Involuntary psychiatric hospitalisation - differences and similarities between patients detained under the mental health act and according to the legal guardianship legislation.

BACKGROUND: Involuntary psychiatric hospitalisation occurs under different legal premises. According to German law, detention under the Mental Health Act (MHA) is possible in cases of imminent danger of self-harm or harm to others, while detention according to the legal guardianship legislation (LGL) serves to prevent self-harm if there is considerable but not necessarily imminent danger. This study aims to compare clinical, sociodemographic and environmental socioeconomic differences and similarities between patients hospitalised under either the MHA or LGL. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective health records analysis of all involuntarily hospitalised cases in the four psychiatric hospitals of the city of Cologne, Germany, in 2011. Of the 1,773 cases, 87.3% were detained under the MHA of the federal state of North Rhine-Westphalia and 6.4% were hospitalised according to the federal LGL. Another 6.3% of the cases were originally admitted under the MHA, but the legal basis of detention was converted to LGL during the inpatient psychiatric stay (MHA→LGL cases). We compared sociodemographic, clinical, systemic and environmental socioeconomic (ESED) variables of the three groups by means of descriptive statistics. We also trained and tested a machine learning-based algorithm to predict class membership of the involuntary modes of psychiatric inpatient care. RESULTS: Cases with an admission under the premises of LGL lived less often on their own, and they were more often retired compared to MHA cases. They more often had received previous outpatient or inpatient treatment than MHA cases, they were more often diagnosed with a psychotic disorder and they lived in neighbourhoods that were on average more socially advantaged. MHA→LGL cases were on average older and more often retired than MHA cases. More often, they had a main diagnosis of an organic mental disorder compared to both MHA and LGL cases. Also, they less often received previous psychiatric inpatient treatment compared to LGL cases. The reason for detention (self-harm or harm to others) did not differ between the three groups. The proportion of LGL and MHA cases differed between the four hospitals. Effect sizes were mostly small and the balanced accuracy of the Random Forest was low. CONCLUSION: We found some plausible differences in patient characteristics depending on the legal foundation of the involuntary psychiatric hospitalisation. The differences relate to clinical, sociodemographic and socioeconomical issues. However, the low effect sizes and the limited accuracy of the machine learning models indicate that the investigated variables do not sufficiently explain the respective choice of the legal framework. In addition, we found some indication for possibly different interpretation and handling of the premises of the law in practice. Our findings pose the need for further research in this field.

[Professionals' Views On Forensic-Psychiatric Patients With Intellectual Disability: Impact Of Structural, Systemic And Diagnosis-Related Aspects On Treatment And Release]. / Forensisch-psychiatrische Patient*innen mit Intelligenzminderung aus Sicht der Behandler*innen ­ Wie strukturelle, systemische und diagnosebezogene Besonderheiten Behandlung und Entlassung erschweren.

In forensic psychiatric clinics, patients who have committed a criminal offense on the basis of intellectual disability are also treated in according to Sect. 63 of the German Criminal Code. This group of patients has above-average lengths of stay and specific difficulties in treatment and in transition to aftercare systems are reported from practice. The present study is based on a content-analytical evaluation of ten structured interviews with practitioners of different professions who are familiar with the treatment of this patient group in forensic psychiatry. The aim was to identify treatment experiences and challenges of inpatient forensic care for this group as well as needs for change and suggestions for improvement. Respondents confirmed the specific treatment needs and person- and diagnosis-related challenges known from other studies, which were considered to be causally related to prolonged hospital stay and problems at discharge. Numerous structural and systemic barriers were also identified that impede the shortest possible forensic inpatient care and seamless transition to the non-forensic aftercare system. At the structural level, these included the need for human resources (both quantitative and qualitative) and adapted treatment concepts. Professional aftercare was considered very important for this group of patients. In this regard, the non-availability of suitable institutions, long waiting lists and reservations on the part of these institutions towards former forensic patients were identified as problems. The fact that patients with intellectual disability were less able to make their needs known than other patients and thus often received less attention from the treatment providers can be described as a systemic obstacle. This also applies to the rather high demands that the forensic system, with its goal of "improvement" through treatment, also places on people with intellectual disability. The findings of this study can contribute to improvement of the forensic inpatient care of people with intellectual disability at systemic and structural levels.

The somatic care of patients with comorbid mental disorders: protocol of a mixed-methods study aiming to identify barriers to and enablers of utilization of somatic healthcare (SoKo).

BACKGROUND: Healthcare for people with somatic and comorbid mental diseases can pose a challenge to the healthcare system. The aim of the SoKo study (the Somatic care of patients with mental Comorbidity) is to assess the current state of care and the facilitators and barriers of somatic care of people with somatic disorders and comorbidity of a mental disorder. METHODS: The study is conducted as a mixed-methods approach and will include (a) descriptive and inferential analysis of secondary claims data of persons insured by a German statutory health insurance company in North Rhine-Westphalia (Techniker Krankenkasse, TK-NRW), (b) qualitative individual interviews and group discussions, and (c) based on (a) and (b), quantitative surveys of both patients and physicians. We intend to analyse a sample of claims data of about 2.6 million persons insured by TK-NRW (group comparisons between TK-NRW insured persons with a diagnosis of a prevalent somatic disease [ICD-10-GM E01-E07, E11, E66, I10-I15, I20-I25, I60-I64] with and without comorbidity of a mental disorder [F00-F99]), in order to assess the uptake of somatic care by people with mental and somatic comorbidity. In addition, primary data from patients with the aforementioned somatic illnesses and a mental comorbidity as well as primary data from physicians (general practitioners and medical specialists) will be collected. The focus here will be on support factors and barriers in the somatic care of people with mental comorbidity. DISCUSSION: Up to now, there have been no published results of a systematic collection of both secondary and primary data on the utilisation of different care services of somatically ill patients with mental comorbidity for Germany. The present mixed-methods study aims to address this gap. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered with the German Clinical Trials Register DRKS: DRKS00030513. The trial was registered on 3rd February 2023.

Blended-ALMAMAR app for inpatient mental health care for refugees: study protocol for a multicenter implementation study within the I-REACH consortium (Internet based REfugee mentAl healtH Care).

BACKGROUND: Refugees are at high risk for developing mental illnesses. Due to language and cultural barriers, there is need for specifically adapted therapeutic procedures for refugees in inpatient mental health care settings. Internet-based applications in refugee mother tongues have the potential to improve the outcomes of mental health care for this vulnerable population. The key research question of the present implementation study is whether the newly developed "blended ALMAMAR" app for Arabic and Farsi speaking refugees in Germany is used and accepted by patients and professionals in routine inpatient mental health care (blended care). METHODS: We present the design of an observational, prospective multicenter implementation study in eight psychiatric hospitals. We plan to recruit 100 Farsi or Arabic speaking refugees receiving in-patient treatment due to depression, anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance use disorders. These patients will get access to the "blended ALMAMAR" app during their inpatient stay in a blended-care approach. We will assess the usage (e.g., duration and frequency of use of the app) as well as subjective acceptability and usability of the intervention. To identify sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with "blended ALMAMAR" usage, we will also perform clinical and questionnaire assessments. DISCUSSION: The newly developed "blended ALMAMAR" app may help to close communication gaps for the hard-to reach and vulnerable group of refugees in inpatient mental health care. It is the first blended-care intervention that addresses severely mentally ill refugees in an inpatient psychiatric setting in Germany. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register on November 11, 2021 (DRKS00025972) and adapted on November 14, 2023.

Adapting and Implementing Apps for Mental Healthcare.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To describe examples of adapting apps for use in mental healthcare and to formulate recommendations for successful adaptation in mental healthcare settings. RECENT FINDINGS: International examples are given to explore implementation procedures to address this multitude of challenges. There are only few published examples of adapting apps for use in mental healthcare. From these examples and from results of studies in implementation science in general clinical settings, it can be concluded that the process of adapting apps for mental healthcare needs to address clinician training and information needs, user needs which include cultural adaptation and go beyond mere translation, and organizational needs for blending app use into everyday clinical mental healthcare workflows.

Online therapy: an added value for inpatient routine care? Perspectives from mental health care professionals.

Internet-delivered interventions can be effective in treating mental disorders. However, their rate of use in German psychiatric inpatient routine care is low. The current study aimed to investigate the attitude of mental health care professionals working in inpatient care regarding internet-delivered interventions, including presumed benefits, barriers and facilitators. In total, 176 health professionals from ten inpatient psychiatric hospitals throughout Germany were surveyed on site. The professionals' attitude towards internet-delivered interventions in inpatient care was assessed by an adapted version of the 'Attitude toward Telemedicine in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy' (ATTiP) questionnaire. To identify benefits, barriers and facilitators, we developed open-response questions that were based on the 'Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology' (UTAUT) and analyzed by a qualitative content analysis. Professionals reported little experience or knowledge about internet-delivered interventions. Their attitude towards internet-delivered interventions in psychiatric inpatient care was rather indifferent. The most frequently mentioned potential benefits were an optimised treatment structure and patient empowerment; the most frequently anticipated barriers were too severe symptoms of patients, the feared neglect of face-to-face contacts and insufficient technical equipment; and the most frequently mentioned facilitators were high usability of the internet-based intervention, a sufficient functional level of the patient and further education of staff. For successful implementation in the inpatient sector, internet-delivered interventions must be adapted to the special needs of severely mentally ill patients and to the hospital management systems and workflow. In addition, technical preconditions (internet access, devices) must be met. Last, further education of mental health care professionals is needed.

Determinants of compulsory hospitalisation at admission and in the course of inpatient treatment in people with mental disorders-a retrospective analysis of health records of the four psychiatric hospitals of the city of Cologne.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to identify differences in predictors of involuntary psychiatric hospitalisation depending on whether the inpatient stay was involuntary right from the beginning since admission or changed from voluntary to involuntary in the course of in-patient treatment. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of 1,773 mental health records of all cases treated under the Mental Health Act in the city of Cologne in the year 2011. 79.4% cases were admitted involuntarily and 20.6% were initially admitted on their own will and were detained later during the course of in-patient stay. We compared the clinical, sociodemographic, socioeconomic and environmental socioeconomic data (ESED) of the two groups. Finally, we employed two different machine learning decision-tree algorithms, Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection (CHAID) and Random Forest. RESULTS: Most of the investigated variables did not differ and those with significant differences showed consistently low effect sizes. In the CHAID analysis, the first node split was determined by the hospital the patient was treated at. The diagnosis of a psychotic disorder, an affective disorder, age, and previous outpatient treatment as well as the purchasing power per 100 inhabitants in the living area of the patients also played a role in the model. In the Random Forest, age and the treating hospital had the highest impact on the accuracy and decrease in Gini of the model. However, both models achieved a poor balanced accuracy. Overall, the decision-tree analyses did not yield a solid, causally interpretable prediction model. CONCLUSION: Cases with detention at admission and cases with detention in the course of in-patient treatment were largely similar in respect to the investigated variables. Our findings give no indication for possible differential preventive measures against coercion for the two subgroups. There is no need or rationale to differentiate the two subgroups in future studies.

Homelessness among psychiatric inpatients in North Rhine-Westphalia: a retrospective routine data analysis.

BACKGROUND: Within the last five years the number of homeless persons in Germany has more than doubled, with many suffering from mental illnesses that require treatment. Whether the mental illness itself led to losing shelter or whether the state of being homeless increased the likelihood of developing symptoms of a mental disorder remains unclear. The current study assessed the interaction of homelessness and mental illness from a care provider perspective. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of inpatient routine data from 20 psychiatric hospitals in North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW), Germany, over a period of four years (N = 366,767 inpatient treatment cases). Patients were considered "homeless" if they had no fixed unique address. RESULTS: About 2.4% of the analyzed cohort was classified as homeless, with increasing tendency over the study period (+14% from 2016 to 2019). The percentage of homeless patients varied broadly between the hospitals (0.2-6.3%). Homeless patients were more often male and on average eight years younger than patients with a fixed address. Homeless patients experienced more involuntary measures (admission and restraint), had a shorter course of treatment and were more often discharged within one day. Every second homeless case was diagnosed with a substance use disorder and every third homeless case with a psychotic disorder, whereas affective disorders were diagnosed less frequently in this group. Psychiatric comorbidity occurred more often in homeless patients whereas somatic diseases did not. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple patient-related sociodemographic and local factors are associated with homelessness of psychiatric inpatients. In addition, clinical factors differ between homeless and non-homeless patients, pointing to more severe mental illness and treatment complications (e.g., coercive measures) in homeless persons. Thus, homelessness of psychiatric inpatients can imply special challenges that need to be considered by healthcare providers and politicians, with the goal of optimizing mental and social care and the mental health outcomes of homeless persons.

Smartphone applications for depression: a systematic literature review and a survey of health care professionals' attitudes towards their use in clinical practice.

Smartphone applications ("apps") may contribute to closing the treatment gap for depression by reaching large populations at relatively low costs. The general public seems open towards the use of apps for mental disorders but less is known about the attitudes of health care professionals. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the available evidence on the effectiveness of apps for depression and to explore the attitudes of health care professionals towards their use in practice. A systematic literature search was performed aimed at studies utilizing smartphone applications for depression. In addition, a survey was conducted to explore health care professionals' attitudes towards using these treatment apps in clinical practice. Twelve articles were identified in the systematic literature review. All included trials reported a decline in depressive symptoms after the intervention periods. In the survey, 72 health care professionals participated. Significant differences were found between the level of technology experience and how much the health care professional would consider the use of mobile applications in clinical practice. Survey participants reported openness towards therapeutic app use but very little knowledge and experience in the field. Apps appear to be a promising self-management tool for reducing depressive symptoms. Despite some concerns, health care professionals' attitudes towards the use of smartphone applications in clinical practice are quite positive. The provision of information on the potential benefits of e-health interventions as well as the training of professionals in the application of new technologies may increase health care professionals' awareness and knowledge about mobile apps for the treatment of mental disorders.

Accuracy of diagnostic classification and clinical utility assessment of ICD-11 compared to ICD-10 in 10 mental disorders: findings from a web-based field study.

In this web-based field study, we compared the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of 10 selected mental disorders between the ICD-11 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines (CDDG) and the ICD-10 CDDG using vignettes in a sample of 928 health professionals from all WHO regions. On average, the ICD-11 CDDG displayed significantly higher diagnostic accuracy (71.9% for ICD-11, 53.2% for ICD-10), higher ease of use, better goodness of fit, higher clarity, and lower time required for diagnosis compared to the ICD-10 CDDG. The advantages of the ICD-11 CDDG were largely limited to new diagnoses in ICD-11. After limiting analyses to diagnoses existing in ICD-11 and ICD-10, the ICD-11 CDDG were only superior in ease of use. The ICD-11 CDDG were not inferior in diagnostic accuracy or clinical utility compared to the ICD-10 CDDG for any of the vignettes. Diagnostic accuracy was consistent across WHO regions and independent of participants' clinical experience. There were no differences between medical doctors and psychologists in diagnostic accuracy, but members of other health professions had greater difficulties in determining correct diagnoses based on the ICD-11 CDDG. In sum, there were no differences in diagnostic accuracy for diagnoses existing in ICD-10 and ICD-11, but the introduction of new diagnoses in ICD-11 has improved the diagnostic classification of some clinical presentations. The favourable clinical utility ratings of the ICD-11 CDDG give reason to expect a positive evaluation by health professionals in the implementation phase of ICD-11. Yet, training in ICD-11 is needed to further enhance the diagnostic accuracy.

[Revised S3 guidelines on schizophrenia : Developmental process and selected recommendations]. / Die aktualisierte S3-Leitlinie Schizophrenie : Entwicklungsprozess und ausgewählte Empfehlungen.

Schizophrenia is one of the most severe mental diseases and leads to significant personal and social impairments for affected persons. The illness is characterized by frequent relapses, results in increased mortality and is associated with the highest socioeconomic costs of all diseases. Moreover, patients with schizophrenia are often stigmatized in everyday life and also in most treatment settings. In 1998 the first German schizophrenia guidelines were published, followed by the first S3 guidelines for schizophrenia in 2006. The revision process started in 2012 coordinated by the German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics (DGPPN) and the revised guidelines were published in 2019. The target group for the revised S3 guidelines includes all persons involved in the care of patients with schizophrenia in all sectors of the German healthcare system, including decision makers and insurance funds. Starting with an introduction of the biological, clinical and epidemiological basis of the disorder, recommendations for the diagnostics of schizophrenia, the detection of comorbidities, the use of antipsychotic medication and other somatic procedures, for psychotherapy, psychosocial interventions, handling of special treatment conditions and rehabilitation are made. Finally, recommendations for an evidence-based and optimal coordination within the healthcare system are made, followed by a discussion of the cost-effectiveness of treatment and presentation of strategies for improved quality management. The most important aspect of the revised S3 guidelines on schizophrenia is the multiprofessional cooperation in all phases of the disorder and an empathic and respectful therapeutic alliance.

Use of Telepsychiatry in Emergency and Crisis Intervention: Current Evidence.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this review is to evaluate recent literature on the use of telepsychiatry in mental crises or emergency situations. RECENT FINDINGS: Results from recent studies which evaluated the implementation of a telepsychiatric consultation model in emergency departments point at a reduction of length of stay and a drop in admissions, increased cost-effectiveness, and improved satisfaction of patients and staff. There was almost no empirical evidence on videoconferencing in crisis intervention within the context of crisis resolution teams or online therapies. No study reporting on telepsychiatry videoconferencing in the context of disasters was found. There is still very little but increasing empirical evidence supporting the implementation of telepsychiatry in emergencies. Other mental crisis-related implementation settings remain to be researched. The implications and future research potential are discussed.

A retrospective analysis of determinants of involuntary psychiatric in-patient treatment.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of our study was to identify predictors of a high risk of involuntary psychiatric in-patient treatment. METHODS: We carried out a detailed analysis of the 1773 mental health records of all the persons treated as in-patients under the PsychKG NRW (Mental Health Act for the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany) in a metropolitan region of Germany (the City of Cologne) in 2011. 3991 mental health records of voluntary in-patients from the same hospitals served as a control group. We extracted medical, sociodemographic and socioeconomic data from these records. Apart from descriptive statistics, we used a prediction model employing chi-squared automatic interaction detection (CHAID). RESULTS: Among involuntary patients, organic mental disorders (ICD10: F0) and schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders (ICD10: F2) were overrepresented. Patients treated as in-patients against their will were on average older, they were more often retired and had a migratory background. The Exhaustive CHAID analysis confirmed the main diagnosis to be the strongest predictor of involuntary in-patient psychiatric treatment. Other predictors were the absence of outpatient treatment prior to admission, admission outside of regular service hours and migratory background. The highest risk of involuntary treatment was associated with patients with organic mental disorders (ICD 10: F0) who were married or widowed and patients with non-organic psychotic disorders (ICD10: F2) or mental retardation (ICD10: F7) in combination with a migratory background. Also, referrals from general hospitals were frequently encountered. CONCLUSIONS: We identified modifiable risk factors for involuntary psychiatric in-patient treatment. This implies that preventive measures may be feasible and should be implemented to reduce the rate of involuntary psychiatric in-patient treatment. This may include efforts to establish crisis resolution teams to improve out-patient treatment, train general hospital staff in deescalation techniques, and develop special programs for patients with a migratory background.

[Schizophrenia and other primary psychotic disorders in ICD-11]. / Schizophrenie und andere primäre psychotische Störungen in ICD-11.

In the development of the International Classsification of Disorders (ICD-11), the World Health Organisation (WHO) has used a systematic approach with a focus on the utility of the revised classification criteria. For all major groups of mental and behavioural disorders working groups were set up, and these reviewed the scientific evidence and developed suggestions for revised classification criteria. These initial proposals, then submitted to public consultation and review, resulted in updated proposals. The chapter title for the primary psychotic disorders will be "Schizophrenia and other primary psychotic disorders". The clinical subtypes of schizophrenia will be substituted by symptom specifiers, which are applicable to all primary psychotic disorders. The role of Schneider's first-rank symptoms will be deemphasized. Course specifiers will be introduced and will be compatible with the U.S.-American classification system for mental disorders (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 5th revision, DSM-5). The group of Acute and Transient Psychotic Disorders will be more clearly differentiated from schizophrenia. Currently, field trials are under way both in clinical and internet-based settings to test the utility of the revised classification criteria. In early 2018, the final classification criteria of ICD-11 should be available.

[Web-based field studies on diagnostic classification and code assignment of mental disorders: comparison of ICD-11 and ICD-10]. / Internetbasierte Untersuchungen zur diagnostischen Klassifikation und Kodierung psychischer Störungen im Vergleich von ICD-11 und ICD-10.

The German Society for Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy (DGPPN,) conducted a comprehensive field study (principal investigator WG) funded by the German Federal Ministry of Health in cooperation with 4 other German medical societies in the field of mental health (DGPM, DGPPR, DeGFS, DGfS) * to support WHO's development of the ICD-11 (Chapters 6 and 17). The objective of the web-based field study was to compare ICD-10 and ICD-11 (beta draft) for selected mental disorders, regarding consistency, accuracy and assessment of utility. The first study (TP1) focused on the diagnostic classification and the second (TP2) on assignment of diagnostic codes.In TP1, clinicians used either the ICD-10 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines (CDDG) version or a draft version of the ICD-11 CDDG to evaluate 10 case vignettes in a randomized study implemented through the WHO GCPN **. As hypothesized, consistency was in favor of the ICD-11 (p = .02; n = 319 expert participants) though there was some variability across the different diagnostic categories. In addition, time for diagnosis was shorter (p = .01) and clinicians' judgment of utility (ease of use; goodness of fit) was better for ICD-11 (p = .047 and p < .001 respectively).TP2 focused on consistency of diagnostic code assignment for 25 short case descriptions (including explicit diagnosis and additional clinical information) using both ICD-10 and ICD-11 in a randomized web-based field study which was run on the WHO ICD-FiT *** platform. Based on 531 code assignments by120 expert clinicians, consistency for ICD-11 was significantly lower compared to ICD-10 (71 % vs. 82 %, p < .001) contrary to study hypothesis, and time required was significantly higher for ICD-11 (p < .001). Nevertheless, utility assessments were in favor of ICD-11 (p < .005).In summary, in TP1, given vignettes with more complex clinical descriptions more similar to clinical cases, ICD-11 showed advantages in the consistency of correct diagnoses among clinicians, time required to reach a diagnosis, and clinicians' ratings of clinical utility. These results provide evidence for quality improvement of the diagnostic process due to the revision of the more complete diagnostic guidelines for ICD-11. In the coding task of TP2, coding by clinicians using the ICD-10 was more consistent and faster than coding using the ICD-11. This may be a result of the greater complexity for coding use of the ICD-11 (e. g., due to 'post-coordination'), as well as greater familiarity with the ICD-10 system (which German clinicians currently use) and lack of practice with the new ICD-11 codes and tools. In spite of this, users assessed the ICD-11 system as more useful than the ICD-10, in part also because of ICD-11's more systematic and comprehensive coding tools. In addition, time needed for coding improved with practice, indicating need for intense education and training initiatives when ICD-11 is adopted and implemented into clinical practice.

Development of quality indicators for mental healthcare in the Danube region.

BACKGROUND: Quality indicators are quality assurance instruments for the evaluation of mental healthcare systems. Quality indicators can be used to measure the effectiveness of mental healthcare structure and process reforms. This project aims to develop quality indicators for mental healthcare systems in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Serbia to provide monitoring instruments for the transformation of mental healthcare systems in these countries. METHODS: Quality indicators for mental healthcare systems were developed in a systematic, multidisciplinary approach. A systematic literature study was conducted to identify quality indicators that are used internationally in mental healthcare. Retrieved quality indicators were systematically selected by means of defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality indicators were subsequently rated in a two-stage Delphi study for relevance, validity and feasibility (data availability and data collection effort). The Delphi panel included 22 individuals in the first round, and 18 individuals in the second and final round. RESULTS: Overall, mental healthcare quality indicators were rated higher in relevance than in validity (Mean relevance=7.6, SD=0.8; Mean validity=7.1, SD=0.7). There was no statistically significant difference in scores between the four countries for relevance (X2 (3)=3.581, p=0.310) and validity (X2 (3)=1.145, p=0.766). For data availability, the appraisal of "YES" (data are available) ranged from 6% for "assisted housing" to 94% for "total beds for mental healthcare per 100,000 population" and "availability of mental health service facilities". CONCLUSION: Quality indicators were developed in a systematic and multidisciplinary development process. There was a broad consensus among mental healthcare experts from the participating countries in terms of relevance and validity of the proposed quality indicators. In a next step, the feasibility of these twenty-two indicators will be evaluated in a pilot study in the participating countries.

European Psychiatric Association (EPA) guidance on the quality of eMental health interventions in the treatment of psychotic disorders.

The main aim was to develop recommendations on eMental health interventions for the treatment of psychotic disorders. A systematic literature search on eMental health interventions was performed, and 24 articles about interventions in psychotic disorders were retrieved and systematically assessed for their quality. Studies were characterized by a large heterogeneity with regard to study type, sample sizes, interventions and outcome measures. Five graded recommendations were developed dealing with the feasibility of eMental health interventions, beneficial effects of psychoeducation, preliminary results of clinical efficacy, the need of moderation in peer support eMental health groups and the need to develop quality standards.

Dysregulated IGFBP5 expression causes axon degeneration and motoneuron loss in diabetic neuropathy.

Diabetic neuropathy (DNP), afflicting sensory and motor nerve fibers, is a major complication in diabetes. The underlying cellular mechanisms of axon degeneration are poorly understood. IGFBP5, an inhibitory binding protein for insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1) is highly up-regulated in nerve biopsies of patients with DNP. We investigated the pathogenic relevance of this finding in transgenic mice overexpressing IGFBP5 in motor axons and sensory nerve fibers. These mice develop motor axonopathy and sensory deficits similar to those seen in DNP. Motor axon degeneration was also observed in mice in which the IGF1 receptor (IGF1R) was conditionally depleted in motoneurons, indicating that reduced activity of IGF1 on IGF1R in motoneurons is responsible for the observed effect. These data provide evidence that elevated expression of IGFBP5 in diabetic nerves reduces the availability of IGF1 for IGF1R on motor axons, thus leading to progressive neurodegeneration. Inhibition of IGFBP5 could thus offer novel treatment strategies for DNP.

Stigmatization of psychiatrists and general practitioners: results of an international survey.

The stigma of mental illness affects psychiatry as a medical profession and psychiatrists. The present study aimed to compare the extent and correlation patterns of perceived stigma in psychiatrists and general practitioners. An international multicenter survey was conducted in psychiatrists and general practitioners from twelve countries. Responses were received from N = 1,893 psychiatrists and N = 1,238 general practitioners. Aspects of stigma assessed in the questionnaire included perceived stigma, self-stigma (stereotype agreement), attitudes toward the other profession, and experiences of discrimination. Psychiatrists reported significantly higher perceived stigma and discrimination experiences than general practitioners. Separate multiple regression analyses showed different predictor patterns of perceived stigma in the two groups. Hence, in the psychiatrists group, perceived stigma correlated best with discrimination experiences and self-stigma, while in the general practitioners group it correlated best with self-stigma. About 17% of the psychiatrists perceive stigma as a serious problem, with a higher rate in younger respondents. Against this background, psychiatry as a medical profession should set a high priority on improving the training of young graduates. Despite the number of existing antistigma interventions targeting mental health professionals and medical students, further measures to improve the image of psychiatry and psychiatrists are warranted, in particular improving the training of young graduates with respect to raising awareness of own stigmatizing attitudes and to develop a better profession-related self-assertiveness.

Schizophrenia in 2020: Trends in diagnosis and therapy.

Schizophrenia research is providing an increasing number of studies and important insights into the condition's etiopathogenesis based on genetic, neuropsychological and cranial neuroimaging studies. However, research progress has not yet led to the incorporation of such findings into the revised classification criteria of mental disorders or everyday clinical practice. By 2020, schizophrenia will most likely still be a clinically defined primary psychotic disorder. While there is some hope that treatment will be improved with new antipsychotic drugs, drugs addressing negative symptoms, more refined psychotherapy approaches and the introduction of new treatment modalities like transcranial magnetic stimulation, an additional hope is to improve early detection and prevention. As the results of new research into the etiopathogenesis of schizophrenia are promising to improve diagnosis, classification and therapy in the future, a picture of complex brain dysfunction is currently emerging requiring sophisticated mathematical methods of analysis. The imminent clinical challenge will be to develop comprehensive diagnostic and treatment modules individually tailored to the time-variable needs of patients and their families.