidelines at provincial and national levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05019963. Registered on 25 August 2021.

Homelessness and health-related outcomes: an umbrella review of observational studies and randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Homelessness has been associated with multiple detrimental health outcomes across observational studies. However, relatively few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted on people who experience homelessness (PEH). Thus, this umbrella review ranked the credibility of evidence derived from systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) of observational studies investigating the associations between homelessness and any health outcome as well as RCTs targeting health needs in this population. METHODS: Several databases were systematically searched from inception through April 28, 2021. Any SR and/or MA reporting quantitative data and providing a control group were eligible for inclusion. The credibility of the evidence derived from observational studies was appraised by considering the significance level of the association and the largest study, the degree of heterogeneity, the presence of small-study effects as well as excess significance bias. The credibility of evidence was then ranked in five classes. For SRs and/or MAs of RCTs, we considered the level of significance and whether the prediction interval crossed the null. The AMSTAR-2 and AMSTAR-plus instruments were adopted to further assess the methodological quality of SRs and/or MAs. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was employed to further appraise the methodological quality of prospective cohort studies only; a sensitivity analysis limited to higher quality studies was conducted. RESULTS: Out of 1549 references, 8 MAs and 2 SRs were included. Among those considering observational studies, 23 unique associations were appraised. Twelve of them were statistically significant at the p≤0.005 level. Included cases had worst health-related outcomes than controls, but only two associations reached a priori-defined criteria for convincing (class I) evidence namely hospitalization due to any cause among PEH diagnosed with HIV infection, and the occurrence of falls within the past year among PEH. According to the AMSTAR-2 instrument, the methodological quality of all included SRs and/or MAs was "critically low." Interventional studies were scant. CONCLUSION: While homelessness has been repeatedly associated with detrimental health outcomes, only two associations met the criteria for convincing evidence. Furthermore, few RCTs were appraised by SRs and/or MAs. Our umbrella review also highlights the need to standardize definitions of homelessness to be incorporated by forthcoming studies to improve the external validity of the findings in this vulnerable population.

Engaging in resuscitation status conversations in psychiatry: A qualitative study of nurses' perspectives.

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Discussion and documentation of a patient's resuscitation status are essential aspects of any hospital admission, and yet, they seldomly occur in psychiatry. Nurses play an important role in resuscitation status determination by being an information broker, supporter and advocate. Persons with mental illness may be competent to engage in the determination of their resuscitation status and deserve the same respect and autonomy as other patients during this process. There are no published qualitative studies exploring healthcare providers experiences in initiating resuscitation status conversations in the psychiatric setting. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: An in-depth qualitative understanding of the complexity of resuscitation status determination in psychiatry. The shared experiences of nurses enacting their role in resuscitation status determination with patients admitted to psychiatry. The challenges of implementing a 'one-size fits all' approach to resuscitation status policies, and the ways in which depression and/or suicidal ideation influence the process. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Role clarity and improved communication between providers about resuscitation status determination in psychiatry are needed. Hospital policies for resuscitation status determination must account for the psychiatric context to ensure patients' goals of care are known and upheld. Nurses working in psychiatry should initiate and more readily engage in resuscitation status conversations. ABSTRACT: Introduction Patients with mental illness experience stigma and marginalization, which affects the quality of their health care. In most settings, end-of-life decisions, including goals of care, must be discussed with all patients upon hospital admission, including determining cardiopulmonary resuscitation preferences in the event of a medical emergency. Despite this requirement, these conversations do not routinely occur in inpatient psychiatry. By default, patients become a 'full code status', mandating life-sustaining interventions. Aim To explore how and why resuscitation status conversations occur, or do not occur, in inpatient psychiatry from the perspectives of healthcare providers. Method Qualitative descriptive study using focus groups with nurses working in psychiatry. Results Nurses' experiences with initiating and engaging in resuscitation status conversations related to Working in Psychiatry, which represents the current practices and the participants' views of the nursing role; Caring for Psychiatric Patients, which describes how fluctuating competency and suicidality influence determination; and The Influence of Physical Health Status, which details how differences in physical health status affect how healthcare providers engage in resuscitation status determination. Discussion Although the importance of completing resuscitation status conversations with patients admitted to psychiatry was expressed by participants, they seldomly occur. There is ambiguity about when and how to determine patient wishes. Implications for practice Tailored strategies are needed to ensure patients' rights to self-determination are upheld when they are admitted to psychiatry. Nurses working in this setting would benefit from education, training and support to adequately initiate and engage in these conversations.

Interventions to improve emergency department use for mental health reasons: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare resources are limited and unnecessary, and inappropriate emergency department use is now a highly visible healthcare priority. Individuals visiting the emergency department for mental health-related reasons are often amongst the most frequent presenters. In response, researchers and clinicians have created interventions to streamline emergency department use and several primary studies describe the effects of these interventions. Yet, no consensus exists on the optimal approach, and information on the quality of development, effectiveness, acceptability, and economic considerations is hard to find. The purpose of this study is to systematically review interventions designed to improve appropriate use of the emergency department for mental health reasons. METHOD: A mixed-method systematic review using Joanna Briggs Methodology. Search combining electronic databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, PROQUEST, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health) and secondary searches (grey literature and hand search with consultation). Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts using predetermined eligibility criteria and a third reviewer will resolve conflicts. Full texts will also be screened by two independent reviews and conflicts resolved in a consensus meeting with a third reviewer. A pilot-tested data extraction form will be used to retrieve data relevant to the study objectives. We will assess the quality and of all included studies. Data describing interventions will be summarized using logic models and reported narratively. Quality of development will be assessed using the Oxford Implementation Index. For data on intervention effectiveness, we will assess statistical heterogeneity and conduct a meta-analysis using a random effects method, if appropriate. For interventions that cannot be pooled, we will report outcomes narratively and descriptively. Qualitative data on acceptability will be synthesized using meta-aggregation and an economic evaluation of interventions will be done. The reporting of this protocol follows the PRISMA-P statement. DISCUSSION: Using a combined systematic review methodology and integrated knowledge translation plan, the project will provide decision makers with concrete evidence to support the implementation and evaluation of interventions to improve emergency department use for mental health reasons. These interventions reflect widespread priorities in the area of mental health care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018087430.

Hepatitis C patient communication source and modality preferences in the direct-acting antiviral era.

Background: Although hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment has improved dramatically, decision making related to treatment continues to be complex and challenging. Little data exists regarding patient information needs and preferences in the direct-acting antiviral (DAA) era. Methods: We evaluated patient-perceived information needs and preferences when making HCV treatment decisions. A cross-sectional survey was conducted at two Ottawa-based sites: a hospital-located outpatient viral hepatitis clinic, and a community-based HCV patient support program. Results: One hundred and seventeen patients completed the survey: the mean age was 52.1 years (range 23 to 78), and 64% were male, 81.5% were White, 48.6% were on disability support or leave, and 60.3% had a high school education or less. Although traditional sources of health information (e.g., direct communication with health care providers) remain preferred by most, a range of preferences were reported including utilization of newer technologies (e.g., emails, text messages). The telephone was rated as the preferred method of contact for medication reminders, with daily or weekly communication reported as most helpful. White participants, those more highly educated, and those with a higher income all indicated a greater acceptability for e-mail and/or text message communication for medication and appointment reminders. Conclusions: There is no single preferred source or method of communicating with patients. These findings indicate that a tailored multi-pronged approach, including newer technologies, is more likely to effectively educate and communicate with the heterogeneous population of individuals living with HCV.