Implementation of an Electronic Clinical Decision Support System for the Early Recognition and Management of Dysglycemia in an Inpatient Mental Health Setting Using CogStack: Protocol for a Pilot Hybrid Type 3 Effectiveness-Implementation Randomized Controlled Cluster Trial.

BACKGROUND: Severe mental illnesses (SMIs), including schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder, and major depressive disorder, are associated with an increased risk of physical health comorbidities and premature mortality from conditions including cardiovascular disease and diabetes. Digital technologies such as electronic clinical decision support systems (eCDSSs) could play a crucial role in improving the clinician-led management of conditions such as dysglycemia (deranged blood sugar levels) and associated conditions such as diabetes in people with a diagnosis of SMI in mental health settings. OBJECTIVE: We have developed a real-time eCDSS using CogStack, an information retrieval and extraction platform, to automatically alert clinicians with National Health Service Trust-approved, guideline-based recommendations for dysglycemia monitoring and management in secondary mental health care. This novel system aims to improve the management of dysglycemia and associated conditions, such as diabetes, in SMI. This protocol describes a pilot study to explore the acceptability, feasibility, and evaluation of its implementation in a mental health inpatient setting. METHODS: This will be a pilot hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation randomized controlled cluster trial in inpatient mental health wards. A ward will be the unit of recruitment, where it will be randomly allocated to receive either access to the eCDSS plus usual care or usual care alone over a 4-month period. We will measure implementation outcomes, including the feasibility and acceptability of the eCDSS to clinicians, as primary outcomes, alongside secondary outcomes relating to the process of care measures such as dysglycemia screening rates. An evaluation of other implementation outcomes relating to the eCDSS will be conducted, identifying facilitators and barriers based on established implementation science frameworks. RESULTS: Enrollment of wards began in April 2022, after which clinical staff were recruited to take part in surveys and interviews. The intervention period of the trial began in February 2023, and subsequent data collection was completed in August 2023. Data are currently being analyzed, and results are expected to be available in June 2024. CONCLUSIONS: An eCDSS can have the potential to improve clinician-led management of dysglycemia in inpatient mental health settings. If found to be feasible and acceptable, then, in combination with the results of the implementation evaluation, the system can be refined and improved to support future successful implementation. A larger and more definitive effectiveness trial should then be conducted to assess its impact on clinical outcomes and to inform scalability and application to other conditions in wider mental health care settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04792268; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04792268. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/49548.

Factors influencing the length of stay in forensic psychiatric settings: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Forensic psychiatry is often associated with long admissions and has a high cost of care. There is little known about factors influencing length of stay (LOS), and no previous systematic review has synthesised the available data. This paper aims to identify factors influencing the LOS in forensic psychiatry hospitals to inform care and interventions that may reduce the length of admissions. METHODOLOGY: A systematic review was conducted by searching major databases, including PubMed, EMBASE and PsycInfo, from inception until May 2022. Observational studies conducted in forensic hospitals that examined associations between variables of interest and LOS were included. Following data extraction, the Newcastle‒Ottawa Scale was used for quality appraisal. No meta-analysis was conducted due to heterogeneity of information; a quantitative measure to assess the strength of evidence was developed and reported. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies met the inclusion criteria out of 1606 citations. A detailed quantitative synthesis was performed using robust criteria. Having committed homicide/attempted homicide, a criminal legal status with restrictions, and a diagnosis of schizophrenia-spectrum disorders were all associated with longer LOS. Higher Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scores were associated with a shorter LOS. CONCLUSION: High-quality research examining factors associated with LOS in forensic psychiatry is lacking, and studies are heterogeneous. No modifiable characteristics were identified, and thus, practice recommendations were not made. There is an increasing necessity to understand the factors associated with longer admissions to inform care and increase success in reintegration and rehabilitation. This paper provides recommendations for future research.

A cross-sectional investigation on remote working, loneliness, workplace isolation, well-being and perceived social support in healthcare workers.

BACKGROUND: Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare trusts began to implement remote working arrangements, with little knowledge of their impact on staff well-being. AIMS: To investigate how remote working of healthcare workers during the pandemic may have been associated with stress, productivity and work satisfaction at that time, and associations between loneliness, workplace isolation, perceived social support and well-being. METHOD: A questionnaire was developed to explore remote working and productivity, stress and work satisfaction during time spent working remotely. Associations between current loneliness, workplace isolation and well-being, and the influence of perceived social support, were explored with perceived social support as a potential moderator. RESULTS: A total of 520 participants responded to the study, of whom 112 were men (21.5%) and 406 were women (78.1%), with an age range of 21-77 years (mean 40.0, s.d. = 12.1). Very few (3.1%) worked remotely before the COVID-19 pandemic, and this had increased significantly (96.9%). Those who worked ≥31 h a week remotely reported higher stress and lower workplace satisfaction at that time, compared with office work, yet also felt more productive. Current loneliness, workplace isolation and perceived social support were cross-sectionally associated with lower current well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Those who worked more hours a week remotely during the pandemic reported increased stress, which may be related to the lack of resources in place to support this change in work.

Exploring the Use of Digital Interventions by People with Severe Mental Illness to Support Their Physical Health: A Mixed Methods Study.

People with severe mental illness (SMI) are more likely to experience physical health conditions than the general population. Little is known about the experience of people with SMI using digital health interventions (DHIs) to support their physical health. We explored how people with SMI use DHIs to support their physical health, the acceptability, factors affecting use, and impact on physical health. This was a three-stage mixed methods study (1) online survey of people with SMI; (2) interviews with a subsample of participants from Stage 1; (3) stakeholder workshops. Participants were generally satisfied with the DHIs they used. The most popular DHIs were targeted at diet, exercise, and weight management. Factors that encouraged use included simplicity and data-linkage. Concerns included costs, data security, and reliability of information. Positive impacts included accountability and tangible physical health benefits. Mental health impacted engagement with DHIs. DHIs were seen as a useful tool to monitor physical health but could not replace contact with clinical services. DHIs were considered useful and acceptable by people with SMI and may be used as an extension of clinical care. The specific needs and priorities of people with SMI should be considered both in developing and recommending interventions.

Factors Associated With Oral Anticoagulant Use in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Mental Disorders.

Objective: This study aims to identify how mental illness severity interacts with oral anticoagulant (OAC) patterns among people with atrial fibrillation (AF).Methods: AF patients with comorbid mental illness (classified using ICD-10) were identified from the South London and Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre Case Register. CHA2DS2-VASc and ORBIT scales were used to calculate stroke and bleeding risks, respectively, whereas Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) assessment was used for functional impairment.Results: Overall, 2,105 AF patients were identified between 2011 and 2019. Serious mental illness (SMI) was associated with lower prescription of any OAC (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]: 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90-0.99). A total of 62% of SMI patients at risk of stroke were not prescribed an OAC. In the AF cohort, alcohol or substance dependence and activities of daily living (ADL) impairment were associated with lower prescription of warfarin (aRR: 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98 and aRR: 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93-0.99, respectively). Among people with AF and SMI, warfarin was less likely to be prescribed to people with self-injury (aRR: 0.84; 95% CI, 0.77-0.91), hallucinations or delusions (aRR: 0.92; 95% CI, 0.85-0.99), ADL impairment (aRR: 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.99), or alcohol or substance dependence (aRR: 0.92; 95% CI, 0.87-0.98). Among people with AF and comorbid substance use disorder, self-injury (aRR: 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.96), cognitive problems (aRR: 0.84; 95% CI, 0.70-0.99), and other mental illnesses (aRR: 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.99) were associated with lower prescription of warfarin.Conclusions: An OAC treatment gap for AF patients with comorbid SMI relative to other mental illnesses was identified. The gap was wider in those with dependence comorbidities, positive symptoms, self-injury, or functional impairment.J Clin Psychiatry 2024;85(1):23m14824. Author affiliations are listed at the end of this article.

Attendance at remote versus in-person outpatient appointments in an NHS Trust.

INTRODUCTION: With the growing use of remote appointments within the National Health Service, there is a need to understand potential barriers of access to care for some patients. In this observational study, we examined missed appointments rates, comparing remote and in-person appointments among different patient groups. METHODS: We analysed adult outpatient appointments at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust in Northwest London in 2021. Rates of missed appointments per patient were compared between remote versus in-person appointments using negative binomial regression models. Models were stratified by appointment type (first or a follow-up). RESULTS: There were 874,659 outpatient appointments for 189,882 patients, 29.5% of whom missed at least one appointment. Missed rates were 12.5% for remote first appointments and 9.2% for in-person first appointments. Remote and in-person follow-up appointments were missed at similar rates (10.4% and 10.7%, respectively). For remote and in-person appointments, younger patients, residents of more deprived areas, and patients of Black, Mixed and 'other' ethnicities missed more appointments. Male patients missed more in-person appointments, particularly at younger ages, but gender differences were minimal for remote appointments. Patients with long-term conditions (LTCs) missed more first appointments, whether in-person or remote. In follow-up appointments, patients with LTCs missed more in-person appointments but fewer remote appointments. DISCUSSION: Remote first appointments were missed more often than in-person first appointments, follow-up appointments had similar attendance rates for both modalities. Sociodemographic differences in outpatient appointment attendance were largely similar between in-person and remote appointments, indicating no widening of inequalities in attendance due to appointment modality.