Demographic, clinical, and service-use characteristics related to the clinician's recommendation to transition from child to adult mental health services.

PURPOSE: The service configuration with distinct child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) and adult mental health services (AMHS) may be a barrier to continuity of care. Because of a lack of transition policy, CAMHS clinicians have to decide whether and when a young person should transition to AMHS. This study describes which characteristics are associated with the clinicians' advice to continue treatment at AMHS. METHODS: Demographic, family, clinical, treatment, and service-use characteristics of the MILESTONE cohort of 763 young people from 39 CAMHS in Europe were assessed using multi-informant and standardized assessment tools. Logistic mixed models were fitted to assess the relationship between these characteristics and clinicians' transition recommendations. RESULTS: Young people with higher clinician-rated severity of psychopathology scores, with self- and parent-reported need for ongoing treatment, with lower everyday functional skills and without self-reported psychotic experiences were more likely to be recommended to continue treatment. Among those who had been recommended to continue treatment, young people who used psychotropic medication, who had been in CAMHS for more than a year, and for whom appropriate AMHS were available were more likely to be recommended to continue treatment at AMHS. Young people whose parents indicated a need for ongoing treatment were more likely to be recommended to stay in CAMHS. CONCLUSION: Although the decision regarding continuity of treatment was mostly determined by a small set of clinical characteristics, the recommendation to continue treatment at AMHS was mostly affected by service-use related characteristics, such as the availability of appropriate services.

Engaging male students with mental health support: a qualitative focus group study.

BACKGROUND: Males are less likely to seek help for mental health difficulties compared to females. Despite considerable interest, a paucity of evidence-based solutions exists to address this. Concerns about students' mental health has led to the United Kingdom's Department of Education to make this a priority. Studies have shown that male students hold more negative attitudes towards the use of psychological services compared to female students and are less likely to seek help. A major concern is that male students make up 69% of university suicides, which is often associated with lower rates of help-seeking. This focus group study therefore sought to identify potential approaches that would be relevant to improving mental health help-seeking in male students. METHODS: Three focus groups comprising of 24 male students at a London University were conducted. Participants were asked questions exploring: the barriers to seeking help, what would encourage help-seeking, how an appropriate intervention should be designed, and how to publicise this intervention to male students. Thematic analysis was conducted to evaluate participants responses. RESULTS: Five distinct themes were identified. These were: 1) protecting male vulnerability, 2) providing a masculine narrative of help-seeking, 3) differences over intervention format, 4) difficulty knowing when and how to seek help, and 5) strategies to sensitively engage male students. CONCLUSIONS: These themes represent important considerations that can be used, together with the existing literature about male help-seeking, to develop more male friendly interventions that are suitable for male students. This could help improve help-seeking attitudes and the uptake of mental health interventions for male students experiencing emotional distress.

Protocol for the development and validation procedure of the managing the link and strengthening transition from child to adult mental health care (MILESTONE) suite of measures.

BACKGROUND: Mental health disorders in the child and adolescent population are a pressing public health concern. Despite the high prevalence of psychopathology in this vulnerable population, the transition from Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) to Adult Mental Health Services (AMHS) has many obstacles such as deficiencies in planning, organisational readiness and policy gaps. All these factors contribute to an inadequate and suboptimal transition process. A suite of measures is required that would allow young people to be assessed in a structured and standardised way to determine the on-going need for care and to improve communication across clinicians at CAMHS and AMHS. This will have the potential to reduce the overall health economic burden and could also improve the quality of life for patients travelling across the transition boundary. The MILESTONE (Managing the Link and Strengthening Transition from Child to Adult Mental Health Care) project aims to address the significant socioeconomic and societal challenge related to the transition process. This protocol paper describes the development of two MILESTONE transition-related measures: The Transition Readiness and Appropriateness Measure (TRAM), designed to be a decision-making aide for clinicians, and the Transition Related Outcome Measure (TROM), for examining the outcome of transition. METHODS: The TRAM and TROM have been developed and were validated following the US FDA Guidance for Patient-reported Outcome Measures which follows an incremental stepwise framework. The study gathers information from service users, parents, families and mental health care professionals who have experience working with young people undergoing the transition process from eight European countries. DISCUSSION: There is an urgent need for comprehensive measures that can assess transition across the CAMHS/AMHS boundary. This study protocol describes the process of development of two new transition measures: the TRAM and TROM. The TRAM has the potential to nurture better transitions as the findings can be summarised and provided to clinicians as a clinician-decision making support tool for identifying cases who need to transition and the TROM can be used to examine the outcomes of the transition process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: MILESTONE study registration: ISRCTN83240263 Registered 23-July-2015 - ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03013595 Registered 6 January 2017.

Comparing the DSM-5 construct of Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder and ICD-10 Mixed Disorder of Emotion and Conduct in the UK Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (UK-LAMS) Study.

It is important to understand new diagnostic entities in classifications of psychopathology such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 (DSM-5) (code F34.8) construct of Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (DMDD) and to compare it with possible equivalent disorders in other classificatory systems such as the International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10), which has a category that superficially appears similar, that is, Mixed Disorder of Emotion and Conduct (MDEC) (code F92). In this study, the United Kingdom (UK) arm (UK-LAMS) of the US National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) supported Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) multi-site study was used to evaluate and retrospectively construct DMDD and MDEC diagnoses in order to compare them and understand the conditions they co-occur with, in order to improve the clinical understanding. In particular, the phenomenology of UK-LAMS participants (n = 117) was used to determine whether DMDD is a unique entity within the DSM-5. The findings showed that 24 of 68 participants with either DMDD or MDEC (35.3%) fulfilled both diagnostic criteria for DMDD and MDEC, suggesting that these entities do contain overlapping features, particularly symptoms relating to Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD)/Conduct Disorder (CD), Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)/Hyperkinetic Disorder (HKD) and/or an anxiety disorder. The data also showed that most of the participants who met DMDD criteria also fulfilled the diagnostic criteria for ODD/CD, ADHD, followed by an anxiety disorder. In this context, this raises the issue whether DMDD is a unique construct or whether the symptomology for DMDD can be better explained as a specifier for ODD/CD and ADHD. Unlike DMDD, MDEC clearly specifies that the label should only be used if emotional and conduct disorders co-exist.