Assessment tools of immediate risk of self-harm and suicide in children and young people: A scoping review.

There are increasing numbers of children presenting to paediatric hospital settings in mental health crisis. Typically, non-mental health professionals are responsible for the initial assessment of these children and are required to identify immediate physical and emotional health needs. To ensure the safety of these children, immediate risk of suicide and self-harm should be assessed. However, no standardized assessment tool is used in clinical practice, and for those tools that are used, their validity and reliability is unclear. A scoping review was conducted to identify the existing assessment tools of immediate self-harm and suicide risk. Searches of electronic databases and relevant reference lists were undertaken. Twenty-two tools were identified and most assessed acute risk of suicide with only four tools incorporating a self-harm assessment. The tools varied in number of items (4-146), subscales (0-11) and total scores (16-192). Half incorporated Likert-type scales, and most were completed via self-report. Many tools were subject to limited psychometric testing, and no single tool was valid or reliable for use with children presenting in mental health crisis to non-mental health settings. As such, a clinically appropriate, valid and reliable tool that assesses immediate risk of self-harm and suicide in paediatric settings should be developed.

Children and Young People-Mental Health Safety Assessment Tool (CYP-MH SAT) study: Protocol for the development and psychometric evaluation of an assessment tool to identify immediate risk of self-harm and suicide in children and young people (10-19 years) in acute paediatric hospital settings.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, no standardised, evidence-based assessment tool for assessing immediate self-harm and suicide in acute paediatric inpatient settings exists. AIM: The aim of this study is to develop and test the psychometric properties of an assessment tool that identifies immediate risk of self-harm and suicide in children and young people (10-19 years) in acute paediatric hospital settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Development phase: This phase involved a scoping review of the literature to identify and extract items from previously published suicide and self-harm risk assessment scales. Using a modified electronic Delphi approach, these items will then be rated according to their relevance for assessment of immediate suicide or self-harm risk by expert professionals. Inclusion of items will be determined by 65%-70% consensus between raters. Subsequently, a panel of expert members will convene to determine the face validity, appropriate phrasing, item order and response format for the finalised items.Psychometric testing phase: The finalised items will be tested for validity and reliability through a multicentre, psychometric evaluation. Psychometric testing will be undertaken to determine the following: internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, convergent, divergent validity and concurrent validity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was provided by the National Health Service East Midlands-Derby Research Ethics Committee (17/EM/0347) and full governance clearance received by the Health Research Authority and local participating sites. Findings from this study will be disseminated to professionals and the public via peer-reviewed journal publications, popular social media and conference presentations.

The impact of a computerised test of attention and activity (QbTest) on diagnostic decision-making in children and young people with suspected attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: single-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) relies on subjective methods which can lead to diagnostic uncertainty and delay. This trial evaluated the impact of providing a computerised test of attention and activity (QbTest) report on the speed and accuracy of diagnostic decision-making in children with suspected ADHD. METHODS: Randomised, parallel, single-blind controlled trial in mental health and community paediatric clinics in England. Participants were 6-17 years-old and referred for ADHD diagnostic assessment; all underwent assessment-as-usual, plus QbTest. Participants and their clinician were randomised to either receive the QbTest report immediately (QbOpen group) or the report was withheld (QbBlind group). The primary outcome was number of consultations until a diagnostic decision confirming/excluding ADHD within 6-months from baseline. Health economic cost-effectiveness and cost utility analysis was conducted. Assessing QbTest Utility in ADHD: A Randomised Controlled Trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02209116). RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-two participants were randomised to QbOpen group (123 analysed) and 135 to QbBlind group (127 analysed). Clinicians with access to the QbTest report (QbOpen) were more likely to reach a diagnostic decision about ADHD (hazard ratio 1.44, 95% CI 1.04-2.01). At 6-months, 76% of those with a QbTest report had received a diagnostic decision, compared with 50% without. QbTest reduced appointment length by 15% (time ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.93), increased clinicians' confidence in their diagnostic decisions (odds ratio 1.77, 95% CI 1.09-2.89) and doubled the likelihood of excluding ADHD. There was no difference in diagnostic accuracy. Health economic analysis showed a position of strict dominance; however, cost savings were small suggesting that the impact of providing the QbTest report within this trial can best be viewed as 'cost neutral'. CONCLUSIONS: QbTest may increase the efficiency of ADHD assessment pathway allowing greater patient throughput with clinicians reaching diagnostic decisions faster without compromising diagnostic accuracy.

Study of user experience of an objective test (QbTest) to aid ADHD assessment and medication management: a multi-methods approach.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis and monitoring of Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) typically relies on subjective reports and observations. Objective continuous performance tests (CPTs) have been incorporated into some services to support clinical decision making. However, the feasibility and acceptability of adding such a test into routine practice is unknown. The study aimed to investigate the feasibility and acceptability of adding an objective computerised test to the routine assessment and monitoring of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians (n = 10) and families (parents/young people, n = 20) who participated in a randomised controlled trial. Additionally, the same clinicians (n = 10) and families (n = 76) completed a survey assessing their experience of the QbTest. The study took place in child and adolescent mental health and community paediatric clinics across the UK. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Interviewed clinicians and families valued the QbTest for providing an objective, valid assessment of symptoms. The QbTest was noted to facilitate communication between clinicians, families and schools. However, whereas clinicians were more unanimous on the usefulness of the QbTest, survey findings showed that, although the majority of families found the test useful, less than half felt the QbTest helped them understand the clinician's decision making around diagnosis and medication. The QbTest was seen as a potentially valuable tool to use early in the assessment process to streamline the care pathway. Although clinicians were conscious of the additional costs, these could be offset by reductions in time to diagnosis and the delivery of the test by a Healthcare Assistant. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate the QbTest is an acceptable and feasible tool to implement in routine clinical settings. Clinicians should be mindful to discuss the QbTest results with families to enable their understanding and engagement with the process. Further findings from definitive trials are required to understand the cost/benefit; however, the findings from this study support the feasibility and acceptability of integrating QbTest in the ADHD care pathway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The findings form the implementation component of the Assessing QbTest Utility in ADHD (AQUA) Trial which is registered with the ISRCTN registry ( ISRCTN11727351 , retrospectively registered 04 July 2016) and clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02209116 , registered 04 August 2014).

Innovations in Practice: an objective measure of attention, impulsivity and activity reduces time to confirm attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder diagnosis in children - a completed audit cycle.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and young people typically relies on clinical observation and subjective parent, teacher and self-reports. The subjective nature of reports combined with contradictory or missing data can result in diagnostic uncertainty and delay. The aim of this study was to assess whether the addition of an objective test of attention, impulsivity and activity (QbTest) as an adjunct to standard ADHD assessment could accelerate the diagnostic process in routine National Health Service (NHS) settings. METHOD: In a pre vs. post-test audit design, case records were examined in 40 cases diagnosed without the QbTest [pre-QbTest group] and 40 cases diagnosed with the QbTest [QbTest group], recording the number of consultations until a confirmed ADHD diagnosis was reached. RESULTS: Using Poisson regression, significantly fewer clinician consultations (mean 2.18 vs. 3.05; p < .02) were required to confirm the diagnosis of ADHD when the QbTest was used to augment assessment in comparison to standard assessment as usual. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that the addition of the QbTest to standard clinical assessment may reduce time to diagnosis and potentially result in cost savings to the NHS. These preliminary data suggest that there is a potentially clinically meaningful benefit of adding the QbTest to routine clinical ADHD assessment and this should be examined next in the context of a randomised controlled trial.

The Falls In Care Home study: a feasibility randomized controlled trial of the use of a risk assessment and decision support tool to prevent falls in care homes.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the feasibility of implementing and evaluating the Guide to Action Care Home fall prevention intervention. DESIGN: Two-centre, cluster feasibility randomized controlled trial and process evaluation. SETTING: Purposive sample of six diverse old age/learning disability, long stay care homes in Nottinghamshire, UK. SUBJECTS: Residents aged over 50 years, who had fallen at least once in the past year, not bed-bound, hoist-dependent or terminally ill. INTERVENTIONS: Intervention homes (n = 3) received Guide to Action Care Home fall prevention intervention training and support. Control homes (n = 3) received usual care. OUTCOMES: Recruitment, attrition, baseline and six-month outcome completion, contamination and intervention fidelity, compliance, tolerability, acceptance and impact. RESULTS: A total of 81 of 145 (56%) care homes expressed participatory interest. Six of 22 letter respondent homes (27%) participated. The expected resident recruitment target was achieved by 76% (52/68). Ten (19%) residents did not complete follow-up (seven died, three moved). In intervention homes 36/114 (32%) staff attended training. Two of three (75%) care homes received protocol compliant training. Staff valued the training, but advised greater management involvement to improve intervention implementation. Fall risks were assessed, actioned and recorded in care records. Of 115 recorded falls, 533/570 (93%) of details were complete. Six-month resident fall rates were 1.9 and 4.0 per year for intervention and control homes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The Guide to Action Care Home is implementable under trial conditions. Recruitment and follow-up rates indicate that a definitive trial can be completed. Falls (primary outcome) can be ascertained reliably from care records.

The clinical utility of the continuous performance test and objective measures of activity for diagnosing and monitoring ADHD in children: a systematic review.

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is typically diagnosed using clinical observation and subjective informant reports. Once children commence ADHD medication, robust monitoring is required to detect partial or non-responses. The extent to which neuropsychological continuous performance tests (CPTs) and objective measures of activity can clinically aid the assessment and titration process in ADHD is not fully understood. This review describes the current evidence base for the use of CPTs and objectively measured activity to support the diagnostic procedure and medication management for children with ADHD. Four databases (PsycINFO, Medline, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), and PsycARTICLES) were systematically searched to understand the current evidence base for (1) the use of CPTs to aid clinical assessment of ADHD; (2) the use of CPTs to aid medication management; and (3) the clinical utility of objective measures of activity in ADHD. Sixty relevant articles were identified. The search revealed six commercially available CPTs that had been reported on for their clinical use. There were mixed findings with regard to the use of CPTs to assess and manage medication, with contrasting evidence on their ability to support clinical decision-making. There was a strong evidence base for the use of objective measures of activity to aid ADHD/non-ADHD group differentiation, which appears sensitive to medication effects and would also benefit from further research on their clinical utility. The findings suggest that combining CPTs and an objective measure of activity may be particularly useful as a clinical tool and worthy of further pursuit.

Protocol investigating the clinical utility of an objective measure of activity and attention (QbTest) on diagnostic and treatment decision-making in children and young people with ADHD-'Assessing QbTest Utility in ADHD' (AQUA): a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) state that young people need to have access to the best evidence-based care to improve outcome. The current 'gold standard' ADHD diagnostic assessment combines clinical observation with subjective parent, teacher and self-reports. In routine practice, reports from multiple informants may be unavailable or contradictory, leading to diagnostic uncertainty and delay. The addition of objective tests of attention and activity may help reduce diagnostic uncertainty and delays in initiating treatment leading to improved outcomes. This trial investigates whether providing clinicians with an objective report of levels of attention, impulsivity and activity can lead to an earlier, and more accurate, clinical diagnosis and improved patient outcome. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multisite randomised controlled trial will recruit young people (aged 6-17 years old) who have been referred for an ADHD diagnostic assessment at Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) and Community Paediatric clinics across England. Routine clinical assessment will be augmented by the QbTest, incorporating a continuous performance test (CPT) and infrared motion tracking of activity. The participant will be randomised into one of two study arms: QbOpen (clinician has immediate access to a QbTest report): QbBlind (report is withheld until the study end). Primary outcomes are time to diagnosis and diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes include clinician's diagnostic confidence and routine clinical outcome measures. Cost-effective analysis will be conducted, alongside a qualitative assessment of the feasibility and acceptability of incorporating QbTest in routine practice. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The findings from the study will inform commissioners, clinicians and managers about the feasibility, acceptability, clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of incorporating QbTest into routine diagnostic assessment of young people with ADHD. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. The study has received ethical approval. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02209116.