Examining the Use of Autonomous Systems for Home Health Support Using a Smart Mirror.

The home is becoming a key location for healthcare delivery, including the use of technology driven by autonomous systems (AS) to monitor and support healthcare plans. Using the example of a smart mirror, this paper describes the outcomes of focus groups with people with multiple sclerosis (MS; n = 6) and people who have had a stroke (n = 15) to understand their attitudes towards the use of AS for healthcare in the home. Qualitative data were analysed using a thematic analysis. The results indicate that the use of such technology depends on the level of adaptability and responsiveness to users' specific circumstances, including their relationships with the healthcare system. A smart mirror would need to support manual entry, responsive goal setting, the effective aggregation of data sources and integration with other technology, have a range of input methods, be supportive rather than prescriptive in messaging, and give the user full control of their data. The barriers to its adoption include a perceived lack of portability and practicality, a lack of accessibility and inclusivity, a sense of redundancy, feeling overwhelmed by multiple technological devices, and a lack of trust in data sharing. These results inform the development and deployment of future health technologies based on the lived experiences of people with health conditions who require ongoing care.

Inequalities and mental health during the Coronavirus pandemic in the UK: a mixed-methods exploration.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organisation declared the novel Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) a global pandemic on 11th March 2020. Since then, the world has been firmly in its grip. At the time of writing, there were more than 767,972,961 million confirmed cases and over 6,950,655 million deaths. While the main policy focus has been on controlling the virus and ensuring vaccine roll-out and uptake, the population mental health impacts of the pandemic are expected to be long-term, with certain population groups affected more than others. METHODS: The overall objectives of our 'Coronavirus: Mental Health and the Pandemic' study were to explore UK adults' experiences of the Coronavirus pandemic and to gain insights into the mental health impacts, population-level changes over time, current and future mental health needs, and how these can best be addressed. The wider mixed-methods study consisted of repeated cross-sectional surveys and embedded qualitative sub-studies including in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with the wider UK adult population. For this particular inequalities and mental health sub-study, we used mixed methods data from our cross-sectional surveys and we carried out three Focus Group Discussions with a maximum variation sample from across the UK adult population. The discussions covered the broader topic of 'Inequalities and mental health during the Coronavirus pandemic in the UK' and took place online between April and August 2020. Focus Groups transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis in NVIVO. Cross-sectional survey data were analysed using STATA for descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Three broad main themes emerged, each supporting a number of sub-themes: (1) Impacts of the pandemic; (2) Moving forward: needs and recommendations; (3) Coping mechanisms and resilience. Findings showed that participants described their experiences of the pandemic in relation to its impact on themselves and on different groups of people. Their experiences illustrated how the pandemic and subsequent measures had exacerbated existing inequalities and created new ones, and triggered various emotional responses. Participants also described their coping strategies and what worked and did not work for them, as well as support needs and recommendations for moving forward through, and out of, the pandemic; all of which are valuable learnings to be considered in policy making for improving mental health and for ensuring future preparedness. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic is taking a long-term toll on the nations' mental health which will continue to have impacts for years to come. It is therefore crucial to learn the vital lessons learned from this pandemic. Specific as well as whole-government policies need to respond to this, address inequalities and the different needs across the life-course and across society, and take a holistic approach to mental health improvement across the UK.

Effects of ethnic density on the risk of compulsory psychiatric admission for individuals attending secondary care mental health services: evidence from a large-scale study in England.

BACKGROUND: Black, Asian and minority ethnicity groups may experience better health outcomes when living in areas of high own-group ethnic density - the so-called 'ethnic density' hypothesis. We tested this hypothesis for the treatment outcome of compulsory admission. METHODS: Data from the 2010-2011 Mental Health Minimum Dataset (N = 1 053 617) was linked to the 2011 Census and 2010 Index of Multiple Deprivation. Own-group ethnic density was calculated by dividing the number of residents per ethnic group for each lower layer super output area (LSOA) in the Census by the LSOA total population. Multilevel modelling estimated the effect of own-group ethnic density on the risk of compulsory admission by ethnic group (White British, White other, Black, Asian and mixed), accounting for patient characteristics (age and gender), area-level deprivation and population density. RESULTS: Asian and White British patients experienced a reduced risk of compulsory admission when living in the areas of high own-group ethnic density [odds ratios (OR) 0.97, 95% credible interval (CI) 0.95-0.99 and 0.94, 95% CI 0.93-0.95, respectively], whereas White minority patients were at increased risk when living in neighbourhoods of higher own-group ethnic concentration (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.11-1.26). Higher levels of own-group ethnic density were associated with an increased risk of compulsory admission for mixed-ethnicity patients, but only when deprivation and population density were excluded from the model. Neighbourhood-level concentration of own-group ethnicity for Black patients did not influence the risk of compulsory admission. CONCLUSIONS: We found only minimal support for the ethnic density hypothesis for the treatment outcome of compulsory admission to under the Mental Health Act.

The mental health experiences of ethnic minorities in the UK during the Coronavirus pandemic: A qualitative exploration.

Background: Worldwide, the Coronavirus pandemic has had a major impact on people's health, lives, and livelihoods. However, this impact has not been felt equally across various population groups. People from ethnic minority backgrounds in the UK have been more adversely affected by the pandemic, especially in terms of their physical health. Their mental health, on the other hand, has received less attention. This study aimed to explore the mental health experiences of UK adults from ethnic minorities during the Coronavirus pandemic. This work forms part of our wider long-term UK population study "Mental Health in the Pandemic." Methods: We conducted an exploratory qualitative study with people from ethnic minority communities across the UK. A series of in-depth interviews were conducted with 15 women, 14 men and 1 non-binary person from ethnic minority backgrounds, aged between 18 and 65 years old (mean age = 40). We utilized purposefully selected maximum variation sampling in order to capture as wide a variety of views, perceptions and experiences as possible. Inclusion criteria: adults (18+) from ethnic minorities across the UK; able to provide full consent to participate; able to participate in a video- or phone-call interview. All interviews took place via MS Teams or Zoom. The gathered data were transcribed verbatim and underwent thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke carried out using NVivo 12 software. Results: The qualitative data analysis yielded seven overarching themes: (1) pandemic-specific mental health and wellbeing experiences; (2) issues relating to the media; (3) coping mechanisms; (4) worries around and attitudes toward vaccination; (5) suggestions for support in moving forward; (6) best and worst experiences during pandemic and lockdowns; (7) biggest areas of change in personal life. Generally, participants' mental health experiences varied with some not being affected by the pandemic in a way related to their ethnicity, some sharing positive experiences and coping strategies (exercising more, spending more time with family, community cohesion), and some expressing negative experiences (eating or drinking more, feeling more isolated, or even racism and abuse, especially toward Asian communities). Concerns were raised around trust issues in relation to the media, the inadequate representation of ethnic minorities, and the spread of fake news especially on social media. Attitudes toward vaccinations varied too, with some people more willing to have the vaccine than others. Conclusion: This study's findings highlight the diversity in the pandemic mental health experiences of ethnic minorities in the UK and has implications for policy, practice and further research. To enable moving forward beyond the pandemic, our study surfaced the need for culturally appropriate mental health support, financial support (as a key mental health determinant), accurate media representation, and clear communication messaging from the Governments of the UK.

Concerns about the use of polygenic embryo screening for psychiatric and cognitive traits.

Private companies have begun offering services to allow parents undergoing in-vitro fertilisation to screen embryos for genetic risk of complex diseases, including psychiatric disorders. This procedure, called polygenic embryo screening, raises several difficult scientific and ethical issues, as discussed in this Personal View. Polygenic embryo screening depends on the statistical properties of polygenic risk scores, which are complex and not well studied in the context of this proposed clinical application. The clinical, social, and ethical implications of polygenic embryo screening have barely been discussed among relevant stakeholders. To our knowledge, the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics is the first professional biomedical organisation to issue a statement regarding polygenic embryo screening. For the reasons discussed in this Personal View, the Society urges caution and calls for additional research and oversight on the use of polygenic embryo screening.

Mental health in the pandemic: a repeated cross-sectional mixed-method study protocol to investigate the mental health impacts of the coronavirus pandemic in the UK.

INTRODUCTION: The WHO declared a global pandemic on 11 March 2020. Since then, the world has been firmly in the grip of the COVID-19. To date, more than 211 730 035 million confirmed cases and more than 4 430 697 million people have died. While controlling the virus and implementing vaccines are the main priorities, the population mental health impacts of the pandemic are expected to be longer term and are less obvious than the physical health ones. Lockdown restrictions, physical distancing, social isolation, as well as the loss of a loved one, working in a frontline capacity and loss of economic security may have negative effects on and increase the mental health challenges in populations around the world. There is a major demand for long-term research examining the mental health experiences and needs of people in order to design adequate policies and interventions for sustained action to respond to individual and population mental health needs both during and after the pandemic. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This repeated cross-sectional mixed-method study conducts regular self-administered representative surveys, and targeted focus groups and semi-structured interviews with adults in the UK, as well as validation of gathered evidence through citizens' juries for contextualisation (for the UK as a whole and for its four devolved nations) to ensure that emerging mental health problems are identified early on and are properly understood, and that appropriate policies and interventions are developed and implemented across the UK and within devolved contexts. STATA and NVIVO will be used to carry out quantitative and qualitative analysis, respectively. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval for this study has been granted by the Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee of the University of Cambridge, UK (PRE 2020.050) and by the Health and Life Sciences Research Ethics Committee of De Montfort University, UK (REF 422991). While unlikely, participants completing the self-administered surveys or participating in the virtual focus groups, semi-structured interviews and citizens' juries might experience distress triggered by questions or conversations. However, appropriate mitigating measures have been adopted and signposting to services and helplines will be available at all times. Furthermore, a dedicated member of staff will also be at hand to debrief following participation in the research and personalised thank-you notes will be sent to everyone taking part in the qualitative research.Study findings will be disseminated in scientific journals, at research conferences, local research symposia and seminars. Evidence-based open access briefings, articles and reports will be available on our study website for everyone to access. Rapid policy briefings targeting issues emerging from the data will also be disseminated to inform policy and practice. These briefings will position the findings within UK public policy and devolved nations policy and socioeconomic contexts in order to develop specific, timely policy recommendations. Additional dissemination will be done through traditional and social media. Our data will be contextualised in view of existing policies, and changes over time as-and-when policies change.

Understanding increasing rates of psychiatric hospital detentions in England: development and preliminary testing of an explanatory model.

BACKGROUND: The steep rise in the rate of psychiatric hospital detentions in England is poorly understood. AIMS: To identify explanations for the rise in detentions in England since 1983; to test their plausibility and support from evidence; to develop an explanatory model for the rise in detentions. METHOD: Hypotheses to explain the rise in detentions were identified from previous literature and stakeholder consultation. We explored associations between national indicators for potential explanatory variables and detention rates in an ecological study. Relevant research was scoped and the plausibility of each hypothesis was rated. Finally, a logic model was developed to illustrate likely contributory factors and pathways to the increase in detentions. RESULTS: Seventeen hypotheses related to social, service, legal and data-quality factors. Hypotheses supported by available evidence were: changes in legal approaches to patients without decision-making capacity but not actively objecting to admission; demographic changes; increasing psychiatric morbidity. Reductions in the availability or quality of community mental health services and changes in police practice may have contributed to the rise in detentions. Hypothesised factors not supported by evidence were: changes in community crisis care, compulsory community treatment and prescribing practice. Evidence was ambiguous or lacking for other explanations, including the impact of austerity measures and reductions in National Health Service in-patient bed numbers. CONCLUSIONS: Better data are needed about the characteristics and service contexts of those detained. Our logic model highlights likely contributory factors to the rise in detentions in England, priorities for future research and potential policy targets for reducing detentions.

How service users and carers understand, perceive, rephrase, and communicate about "depressive episode" and "schizophrenia" diagnoses: an international participatory research.

BACKGROUND: For ICD-11, the WHO emphasized the clinical utility of communication and the need to involve service users and carers in the revision process. AIMS: The objective was to assess whether medical vocabulary was accessible, which kinds of feelings it activated, whether and how users and carers would like to rephrase terms, and whether they used diagnosis to talk about mental health experiences. METHOD: An innovative protocol focused on two diagnoses (depressive episode and schizophrenia) was implemented in 15 different countries. The same issues were discussed with users and carers: understanding, feelings, rephrasing, and communication. RESULTS: Most participants reported understanding the diagnoses, but associated them with negative feelings. While the negativity of "depressive episode" mostly came from the concept itself, that of "schizophrenia" was largely based on its social impact and stigmatization associated with "mental illness". When rephrasing "depressive episode", a majority kept the root "depress*", and suppressed the temporal dimension or renamed it. Almost no one suggested a reformulation based on "schizophrenia". Finally, when communicating, no one used the phrase "depressive episode". Some participants used words based on "depress", but no one mentioned "episode". Very few used "schizophrenia". CONCLUSION: Data revealed a gap between concepts and emotional and cognitive experiences. Both professional and experiential language and knowledge have to be considered as complementary. Consequently, the ICD should be co-constructed by professionals, service users, and carers. It should take the emotional component of language, and the diversity of linguistic and cultural contexts, into account.

Moving beyond randomized controlled trials in the evaluation of compulsory community treatment.

Compulsory community treatment for people with severe mental illness remains controversial due to conflicting research evidence. Recently, there have been challenges to the conventional view that trial-based evidence should take precedence. This paper adds to these challenges in three ways. First, it emphasizes the need for critiques of trials to engage with conceptual and not just technical issues. Second, it develops a critique of trials centred on both how we can have knowledge and what it is we can have knowledge of. Third, it uses this critique to develop a research strategy that capitalizes on the information in large-scale datasets.

International Society of Psychiatric Genetics Ethics Committee: Issues facing us.

Psychiatric genetics research is improving our understanding of the biological underpinnings of neurodiversity and mental illness. Using psychiatric genetics in ways that maximize benefits and minimize harms to individuals and society depends largely on how the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of psychiatric genetics are managed. The International Society of Psychiatric Genetics (ISPG) is the largest international organization dedicated to psychiatric genetics. Given its history, membership, and international reach, we believe the ISPG is well-equipped to contribute to the resolution of these ELSI challenges. As such, we recently created the ISPG Ethics Committee, an interdisciplinary group comprised of psychiatric genetics researchers, clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, mental health professionals, patients, patient advocates, bioethicists, and lawyers. This article highlights key ELSI challenges identified by the ISPG Ethics Committee to be of paramount importance for the ethical translation of psychiatric research into society in three contexts: research settings, clinical settings, and legal proceedings. For each of these arenas, we identify and discuss pressing psychiatric genetics ELSI dilemmas that merit attention and require action. The goal is to increase awareness about psychiatric genetics ELSI issues and encourage dialogue and action among stakeholders.

Experiences of in-patient mental health services: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In-patients in crisis report poor experiences of mental healthcare not conducive to recovery. Concerns include coercion by staff, fear of assault from other patients, lack of therapeutic opportunities and limited support. There is little high-quality evidence on what is important to patients to inform recovery-focused care.AimsTo conduct a systematic review of published literature, identifying key themes for improving experiences of in-patient mental healthcare. METHOD: A systematic search of online databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO and CINAHL) for primary research published between January 2000 and January 2016. All study designs from all countries were eligible. A qualitative analysis was undertaken and study quality was appraised. A patient and public reference group contributed to the review. RESULTS: Studies (72) from 16 countries found four dimensions were consistently related to significantly influencing in-patients' experiences of crisis and recovery-focused care: the importance of high-quality relationships; averting negative experiences of coercion; a healthy, safe and enabling physical and social environment; and authentic experiences of patient-centred care. Critical elements for patients were trust, respect, safe wards, information and explanation about clinical decisions, therapeutic activities, and family inclusion in care. CONCLUSIONS: A number of experiences hinder recovery-focused care and must be addressed with the involvement of staff to provide high-quality in-patient services. Future evaluations of service quality and development of practice guidance should embed these four dimensions.Declaration of interestK.B. is editor of British Journal of Psychiatry and leads a national programme (Synergi Collaborative Centre) on patient experiences driving change in services and inequalities.

Montgomery and shared decision-making: implications for good psychiatric practice.

The 2015 Supreme Court judgment in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11 established that consent to medical treatment requires shared decision-making based on dialogue between the clinician and patient. In this editorial, we examine what Montgomery means for standards of good psychiatric practice, and argue that it represents an opportunity for delivering best practice in psychiatric care.Declaration of interestNone.

Evaluating the effects of community treatment orders (CTOs) in England using the Mental Health Services Dataset (MHSDS): protocol for a national, population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: Supervised community treatment (SCT) for people with serious mental disorders has become accepted practice in many countries around the world. In England, SCT was adopted in 2008 in the form of community treatment orders (CTOs). CTOs have been used more than expected, with significant variations between people and places. There is conflicting evidence about the effectiveness of SCT; studies based on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have suggested few positive impacts, while those employing observational designs have been more favourable. Robust population-based studies are needed, because of the ethical challenges of undertaking further RCTs and because variation across previous studies may reflect the effects of sociospatial context on SCT outcomes. We aim to examine spatial and temporal variation in the use, effectiveness and cost of CTOs in England through the analysis of routine administrative data. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Four years of data from the Mental Health Services Dataset (MHSDS) will be analysed using multilevel models. Models based on all patients eligible for CTOs will be used to explore variation in their use. A subset of CTO-eligible patients comprising a treatment group (CTO patients) and a matched control group (non-CTO patients) will be used to examine variation in the association between CTO use and study outcomes. Primary outcome will be total time in hospital. Secondary outcomes will include time to first readmission and mortality. Outputs from these models will be used to populate predictive models of healthcare resource use. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the National Health Service Data Access and Advisory Group and Warwick University. To ensure patient confidentiality and to meet data governance requirements, analyses will be carried out in a secure microdata laboratory using de-identified data. Study findings will be disseminated through academic channels and shared with mental health policy-makers and other stakeholders.

A realist approach to the evaluation of complex mental health interventions.

Conventional approaches to evidence that prioritise randomised controlled trials appear increasingly inadequate for the evaluation of complex mental health interventions. By focusing on causal mechanisms and understanding the complex interactions between interventions, patients and contexts, realist approaches offer a productive alternative. Although the approaches might be combined, substantial barriers remain.Declaration of interestAll authors had financial support from the National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme while completing this work. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Health Service, the National Institute for Health Research, the Medical Research Council, Central Commissioning Facility, National Institute for Health Research Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, the Health Services and Delivery Research Programme or the Department of Health. S.P.S. is part funded by Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care West Midlands. K.B. is editor of the British Journal of Psychiatry.

Realist Evaluation of the Use of Patient Experience Data to Improve the Quality of Inpatient Mental Health Care (EURIPIDES) in England: study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Inpatient mental healthcare continues to be an area of high risk and where patients report negative experiences. To ensure the patient voice is heard, National Health Service (NHS) Trusts are required to collect feedback from patients routinely. We do not know what kinds of feedback are most important or what management processes are needed to translate this into effective action plans. Further, we do not know if this makes any difference to the patients themselves. This study seeks to explore which of the many different approaches to collecting and using patient experience data are the most useful for supporting improvements in inpatient mental healthcare. The overarching aim of the study is to arrive at recommendations for best practice in the collection and use of patient experience data in NHS England adult inpatient mental health settings. We present the protocol for Realist Evaluation of the Use of Patient Experience Data to Improve the Quality of Inpatient Mental Health Care study (EURIPIDES). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is composed of five work packages (WPs), including a systematic review of patient experiences (WP1); a telephone survey to assist the selection of case sites (WP2); six indepth case studies involving interviews with service users, carers and staff to enable a realist evaluation of the use of patient experience to improve quality in adult inpatient mental health services (WP3); an economic evaluation of patient experience feedback activity (WP5); and a consensus conference (WP4). We discuss the methodological rationale for the five WPs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received approval from West Midlands/South Birmingham NHS Research Ethics Committee. The outcome of the consensus conference meeting (WP4) will form the basis of the outputs to be disseminated to NHS providers. Dissemination will also take place through publications and presentations at relevant conferences.

Mental health service users' perceptions of data sharing and data protection: a qualitative report.

BACKGROUND: To improve health services, social, economic and health data should be shared and linked to create a full narrative of lived experience. Mental health data sharing is often considered a particularly sensitive area. OBJECTIVE: To assess mental health service users' perceptions regarding the current practice of administrative data-driven research. METHOD: We conducted a focus group using case study scenarios. Themes and subthemes were analysed using qualitative methods. RESULTS: Participants were generally happy for data owners to share their health, social and economic data if the purpose was transparent and if the information would inform and improve health policy and practice. Participants were less keen on sharing data through digital applications. CONCLUSION: This case study informs a data linkage study protocol. Research teams and database owners should strive to educate service users on data protection and create dissent opportunities.

Variation in compulsory psychiatric inpatient admission in England: a cross-classified, multilevel analysis.

BACKGROUND: The increasing rate of compulsory admission to psychiatric inpatient beds in England is worrying. Studying variation between places and services could be key to identifying targets for interventions to reverse this trend. We modelled spatial variation in compulsory admissions in England using national patient-level data and quantified the extent to which patient, local-area, and service-setting characteristics accounted for this variation. METHODS: This study is a cross-sectional, multilevel analysis of the 2010-11 Mental Health Minimum Data Set (MHMDS). Data from eight provider trusts were excluded, including three independent provider trusts that lacked spatial identification codes. We excluded patients detained under sections of the Mental Health Act concerned only with conveyance to, or assessment in, a registered Place of Safety, or for short-term (≤72 h) assessment only, as these do not in themselves necessarily mean that the person will be admitted to an inpatient mental health bed. MHMDS contained reasonably complete data for a limited number of patient characteristics, namely age, sex, and ethnicity; however, several patient-level variables could not be included in our analysis because of high levels of missing data. Multilevel models were applied with MLwiN to estimate variation in compulsory admission, starting with null (unconditional) models that partitioned total variance in compulsory admission between each level in the model. The primary outcome was compulsory admission to a psychiatric inpatient bed, compared with people admitted voluntarily or receiving only community-based care. FINDINGS: Data were available for 1 238 188 patients, covering 64 National Health Service provider trusts (93%) and 31 865 census lower super output areas (LSOAs; 98%). 7·5% and 5·6% of the variance in compulsory admission occurred at LSOA level and provider trust levels, respectively, after adjusting for patient characteristics. Black patients were almost three times more likely to be admitted compulsorily than were white patients (odds ratio [OR] 2·94, 95% CI 2·90-2·98). Compulsory admission was greater in more deprived areas (OR 1·22, 1·18-1·27) and in areas with more non-white residents (OR 1·51, 1·43-1·59), after adjusting for confounders. INTERPRETATION: Rates of compulsory admission to inpatient psychiatric beds vary significantly between local areas and services, independent of patient, area, and service characteristics. Compulsory admission rates seem to reflect local factors, especially socioeconomic and ethnic population composition. Understanding how these factors condition access to, and use of, mental health care is likely to be important for developing interventions to reduce compulsion. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme.