Comparison of European Clinical Guidelines on the Management of Alcohol Use Disorders.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the European region, and tackling the harmful use of alcohol is a public health priority. Most countries in the region have national strategies for treating alcohol use disorders (AUD), but there is significant between-country variation. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare clinical guidelines for the management of AUD from countries of the European region and to determine whether countries' relative wealth or quality of their health systems had affected the guidelines. METHODS: A survey was conducted of 24 countries. The survey encompassed how AUD clinical guidelines were researched, the range and expertise of contributors, which topics of AUD treatment were included, the definition of a "standard drink" used, and the publishing, funding, endorsement, and dissemination of the guideline. RESULTS: Twenty-one of the 24 countries surveyed had a clinical guideline for AUD. All guidelines were underpinned by a literature review, and psychiatrists were the professional group most commonly involved in producing them. Most of the guidelines covered typical cornerstones of AUD care such as treatment of alcohol dependence, pharmacotherapy for relapse prevention, and detoxification. Definitions of a "standard drink" ranged from 8 to 20 grams of ethanol. Governments or governmental bodies were the main publishers and funders of guidelines, and the vast majority of guidelines were freely available online. There were no statistically significant effects of GDP, GDP per capita, or World Health Organization's World Health Report rankings on whether countries were more likely to have an AUD clinical guideline, to have performed a systematic literature review, or to have involved service users in producing their guideline. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this survey reflect widespread good practice in producing AUD clinical guidelines across European countries. Regional research collaborations could offer significant time and cost savings in producing the evidence base from which guidelines are then written.

Access to specialist community alcohol treatment in England, and the relationship with alcohol-related hospital admissions: qualitative study of service users, service providers and service commissioners.

BACKGROUND: Since 2012 England has seen year-on-year reductions in people accessing specialist community alcohol treatment, and year-on-year increases in alcohol-related hospital admissions. AIMS: We examined perceived barriers to accessing specialist treatment, and perceived reasons behind hospital admission increases. METHOD: We conducted focus groups (n = 4) with service users and semi-structured interviews (n = 16) with service providers and service commissioners at four specialist community alcohol services in England, which experience either high or low rates of alcohol dependence prevalence and treatment access. Themes and subthemes were generated deductively drawing upon Rhodes' risk environment thesis. Data were organised using the framework approach. RESULTS: Data reveal a treatment sector profoundly affected at all levels by changes implemented in the Health and Social Care Act (HSCA) 2012. Substantial barriers to access exist, even in services with high access rates. Concerns regarding funding cuts and recommissioning processes are at the forefront of providers' and commissioners' minds. The lack of cohesion between community and hospital alcohol services, where hospital services exist, has potentially created an environment enabling the reduced numbers of people accessing specialist treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our study reveals a treatment sector struggling with a multitude of problems; these pervade despite enaction of the HSCA, and are present at the national, service provider and individual service level. Although we acknowledge the problems are varied and multifaceted, their existence is echoed by the united voices of service users, service providers and service commissioners.

Gender identity and the management of the transgender patient: a guide for non-specialists.

In this review, we introduce the topic of transgender medicine, aimed at the non-specialist clinician working in the UK. Appropriate terminology is provided alongside practical advice on how to appropriately care for transgender people. We offer a brief theoretical discussion on transgenderism and consider how it relates to broader understandings of both gender and disease. In respect to epidemiology, while it is difficult to assess the exact size of the transgender population in the UK, population surveys suggest a prevalence of between 0.2 and 0.6% in adults, with rates of referrals to gender identity clinics in the UK increasing yearly. We outline the legal framework that protects the rights of transgender people, showing that is not legal for physicians to deny transgender people access to services based on their personal beliefs. Being transgender is often, although not always, associated with gender dysphoria, a potentially disabling condition in which the discordance between a person's natal sex (that assigned to them at birth) and gender identity results in distress, with high associated rates of self-harm, suicidality and functional impairment. We show that gender reassignment can be a safe and effective treatment for gender dysphoria with counselling, exogenous hormones and surgery being the mainstay of treatment. The role of the general practitioner in the management of transgender patients is discussed and we consider whether hormone therapy should be initiated in primary care in the absence of specialist advice, as is suggested by recent General Medical Council guidance.

Is the Lack of Specific Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer/Questioning (LGBTQ) Health Care Education in Medical School a Cause for Concern? Evidence From a Survey of Knowledge and Practice Among UK Medical Students.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) people frequently report negative health care encounters. Medical professionals may inadequately manage LGBTQ persons' health if they have not received training in this area. An anonymous survey measuring efficacy in health situations among LGBTQ persons was answered by 166 medical students across all years of a UK university. Results show that 84.9% of participants reported a lack of LGBTQ health care education, with deficits in confidence clarifying unfamiliar sexual and gender terms, deciding the ward in which to nurse transgender patients, finding support resources, and discussing domestic abuse with LGBTQ patients. Most participants reported that they would not clarify gender pronouns or ask about gender or sexual identity in mental health or reproductive health settings. Participants reported infrequently observing doctors making similar inquiries. Participants held positive attitudes toward LGBTQ patients, with attitude scores positively correlating with LGBTQ terminology knowledge scores (rs = 0.5052, p < .01). Addressing gender identity and sexuality issues within medical curricula may remove barriers to accessing health care and improve encounters for LGBTQ patients.