Development of an electronic burns register: Digitisation of routinely collected hospital data for global burns surveillance.

INTRODUCTION: Burn registers provide important data that can track injury trends and evaluate services. Burn registers are concentrated in high-income countries, but most burn injuries occur in low- and middle-income countries where surveillance data are limited. Injury surveillance guidance recommends utilisation of existing routinely collected data where data quality is adequate, but there is a lack of guidance on how to achieve this. Our aim was to develop a rigorous and reproducible method to establish an electronic burn register from existing routinely collected data that can be implemented in low resource settings. METHODS: Data quality of handwritten routinely collected records (register books) from a tertiary government hospital burn unit in Mysore, India was assessed prior to digitisation. Process mapping was conducted for burn patient presentations. Register and casualty records were compared to assess the case ascertainment rate. Register books from February 2016 to February 2022 were scanned and anonymised. Scans were quality checked and stored securely. An online data entry form was developed. All data underwent double verification. RESULTS: Process mapping suggested data were reliable, and case ascertainment was 95%. 1930 presentations were recorded in the registers, representing 0.84% of hospital all-cause admissions. 388 pages were scanned with 4.4% requiring rescanning due to quality problems. Two-step verification estimated there to be errors remaining in 0.06% of fields following data entry. CONCLUSION: We have described, using the example of a newly established electronic register in India, methods to assess the suitability and reliability of existing routinely collected data for surveillance purposes, to digitise handwritten data, and to quantify error during the digitisation process. The methods are likely to be of particular interest to burn units in countries with no active national burns register. We strongly recommend mobilisation of resources for digitisation of existing high quality routinely collected data as an important step towards developing burn surveillance systems in low resource settings.

Social prescribing: an inadequate response to the degradation of social care in mental health.

Social prescribing is poorly defined and there is little evidence for its effectiveness. It cannot address the social determinants of mental health and it is unlikely to produce enduring change for that part of the population that suffers the worst physical and mental health, namely the most deprived and marginalised. It has emerged at a time of growing health inequity. This has occurred alongside the neglect of social care and of the social aspects of mental health intervention. Social prescribing gives a false impression of addressing social factors, and as such is counterproductive. We can do better than this.

Terminology and methods used to differentiate injury intent of hospital burn patients in South Asia: Results from a systematic scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: A key component in the classification of all injury types is to differentiate whether the injury was deliberately inflicted and by whom, commonly known as "intent" in the surveillance literature. These data guide patient care and inform surveillance strategies. South Asia is believed to have the greatest number of intentional burn injuries, but national surveillance data is not disaggregated by injury intent. Scientific literature can be used for injury surveillance where national data collection does not exist. In order to synthesise research findings, it is essential to assess the potential impact of misclassification bias. We therefore conducted a systematic scoping review to understand terminology and methods used to differentiate injury intent of hospital burn patients in South Asia. METHODS: We followed the methods in our registered protocol (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/DCYNQ). Studies met defined population, concept, context, and study design criteria. The databases Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and PakMediNet were searched. Two reviewers independently screened results. Data were extracted in a standardised manner and verified. The rigour of the method used to differentiate injury intent was appraised. RESULTS: 1435 articles were screened. Of these, 89 met our inclusion criteria. Most articles were from India and Pakistan, and used an observational study design. There were 14 stem terms used in the articles. The most common was "cause". There were 40 classifier terms. The most common were "accident", "suicide", and "homicide". Few articles defined these terms. The method used to differentiate injury intent was only described explicitly in 17% of articles and the rigour of the methods used were low. Where methods of differentiation were described, they appear to be based on patient or family report rather than multidisciplinary assessment. CONCLUSION: The heterogeneity in terms, lack of definitions, and limited investigation of injury intent means this variable is likely to be prone to misclassification bias. We strongly recommend that the global burn community unites to develop a common data element, including definitions and methods of assessment, for the concept of burn injury intent to enable more reliable data collection practices and interstudy comparisons.

Psychiatrists' attitudes to professional boundaries concerning spirituality and religion: mixed-methods study.

AIMS AND METHOD: Calls for the integration of spirituality into psychiatric practice have raised concerns about boundary violations. We sought to develop a method to capture psychiatrists' attitudes to professional boundaries and spirituality, explore consensus and understand what factors are considered. Case vignettes were developed, tested and refined. Three vignettes were presented to 80 mental health professionals (53% said they were psychiatrists; 39% did not identify their professional status). Participants recorded their reactions to the vignettes. Four researchers categorised these as identifying boundary violations or not and analysed the factors considered. RESULTS: In 90% of cases, at least three of the four researchers agreed on classification (boundary violation; possible boundary violation; no boundary violation). Participants' opinion about boundary violations was heterogeneous. There was consensus that psychiatrists should not proselytise in clinical settings. Reasoning emphasised pragmatic concerns. Few participants mentioned their religious beliefs. Equivocation was common. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Mental health professionals seem unsure about professional boundaries concerning religion and spirituality in psychiatric practice.

Terminology and methods used to differentiate injury intent of hospital burn patients in South Asia: a systematic scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: The greatest proportion of burn injuries globally occur in South Asia, where there are also high numbers of intentional burns. Burn injury prevention efforts are hampered by poor surveillance data on injury intent. There is a plethora of local routinely collected data in the research literature from South Asia that could be used for epidemiological purposes, but it is not known whether the definitions and methods of differentiation of injury intent are sufficiently homogenous to allow valid study comparisons. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic scoping review to understand terminology and methods used to differentiate injury intent of hospital burn patients in South Asia. The objectives of the study are to: determine the breadth of terminology and common terms used for burn injury intent; to determine if definitions are comparable across studies where the same term is used; and to appraise the rigour of methods used to differentiate burn injury intent and suitability for comparison across studies. The databases Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PakMediNet will be searched. Screening and data extraction will be completed independently by two reviewers. To be included, the article must be as follows: peer reviewed, primary research, study cutaneous burns, based on hospital patients from a country in South Asia, and use intent terminology or discuss a method of differentiation of injury intent. Results will be restricted to English language studies. No date restrictions will be applied. A plain language summary and terminology section are included for non-specialist readers. DISCUSSION: Results will be used to inform stakeholder work to develop standardised terminology and methods for burn injury intent in South Asia. They will be published open access in peer-reviewed journals wherever possible. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review has been registered with the Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/DCYNQ ).

The Goldberg-Huxley model of the pathway to psychiatric care: 21st-century systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The classification of mental disorders used to be based only on people seen by hospital psychiatrists. In fact, most people with a mental disorder were, and are, not seen by psychiatrists because of decisions made prior to psychiatric consultation. The first description of this 'pathway' to care and its levels and filters was published by Goldberg and Huxley in 1980. AIMS: To conduct a review of papers relevant to the application of the Goldberg-Huxley model in the 21st century. METHOD: Systematic review (PROSPERO registration CRD42021270603) of the pathway to psychiatric care in the 21st century. The review concentrates on community surveys and passage through the first filter (consultation in primary care or its equivalent). Ten databases were searched for papers meeting the defined inclusion criteria published between 2000 and 2019 and completed on 15 February 2020. RESULTS: In total, 1824 papers were retrieved, 137 screened fully and 31 included in this review. The results are presented in a table comparing them with previous research. Despite major social, economic and health service changes since 1980, community prevalence and consultation rates remain remarkably consistent and in line with World Health Organization findings. Passage through the first filter is largely unchanged and there is evidence that the same factors operate internationally, especially gender and social parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The Goldberg-Huxley model remains applicable internationally, but this may change owing to an increasingly mixed mental health economy and reduced access to primary care services.

Establishing Self-Harm Registers: The Role of Process Mapping to Improve Quality of Surveillance Data Globally.

Self-harm registers (SHRs) are an essential means of monitoring rates of self-harm and evaluating preventative interventions, but few SHRs exist in countries with the highest burden of suicides and self-harm. Current international guidance on establishing SHRs recommends data collection from emergency departments, but this does not adequately consider differences in the provision of emergency care globally. We aim to demonstrate that process mapping can be used prior to the implementation of an SHR to understand differing hospital systems. This information can be used to determine the method by which patients meeting the SHR inclusion criteria can be most reliably identified, and how to mitigate hospital processes that may introduce selection bias into these data. We illustrate this by sharing in detail the experiences from a government hospital and non-profit hospital in south India. We followed a five-phase process mapping approach developed for healthcare settings during 2019-2020. Emergency care provided in the government hospital was accessed through casualty department triage. The non-profit hospital had an emergency department. Both hospitals had open access outpatient departments. SHR inclusion criteria overlapped with conditions requiring Indian medicolegal registration. Medicolegal registers are the most likely single point to record patients meeting the SHR inclusion criteria from multiple emergency care areas in India (e.g., emergency department/casualty, outpatients, other hospital areas), but should be cross-checked against registers of presentations to the emergency department/casualty to capture less-sick patients and misclassified cases. Process mapping is an easily reproducible method that can be used prior to the implementation of an SHR to understand differing hospital systems. This information is pivotal to choosing which hospital record systems should be used for identifying patients and to proactively reduce bias in SHR data. The method is equally applicable in low-, middle- and high-income countries.

Social psychiatry lives!

SUMMARY: In this journal Ikkos examines the work of the American sociologist Owen Whooley, who argues that US psychiatry has gone through five paradigm shifts without defining the object of its own expertise. We look at the substance of Whooley's methods and assumptions and offer our observations on Ikkos's argument and conclusions.

Breaking out of the citadel: social theory and psychiatry.

British psychiatry has tended to hold itself aloof from social theory. Nonetheless, these ideas have influenced the development of mental health services. Alongside this, the biopsychosocial model cannot reconcile contradictions in the scientific evidence regarding mental illness. We need to develop a more constructive understanding of the implications of social theory.

Psychiatry's need for Vergangenheitsbewältigung: 'culture wars', cognitive dissonance and coming to terms with the past.

UK psychiatry's sense of self rests on being part of a socially progressive national tradition. This makes it difficult to engage with more critical narratives. The process of analysing and accepting psychiatry's past can help our profession to get closer to its real self and on a path to a better future.

Patterns of prescribing in primary care leading to high-dose opioid regimens: a mixed-method study.

BACKGROUND: There are concerns about continuing increases in the number of patients prescribed long-term opioids and the prescribing of 'strong' opioids for chronic pain. Little is known about patients who are prescribed these long-term, high-dose drugs. AIM: To understand patterns of opioid prescribing that lead to long-term, high-dose use. DESIGN & SETTING: A mixed-method study of the opioid prescription histories of patients using high doses in a North Wales GP practice. METHOD: All patients on high-dose opioids during the census week were identified. Summary graphs of the prescription histories were prepared. Qualitative analysis was conducted individually by four researchers. A workshop was held to arrive at a consensus about common features and to inform further quantitative analysis. RESULTS: A quarter of high-dose regimens were initiated outside the practice, either in a different primary care practice or in secondary care. The majority of the remaining patients showed a pattern of dose increases to high levels over a short period (median 3.5 months). None showed a pattern of gradual increases over a longer timescale. Most of the patients remained on high doses continuously once a daily dose of ≥120 mg oral morphine equivalent (OME) was reached. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that high-dose opioid regimens develop quickly in response to unknown clinical factors. An expected insidious upward drift in dose was not seen. The findings have implications for the prevention of potentially dangerous long-term, high-dose opioid prescribing. A dose of 60 mg OME or more is suggested as a useful 'red flag'.

A qualitative interview study of GPs' experiences of prescribing opioid medication for chronic pain.

BACKGROUND: Prescribing of opioid medication has increased over the past 20 years. Most occurs in primary care for chronic pain. There is little evidence that these drugs are effective for this indication. There are concerns about the continuing prescribing of opioids, particularly in the long term and at high doses. AIM: To explore GPs' experiences of prescribing opioids, problems encountered, and factors militating against good prescribing practice. DESIGN & SETTING: Qualitative interviews with GPs who prescribe opioids in primary care in North East Wales. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with 20 GPs were transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis utilising the framework approach. RESULTS: Participating GPs identified a range of problems associated with prescribed opioids. They were concerned about limited effectiveness of the drugs and what they perceived as addiction resulting from their use. They identified healthcare system factors that were obstacles to good prescribing practice such as lack of continuity of care, poor access to secondary care pain management support, and, most importantly, constant time pressure. They reported adverse effects on relationships with patients. Unrealistic expectations that pain could be eliminated resulted in pressure to prescribe stronger drugs and increased doses. It led to difficulties in establishing and maintaining trust and in persuading patients to agree to, and to carry out, dose reductions. CONCLUSION: Themes emerging from this study suggest that GPs lack appropriate control of opioid prescribing. There is a need to develop methods to help patients and GPs to work together to manage chronic pain safely.

Long-term, high-dose opioid prescription for chronic non-cancer pain in primary care: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Opioid prescriptions for chronic pain have risen sharply over the last 25 years; harms associated with these drugs are related to dose and length of use. AIM: The main aim of this study was to identify patients prescribed long-term, high-dose (LTHD) opioids in the community and to assess the prevalence of such use. DESIGN & SETTING: An observational study of opioid prescribing in two demographically dissimilar GP practices in North Wales, UK. METHOD: Details of opioid prescriptions were collected for 22 841 patients, of whom 1488 (6.5%) were being prescribed opioids on the census date. Exhaustive examination of the data identified all patients who were prescribed oral morphine equivalent doses of ≥120 mg/day for ≥1 year. RESULTS: All these patients were being prescribed ≥120 mg/day, as a single drug, morphine, oxycodone, fentanyl, or buprenorphine, irrespective of opioid polypharmacy. Across both practices, 1.71/1000 patients were identified as LTHD users of opioid medication for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Prevalence was similar in the two practices. Repetition of the process until January 2021 showed no change in the pattern. CONCLUSION: This study offers confirmation that a significant group of patients are prescribed long-term opioid medication for chronic pain at doses that are unlikely to be effective in reducing pain, but are likely to have harmful consequences. The findings offer a simple, reliable, and practical method of data extraction to identify these patients individually from routinely collected prescribing data, which will help in monitoring and treating individuals and establishing the problem prevalence.

COVID-19-related posttraumatic stress disorder in adults with lived experience of psychiatric disorder.

BACKGROUND: Prevalence estimates of COVID-19-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have ranged from 1% to over 60% in the general population. Individuals with lived experience of a psychiatric disorder may be particularly vulnerable to COVID-19-related PTSD but this has received inadequate attention. METHODS: Participants were 1571 adults with lived experience of psychiatric disorder who took part in a longitudinal study of mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. PTSD was assessed by the International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ) anchored to the participant's most troubling COVID-19-related experiencevent. Factors hypothesised to be associated with traumatic stress symptoms were investigated by linear regression. RESULTS: 40.10% of participants perceived some aspect of the pandemic as traumatic. 5.28% reported an ICD-11 PTSD qualifying COVID-19 related traumatic exposure and 0.83% met criteria for probable ICD-11 COVID-19-related PTSD. Traumatic stress symptoms were associated with younger age, lower income, lower social support, and financial worries, and lived experience of PTSD/complex PTSD. Depression and anxiety measured in June 2020 predicted traumatic stress symptoms at follow-up approximately 20 weeks later in November 2020. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence of widespread COVID-19-related PTSD among individuals with lived experience of a psychiatric disorder. There is a need for future research to derive valid prevalence estimates of COVID-19-related PTSD.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in individuals with pre-existing mental illness.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that the COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected mental health, but most studies have been conducted in the general population. AIMS: To identify factors associated with mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in individuals with pre-existing mental illness. METHOD: Participants (N = 2869, 78% women, ages 18-94 years) from a UK cohort (the National Centre for Mental Health) with a history of mental illness completed a cross-sectional online survey in June to August 2020. Mental health assessments were the GAD-7 (anxiety), PHQ-9 (depression) and WHO-5 (well-being) questionnaires, and a self-report question on whether their mental health had changed during the pandemic. Regressions examined associations between mental health outcomes and hypothesised risk factors. Secondary analyses examined associations between specific mental health diagnoses and mental health. RESULTS: A total of 60% of participants reported that mental health had worsened during the pandemic. Younger age, difficulty accessing mental health services, low income, income affected by COVID-19, worry about COVID-19, reduced sleep and increased alcohol/drug use were associated with increased depression and anxiety symptoms and reduced well-being. Feeling socially supported by friends/family/services was associated with better mental health and well-being. Participants with a history of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder or eating disorder were more likely to report that mental health had worsened during the pandemic than individuals without a history of these diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: We identified factors associated with worse mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in individuals with pre-existing mental illness, in addition to specific groups potentially at elevated risk of poor mental health during the pandemic.

Rationalisation of long-term high-dose opioids for chronic pain: development of an intervention and conceptual framework.

There has been a large increase in the number of prescriptions for opioid drugs in the United Kingdom over the last 20 years or more and the prescribing of opioids in high doses continues to increase. Much opioid prescribing is for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) despite serious doubts about the long-term effectiveness of opioids for this indication. Clinical experience is that there are increasing numbers of patients who are on high dosages of opioid drugs over sustained periods which provide limited or no pain relief while having significant negative effects on functioning and quality of life. The aim of this article is to bring readers' attention to some clinical observations of the CNCP population with high doses and to describe an intervention to reduce these doses. Many of these patients have no clinical features of addiction; we suggest that those who show little or no substance misuse behaviours are best understood as a distinct clinical population who have different treatment needs. In order to understand and treat these patients, a model is required which, rather than seeing the problem as lying solely with the patient, focuses on the interaction between the individual and his or her environment and seeks a change in what the patient does every day, rather than a simple, and largely unattainable, goal of symptom elimination. The clinician authors worked together to develop an intervention based upon approaches taken from both pain management and psychiatric practice. A detailed description of this rapid opioid reduction intervention (RORI) is provided along with some preliminary outcome data.

Schizophrenia outcomes in the 21st century: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: We report a review of outcomes in schizophrenia in the twenty-first century, replicating and extending work undertaken by the late Richard Warner in his seminal book, "Recovery from Schizophrenia: Psychiatry and Political Economy" (1985;2004). METHOD: Warner's methods were followed as closely as possible. Only observational/naturalistic studies were included. Six scientific databases were searched from 2000 to 2020. 6,640 records were retrieved. 47 met inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Overall, complete recovery is higher in this study than in Warner's (37.75% cf 20.4%), especially for first episode psychosis (FEP) (57.1% cf 20.7%). Clinical recovery, annualized remission rate (ARR), and employment outcomes were significantly superior for first episode psychosis compared with multiple episode psychosis (MEP). ARR shows a trend toward reduction over time, from 2.2 before the financial crash of 2008 to 1.6 after (t = 1.85 df 40 p = .07). The decline is statistically significant for the MEP group (t = 2.32 df18 p = .03). There were no differences in outcome by region, sample characteristics, outcome measures used, or quality of studies. Heterogeneity of clinical outcome measures across the literature makes evidence synthesis difficult. Weak and inconsistent reporting of functional and employment outcomes mean that findings lack meaning with respect to lived experience. CONCLUSION: Future research strategies should aim to reduce heterogeneity in clinical outcome measures and to increase the emphasis on capture and reporting of more sophisticated measures of social and functional outcome. Outcome domains should be disaggregated rather than conflated into unitary recovery constructs.

Evaluation of a framework for safe and appropriate prescribing of psychoactive medications in a UK prison.

BACKGROUND: The widespread use of drugs in prisons leads to avoidable deaths, poorer health and a poor living environment. The contribution of psychoactive prescription drugs to this problem has received little attention in prison policy or at individual prescriber level. AIMS: To determine the extent of unsafe and inappropriate prescribing of psychoactive medications in one UK prison using a newly developed medicines optimisation framework. METHOD: A medicines optimisation framework was developed based on principles of good prescribing. It was initiated on the opening of a new prison-HMP Berwyn-in February 2017. During the study period, all prisoners at HMP Berwyn were transferred from other prisons. The safety and appropriateness of psychoactive medications were evaluated de novo on reception at HMP Berwyn and during follow up, using the medicines optimisation framework. RESULTS: About 1941 sentenced men arrived at HMP Berwyn between February 2017 and November 2018. Nearly one-third (634, 33%) were on a prescribed psychoactive medication. Seventy-five percent of these (474/634) required a prescription change due to appropriateness or safety concerns. Nearly half (295, 46.5%) received changes at reception despite having already undergone medicines reconciliation at their previous prison. Forty-three percent (275/634) received changes at follow up, most commonly those who had no prior risks identified at reception. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate and unsafe prescribing of psychoactive medications is occurring in prisons despite mandatory medication reviews. Ongoing monitoring is required to reduce the risk from these medications. A medicines optimisation framework such as this could be adopted across other prisons, worldwide, to help contribute to risk reduction from drug use in prisons. Appropriately modified, a similar framework might help reduce inappropriate and harmful prescribing in hospitals and in the community.