Patient and Provider Satisfaction with Asynchronous Versus Synchronous Telepsychiatry in Primary Care: A Secondary Mixed-Methods Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Asynchronous telepsychiatry (ATP) consultations are a novel form of psychiatric consultation. Studies comparing patient and provider satisfaction for ATP with that for synchronous telepsychiatry (STP) do not exist. Methods: This mixed-methods study is a secondary analysis of patients' and primary care providers' (PCPs) satisfaction from a randomized clinical trial of ATP compared with STP. Patients and their PCPs completed satisfaction surveys, and provided unstructured feedback about their experiences with either ATP or STP. Differences in patient satisfaction were assessed using mixed-effects logistic regression models, and the qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis with an inductive coding framework. Results: Patient satisfaction overall was high with 84% and 97% of respondents at 6 months reported being somewhat or completely satisfied with ATP and STP, respectively. Patients in the STP group were more likely to report being completely satisfied, to recommend the program to a friend, and to report being comfortable with their care compared with ATP (all p < 0.05). However, there was no difference between the patients in ATP and STP in perceived change in clinical outcomes (p = 0.51). The PCP quantitative data were small, and thus only summarized descriptively. Conclusions: Patients expressed their overall satisfaction with both STP and ATP. Patients in ATP reported more concerns about the process, likely because feedback after ATP was slower than that after STP consultations. PCPs had no apparent preference for STP or ATP, and reported implementing the psychiatrists' recommendations for both groups when such recommendations were made, which supports our previous findings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02084979; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02084979.

Nicotine dependence and psychosis in Bipolar disorder and Schizoaffective disorder, Bipolar type.

Patients with Bipolar disorder smoke more than the general population. Smoking negatively impacts mortality and clinical course in Bipolar disorder patients. Prior studies have shown contradictory results regarding the impact of psychosis on smoking behavior in Bipolar disorder. We analyzed a large sample of Bipolar disorder and Schizoaffective disorder, Bipolar Type patients and predicted those with a history of psychosis would be more likely to be nicotine dependent. Data from subjects and controls were collected from the Genomic Psychiatry Cohort (GPC). Subjects were diagnosed with Bipolar disorder without psychosis (N = 610), Bipolar disorder with psychosis (N = 1544). Participants were classified with or without nicotine dependence. Diagnostic groups were compared to controls (N = 10065) using logistic regression. Among smokers (N = 6157), those with Bipolar disorder had an increased risk of nicotine dependence (OR = 2.5; P < 0.0001). Patients with Bipolar disorder with psychosis were more likely to be dependent than Bipolar disorder patients without psychosis (OR = 1.3; P = 0.03). Schizoaffective disorder, Bipolar Type patients had more risk of nicotine dependence when compared to Bipolar disorder patients with or without psychosis (OR = 1.2; P = 0.02). Bipolar disorder patients experiencing more severity of psychosis have more risk of nicotine dependence. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Postpartum depression: an original survey of screening practices within a healthcare system.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the strategies for postpartum depression (PPD) screening by surveying healthcare providers at a US academic medical centre. METHODS: A 10-question survey was administered to 251 Obstetrics/Gynaecology, Paediatrics, and Family Practice physicians, nurses and other healthcare professionals in April-June 2007. It explored PPD screening methods and familiarity with selected screening instruments (EPDS, PDSS and PHQ-9). Familiarity scores were assigned based on Likert scale ratings, from 1 (not familiar at all) to 5 (using it all the time). Score mean values and standard deviations were calculated for each screening tool, overall and across specialty and training status. Pearson chi-square analyses with discrete and categorical variables and ANOVA with continuous variables were conducted, followed by Tukey post hoc analyses to identify significant mean differences. RESULTS: There were 131 completed surveys. Respondents were largely unfamiliar with PPD screening instruments, although Ob/Gyn providers were significantly more aware of each tool than were Paediatrics members. Preferred screening methods were symptom review (83%) and physical examination/observation (65%). Sixty-three per cent of respondents used multiple methods. Timing of screening varied across specialties. Paediatric providers screened earliest (0-4 weeks) of all respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare providers typically screened for PPD using a combination of clinical methods and were less familiar with standardised instruments. Uniform screening protocols across specialties and targeted educational interventions are strongly recommended to promote better detection and collaborative management of PPD.